My back is feeling so TENSE lately! =) ADDITIONS/ERRATA: "Enfeeble" having the Attack trait is strange. I honestly think it will be errata'd. Here are the previous things I've said that I mention in the video: "Does the Critical Specialization effect for hammers and flails need a nerf?" (10/28/21): www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/qhtwja/does_the_critical_specialization_effect_for/ "Let's fix RECALL KNOWLEDGE" (3/22/22): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eb2He5x4z8yyd58.html "5 rules to ignore in Pathfinder 2e" (3/28/22): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oqpjY6eizZ_IZ58.html "Why Pathfinder 2e's removing the 8 schools of magic is a good thing" (8/10/23): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fqt7e5t0mLyUhHk.html "10 things to FIX in the Pathfinder Remaster" (9/19/23): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gdeVn7SemJzWiKc.html "Let's fix AID" (9/22/23): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ptyJradop9TFZmQ.html

0:00 - Intro 2:22 - #13: Spell Buffs? 3:32 - #12: New Character Sheet 4:05 - #11: Hammer/Flail Nerf 5:11 - #10: Simplified Spellcasting 6:35 - #9: Shield Runes 7:50 - #8: Buffing Disarm 8:56 - #7: Easier Crafting 10:14 - #6: Changing Recall Knowledge 12:50 - #5: Change to Aid 14:42 - #4: Universal Spellcasting Proficiency 16:40 - #3: No Alignment 19:54 - #2: No longer 8 Magic Schools 22:15 - #1: Buff to Focus Spells 26:47 - Closing Statement That's a lot of back patting, sir. You might want to invest in a back patting machine.

Let's be honest, the Recall Knowledge changes go a long way towards fixing spellcasters. Previously, a caster could not really say, "I only want to know what the weakest save is" or "Are they immune to anything". Instead, the GM decided what information was most pertinent in the encounter. Most GMs I played with interpreted that as "most pertinent to the party", informing everyone that it has Swallow Whole or a Breath Weapon long before ever telling the Wizard that half his spells would be ignored... It sucked, especially considering the limited nature of spell slots. The fact that it was usually the spellcaster doing the Recall Knowledge heavy lifting, only to get no benefit from it was even worse. My Occult Sorcerer has a plethora of Poison and Mental spells... which happens to be some of the traits that have widespread immunities. It could suck at times to start Recall Knowledge fishing for what I could use in an encounter, get no useful information, and eventually use all the wrong spells with no chance of ever affecting the foes. The frustration was infuriating.

One thing I didn't mention before (during the video that discussed Aid Another) is that I personally think Aid Another should be easier for the aiding person than the main check is for the person actually doing the action. Is a nurse as capable as a surgeon at surgery? Hell no. Can they successfully aid a surgeon? Absolutely! I would have made the DC of the Aid action to be the DC of the main action being aided, minus 5. That is, if someone's doing a DC 18 check, it's only DC 13 to aid them. I think it also makes sense from a balance perspective: it's not like you're duplicating the action, you're trashing a reaction AND action to ... add maybe as much as +4 to the roll? Usually a lot less? The harder it is to succeed at Aid Another, the less viable it becomes compared to just attempting the main action yourself (where possible).

I think the +4 aid change is fine because at higher levels, sacrificing an action and reaction is much more costly, and Aid at this point would be to try to confirm a critical more than just a success.

Regarding the Aid rules, I think a big part of it is that you're *supposed* to be critically succeeding at higher levels, considering you spend an action and a reaction to grant the bonus

Excellent coverage, Ronald. You’re quickly becoming my go-to channel for PF2 news.

Thanks for uploading these. I'm a GM that usually GM Fantasy Flight's 40k games, Fragged Empire and Call of Cthulhu 7e. Just recently I've been invited to be a Player in a Pathfinder 2E campaign and I have to say I'm really impressed with how intuitive the system is compared to 5e D&D. I'm playing a little Pumpkin Leshy who looks like a super cute little creature but acts like a brooding Call of Cthulhu investigator. The other people in the party are a Cleric who's very closed off, very secretive and yet very holy looking, an Automaton Maid (Monk) who lost her Master and now seeks to punish evil doers, and finally, a Fletchling Gunslinger who has an eye for adventure, profits and tinkering with his guns. _I live in a backpack._

I wonder if the reason Paizo didn’t add scaling to the Aid reaction, despite almost certainly knowing what change the community has been asking for, is because they actually expect players to use it and want them to succeed that often. We know that they want to emphasize teamwork, so perhaps it's their intention that as the PCs level up that they get increasingly competent and reliable at aiding each other. Additionally, the Action + Reaction investment is a pretty high cost to Action Economy, so making the effect really powerful could be assuring the player that it's worth it.

That's what I love about Ronald's videos - he doesn't feel the need to pat himself on the back😂 Awesome, and thank you for the update!

My group just did session 0 yesterday for pf2e and are starting a Strength of Thousands campaign on Sunday. Im pretty excited. Thanks for all the great videos.

My current character is focused on Recall Knowledge and Crafting, so all around great news.

Another great one Ronald! Thnx 👊 🤓 Looking forward to all your deep dives into the Remaster. I really appreciate your cansor, and smile often at your sarcasm. 😅

These are all great changes, I'm positively surprised by the disarm buff in all honestly, and I love Aid so I'm happy for that buff aswell. I will however say the thing I've said a couple times already in other occasions, removing spells schools is a way to make wizard design more free, but it's not necessarily the only way. Pf1 wizard is bound to the 8 schools but still has 43 options to choose from (31 "normal" schools and 12 elemetal), so while this is definitely the easiest option it wasn't the only one. And we all know the real reason why they had to remove schools to begin with. Anyway, can't wait to hear more info about the remaster!

My one counterargument for aid being “too good” at higher levels is that at high levels, characters have so many options that spending both an action and a reaction to aid is fairly steep price and has a high opportunity cost. I finished GMing Fists of the Ruby Phoenix earlier this fall and even with an item that the AP rewards (Headbands of Translocation, reprinted in Treasure Vault as a common item) which let you aid with ONLY a reaction, aid still didn’t feel too egregious to me.

22:00 A loophole I discovered playing an evoker wizard - You can use a bonus spell slot to prepare a staff.

The aid changes are really nice but I totally agree there needed to be some more detail regarding task difficulty or level based DC. I know most will say "but your the GM you can adjust it" you're right, but the amount of times I GM fir players you who expect the DC to be the suggested one and are annoyed when it's not say otherwise that's all. I think over all it's better for low level play and the beginner box which is a net gain.

You know what's a surprisingly REALLY indepth and SUPER crunchy potential video idea? Ranger animal companion feats and their interactions with the Beast Master archetype. you'd Think that these are super synergistic, but there are so many nuanced difficulties when trying to interact between the two, and I'm really not entirely sure how they are supposed to react to each other, especially when using the Free Archetype alternate rule system.

Very informative video. Waiting for more videos like this^^

Wait, so no changes to Slow *or* Synesthesia? That's wild. I love that your Spellcasting DCs are shared now, though :)

I actually think the ease of critical success on aid actions is a good thing. So I'm gonna put forward a defence of it here: There are broadly 2 categories of circumstance aid might come up in that operate quite differently: Encounter mode and Exploration mode. In Encounter mode I feel that we need those bonuses to be large enough and reliable enough that higher level characters can justify the action cost of aiding. In Exploration mode I feel that we need those bonuses to be high so that multiple characters investing in the same skill doesn't feel redundant. Personally I feel this second reason is more important than we (most players and GMs including myself) typically realise. Because players all the time come to tables wanting to play characters with similar abilities and having a powerful and reliable aid reaction helps to ensure that we never end up in the old 1e situation of "Oh... Well I was gonna play as an charismatic elven emissary, but we already have a silver tongued enchanter so I'd be redundant. I guess I'll think of something else...". It helps to secure one of Pathfinder 2e's greatest virtues as a system which is that the system (/Paizo) work very hard to ensure that player's can always play (and really 'feel') any character they come up with (so far as possible). Now you could achieve this same level of strength for the aid action while still including a degree of uncertainty and I'd be curious to hear about potential ways to do that. However the disadvantage of that is if you increase the risk, and want to keep the same potency the same, you need to increase the reward. And with the rewards already being quite high and aid being so broadly applicable I worry that it might end up breaking too far out of normal maths assumptions. That wouldn't always be an issue but because aid is so broadly applicable I worry that it might end up interacting with an unusual rule system, build, or unusual part of a campaign in a way that breaks something. Perhaps moving higher bonuses down into successes would work with scaling DCs however? Or having a scaling difficulty balanced around having a small chance to succeed (instead of crit succeed)? Each in order to introduce some uncertainty without altering the potency of the action much. But see my final point for a criticism even of those methods. I don't actually think I mind assurance or the flat DCs removing the uncertainty from an aid check. It isn't on the campaign influencing check itself (only on the aid check to provide a bonus to that check) so it isn't going to remove suspense for everyone or from the scene in general (/for everyone) and I think that the aiding player is likely to be involved enough with the rp of their method of aiding and invested enough in the other character's (still uncertain) check that their experience won't suffer from the lack of randomness on their own check. Finally I think that one significant issue with giving aid scaling DCs and greater uncertainty is specifically that it makes them seem similar to the checks they are aiding. While it's not necessarily a 'rational' thing I think that if the aid check 'feels' similar to the check itself then we invite "Eurgh! I could have just rolled the check myself!" type feelings (and when a players roll well no less). While having aid become an action you can do because you're good at a skill that "just helps" and doesn't really feel like a check at all

I like the change to disarm, it'll be a nice boon for swashbucklers and rogues, but did they change the fascinated condition? As is currently stands feats and spells that grant the fascinated condition are pretty under tuned compared to other conditions.

As someone in a PF2e group, but who mostly plays those 'genuinely rules light' systems you keep mentioning in your videos to emphasize that 5e isn't actually rules light, removal of alignment is the change I'm most looking forward to. In the systems I'm used to, if it had anything comparable to alignment it would be a broad adjective or short sentence (or multiple) that you could look down and use to figure out how I should play my character in a situation where I'm not sure how they'd act. I'm not in _love_ with Edicts and Anathemas - they feel a bit too _specific_ to me. Still, they're a far better tool for roleplay than 'chaotic good' or 'lawful neutral' since the issue of being too specific is a lot less of a problem (and comes with the side benefit that the GM can put characters in situations where two of their edicts/anathemas are in opposition to each other, and... That's a recipe for juicy roleplay moments) than being too abstract as alignment often feels to me. (And I kind of needed to put about as much work to figure out a character's alignment as I'd need to work out a character's edicts and anathemas, so taking them isn't going to be any more work in creating a character, it's just going to result in something on the sheet I can use in some situations, and my GM can use, rather than resulting in vague nonsense that feels too abstract to have any meaning but has mechanical impact.)

Thinking about it, I would say the re-adjustment of the focus spells is also a (slight) boon to the animal companion using classes, making it possible to keep your companion more easily topped off (since you can cast it more than once per combat more easily), this then also makes the other feats giving focus spells more interesting due to them granting the much needed focus points (besides the spells themselves)

Thanks for going over this🎉

I feel like in order to solve the desire to shape a build around getting 3 focus spells quickly I might just house rule at my table that if you have at least one focus spell then at level 2 you have a minimum of 2 points and at level 3 you have 3 focus points. No reason to force a player to do build acrobatics to try to rush to 3 points.

Haha I'm glad you got validation for your (at the time) hot takes! Those are well-deserved pats on the back.

You deserve those pats for suggesting good changes. But do you know who also deserves pats? The people who listened and fixed those issues. And do you know who does not deserve back pats? People who were doing a huge revamp of their rules, perhaps even a whole new edition, and did not make many changes which people wanted.

Love your videos! I can't wait to see the whole list of Edicts and Anathemas, they sound really fun and flavorful. Also... I didn't see the Champion class on the list of videos, it's my favorite archetype to get as a defensive caster and I really would love to know more about their changes... =X

Hopefully the planned post-APG class errata comes with the book release; psychics have lost a bunch of their toys relative to other casters, including where maybe they have to speak now. Disarm is interesting now though and I'm glad they rephrased that one dwarf edict, used to be something like "Destroy your enemies"

Thank you for this very well done breakdown of Pathfinder third edition. Excellent job

Did they remove the ability to spend additional days to reduce the price with crafting? I dont see it mentioned in the screengrab of the new Crafting you showed. If its not, I wonder if they touched the Earn Income table it went off of.

Just after Ronald says "Alignment is gone!" there are sirens in the background 🤣

Regarding Aid, it's probably fine. Yes, you can get an automatic +3 by being a master in the skill, but that means you have 2 masters in that skill in your party. That shouldn't be that common.

Really excited to see these changes!

So for the “dead spell slot”, related to schools, perhaps something like the multiclass dedications where if you have spell slots X ranks below your max spell rank, it is simply a free spell slot, you can put in anything you can cast into that slot. This will permit in the shown example of battle wizard to maybe use the 1st rank slot for a more utility spell. Probably max spell rank minus 3 it becomes free to any spell you can cast as part of your class or something

Do they address at all Quick Setup and Complex Crafting from Treasure Vault in relation to the updated crafting rules?

Could you please consider putting chapters in the video? This is one of those that i will definitely look for specific stuff for a while

ty, great summary

One thing I really hope is that they fixed the Alchemist (Listen - if your going to have a build specifically named 'toxicologist ' in your Alchemist class - I shouldn't need a gosh darn poisoner archtype to actually make it work worth anything - give me non-bomb feats before level 10)

Are you sure about the attack roll not being needed on Enfeeble? The spell still has the attack trait, which normally would indicate that an attack roll is needed.

I was wondering if there is clarification for followup Recall Knowledge checks now? If you fail a question I assume you can't ask the same question again, but are you allowed to ask a different but related question? (as currently if you fail once against a creature you can't try again, unless I've been running that wrong).

question, do you know if paizo provided a short checklist of every change? Your video are pretty useful but reading back everything and remembering the changes is going to take some times ^^

Looking forward to Witch changes. Hopefully it can give my familiar more agency than just knowledge checking.

Fighter's (and Duelist dedication) Disarming Twist gonna be far more useful now

I believe the main crux about recall knowledge was whether you can recall knowledge after u fail the first one or not since some people take the "recall additional knowledge" section to apply to the first recall knowledge check whether or not it was successful or not (based on different people's opinions on what "additional knowledge" constitutes

I am slightly confused about crafting and not needing a common formula anymore. You never had to get those separately if you simply bought the book as it contained all formulas for all common items... and was dirt cheap, some even got it for free. To me it reads as if they simply removed the formula-book.

I wonder how psychics will be reflected in the revision. One of their shticks was replacing verbal components with mind components. Thus, in situations where you couldn't speak, they were actually still capable of casting spells. It's a small thing that rarely came up, but it's neat to be underwater or trapped in a gelatinous cube and still be able to cast spells simply because you were projecting your will through your mind rather than speaking. I'd probably still run it this way, I'm just curious if they'll change the language to reflect this. Psychic may or may not be one of my favorite classes. I'm excited for the revision! They made a lot of great changes to the system. I've already employed some of them even before the revision came out.

Any word on how the crafting changes affect Alchemist? If it's applicable to their daily free crafting, just the ability to get ALL the common recipes at level saves a huge amount of gold for learning their formulas and also greatly expands their already high versatility.

Enfeeble doesn't call for an attack roll, but still has the Attack trait? Sounds like something was missed.

What about necromancers are htey still getting the full shaft or is it just the tip?

Any chance you can chime in on the Alchemist remaster? Especially after this much time has passed since the Treasure Vault. There's plenty of focused (enough) talk on the pf2e forum discussing its issues and potential improvements, and even if you don't think you have the specific experience w/ the topic, you can get up to speed very quickly. Lots to dig into, such as the odd spot of being both a prepared !caster and a spontaneous !caster, being a Martial with lower accuracy (making everyone else better at using their bombs & injury poisons), ect. I'm partial to the idea of a Feat/Feature that would enable them to hold multiple L items in each hand, meaning they still need the Draw action, but get much more out of that action cost. I'm not a super big fan of all the action-skipper Feats, but enabling all/1 p turn free Draw is the most common house rule / suggested change for a reason.

6:30 technical as most heal spells will come from clerics, they can use a religious symbol as material compounment the thing is: with a feat you can use a shield as a symbol, so probally most already solved it like that 19:10 I usual give my characters a deity or pantheon, trying to find one who fits the concept/the principles of it and the allignment of how my character is at the moment I play a dwarfen ganzi gunslinger who comes from alkenstar/dongun hold who left home to help around and somehow landed in otari as a hunter or something like that in the swamps doing smaller stuff for the village and keep an eye at the swamp. and allingment would be chaotic good, as it represent the ganzi part and the "being more outside of a village as inside" - but at the same time he would defend these one he was close to or liked that was represented via the deity/pantheon "demon bringers". thought first a dwarf god, but nobody would fit who would let CG, so I took demon bringer, as dwarf was included via torag and my dwraf lifed close enough for that to work and it fits into the: protecting and going out hunting part and the change to edicts and anathema wouldn't affect to much, as I usual go after "which way of representation would fit the best" and the allignment was just a small part heck in the campaign I'm not really sure how well I fit into CG xD

Hi Ronald, I love your work! It's helping me sail smoothly from the-ttrpg-that-shall-not-be-named to pathfinder. I was previously scared by the jump but now I'm pretty excited! Thank you!

I love the new character-sheet, and I like the buffs to crafting and focus-point-regeneration, because I would like to be able to use those abillitys more. I dislike the removal of allignment and schools of magic, edit: because it makes spells harder to CtrF if you don't know the spell's name. ... edit 2: I'm also unsure if any caster buffs were nessisarry; expecially giving bards more weapon proficencys. It's fine for rogues thoguh. I say this as a wizard main.

6:28 Did they universally add the traits that I have been frustrated by being hidden? Ie. Manipulate Trait on a spell? That would be so good, for our AoO reaction that procs on, Movement/Manipulate/Concentrate

The new spell schools are interesting, grouping them more by function than theme.

Since formulas disappear what with things like alchemical crafting - does it now gain uncommon formulas, or does it not contain anything at all?

@TheRulesLawyerRPG i am confused on the "universal spellcasting" section. I understand what you are saying, but when you go to the archetypes section, it clearly states that with basic spell casting you are trained, expert is expert, and master is master like in the old rules and that you can't become legendary in a archetype dedications spellcasting. Is this a contradiction in the rules, or am I just misunderstanding how this works?

When GM picks a skill to roll Recall Knowledge for, I think they should have to tell the player which skill they picked. The character would know what prompted them to come to the recollection they did, wouldn't they? Thoughts?

I do have a suggestion about improving the aid rules I think would be really valuable though (you don't need to have read my other comment to understand this one). I think I would like Paizo to give us more guidance in terms of adjudicating aid and more than just guidance I would like specific examples of common aid actions for different types of check. Default options that players can choose from without any uncertainty. The ability to adjudicate unusual aid actions is (imo) a strong virtue that lends great flexibility to the action. The aid actions suffers hugely however from the uncertainty about how it will be adjudicated. It's easy to say "trust your GM" but from my perspective it seems like the aid action gets consitently sidelined in many games partly because player's (justifiably or otherwise) don't feel confident that the action will have a meaningful impact on gameplay. (Also partly because of a number other reasons, misperception of a +1 bonus for new players, unaware of the unscaled DCs, seeming tertiary to another character's actions, and the action being hidden in basic actions which are often missed when learning). And then there is the real world challenge of needing to 'invent' how you are going to aid on the fly. Which between need for imagination, time pressure at the table, the difficulty of social interaction for many people and the genuine complexity of trying to facilitate flow and ensure everyone gets heard in a ~5 way collaborative conversation with the inherently eccentric (tech meaning) dynamic of players with their GM, doing the process of 'inventing' or 'imagining' what your character might do in order to aid a check is actually potentially asking quite a lot. I think the solution is to write a set of reliable options that cover the most common aid actions and their DCs. That way players have some degree of security and something to work off when imagining how they will aid, and GMs have a lot more to work off when deciding the DCs and effects. Something like: "Aiding an attack roll by engaging an enemy in melee requires 1 action, the reaction has the attack trait and uses the reach and bonus of one of your melee attacks, normally against a DC of 15. This might increase to 20 against foes with unusual flexibility or more than 3 limbs to attack with. It does not work against formless foes, foes who your weapon could not touch, and foes who can engage many combatants at once (eg. a hydra)." "Ranged attack rolls are not normally an effective method of aiding an allies attack roll. In a ranged combat like a firearm shootout they might be used to aid an ally's ranged attack rolls or stealth with normal DC 15 attack checks that require firing/throwing your weapon but without a chance of hitting. Depending on the specifics of positioning they might even give different benefits from usual (at your GM's discretion). Firing on one side of a tree a foe has taken cover behind to encourage them to expose themself on the other side may reduce or negate their cover or temporarily alter their position for line of effect. While firing over a foe crouched behind a table may ensure they duck at the right moment and deny them line of sight during your ally's sneak attempt (quite radically altering that action's outcomes)" "Aiding a coerce attempt by being larger than the target and staring menacingly requires using your exploration activity for the duration of the coerce attempt. The activity and reaction have the concentrate and visual traits and the check can be an intimidation or athletics check. The DC is 15 for most people butmight be as high as 25 for people who are comfortable in their ability to single handedly fight larger foes. A player with a larger animal companion may train their animal companion to aid them this way without requiring direction." "Aiding a climb attempt by pulling them up or supporting their feet or back from beneath would typically require a DC 15 athletics check to climb with the manipuate trait. If done as an exploration activity you can climb with them at half the speed you would normally. Supporting their feet or back is not normally possible while unless they are 2 or more size categories smaller than you. If you get a critical failure you worsen their degree of success by one as your hand slips while they were using it. If you are also climbing your GM would normally require you to make an additional climb check of your own at that point too."

Hi. Thank you. (comments to go, with timestamps, as I watch.)

Instead of refocus and spells per level just going to a mana pool and making spells cost mana would make more sense in that you could spend an extra point to focus a spell or channeling spells could cost say 3 points to cast and 1 point per round to channel.

Love the video. Can you help me understand how the Champion gains a 2nd focus point if they take Deity's Domain? Im playing a champion and would really like this to work. But all the arguments I've seen say this is one of the few instances that doesnt give you a 2nd focus point if you already had a focus pool. Thank you!

The best change from WotC to Paizo is actual, non-AI art.

I'm not a fan of the removal of the schools of magic - but that's because my personal campaign setting revolves around them! Not a problem, because I'll just add them right back.

I don't know if I'm jumping the gun, because I haven't run or played a game in PF2E yet, but I feel like when I do, I will just run with the DC of Aid being 10 lower than the normal DC to do whatever action they are assisting with. That probably makes it a (mostly) guaranteed success most of the time, but my thoughts are, that still is only a +1 to a single check for an action and a reaction if you succeed, and you need a result that would have accomplished the task in question in order to critically succeed at aiding (unless you are assisting in some creative way that isn't just making the same check, but I would want to reward that creativity anyway). I'm sure there are reasons that this approach would make Aid overpowered in certain situations, but think it's worth it if it results in my players trying to work cooperatively and help each other on rolls at every opportunity; I think that would make for a more fun and engaging party experience.

How does the new Crafting rules apply to reverse engineering items for learning their formulas?

Is the PDF available now?

So what do we do with our old 2e rulebook?

There are some monsters in some modules that have Regeneration that can only be turned off by Chaos or Law damage. So the only way to kill them is to hit them with alignment damage. So those will have to be changed since they weren't good or evil, just lawful or chaotic.

I may get flak, but I always just ruled aid as an automatic bonus lol. Trained = +1, expert = +2, etc. No check needed to aid, just the necessary actions/time spent doing so.

I really want to see that character sheet in detail. Really hoping they have LEVEL separate from PROFICIENCY to make it easier to add across on new players.

No attack roll hurts Magus, who needs spells that use a spell attack roll in order to work with the normal Spellstrike.

7:28 according to the Core Rulebook pg. 586 ("Shields" under crafting), "magic shields can’t be etched with runes". So I don't think you can have a reinforced Lion's Shield. Or a reinforced Sturdy Shield for that matter. Unless this is changing as well?

The pathfinder subreddits are pretty toxic as hecc, so I can understand the Karma issue xD Awesome video, thank you for the content!!!

My table is using a slightly modified version of Ronald's Rules of Aiding and so far LOVING it. It's maybe a bit strong? But I'd rather players be a little too strong when aiding with skill checks than not help each other out.

So Enfeeble doesn't need an attack roll... and yet it has the Attack trait? So if you Enfeeble soemthing then shoot it with a bow you suffer MAP, I wodner if that's intentional and designed to make you think about the roder of your actions...?

I prefer using a foci, or other objects, movements and gestures to cast spells. Makes it more difficult and unique.

From what I heard, alignment came from Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone.

6:33 Eschew Materials... For all? Nice.

That's all well and good but can my Ruffian backstab with a longsword, guisarme or trident?

Video #7 got my attention lol. Wish it wasn't your 7th video.

I think 15 aid default is fine. But I also think it should scale at higher levels. One way i probably do it is have the player describe what they are doing to aid and if it is doing something against a creature I am probably basing the dc on the creature's stats. Like if they want to aid with deception. The dc is likely going to be the creatures wisdom dc.

How many Focus SPELLS actually got buffed as opposed to the REFOCUS mechanic getting buffed?

Just seeing the spells at ~3:00 in - they missed a prime opportunity to delineate flavour from rules text - use some italics, or something, Paizo!

Enfeeble has the attack trait though!

Can the Reinforcing Runes be placed on Sturdy Shields then? I didn't see any clause in the rune entry preventing it

They should reduce the damage box on the character sheet and expand the attack sheet so it includes MAP.

I'm so grateful for focus spells being buffed because as it was, a lot of very iconic class features became WAY more limited than they ever had been before

I don't understand your issue with aid and it's crit success. This game is based on teamwork and aid being the premiere action to emphasize it is wonderful. At later levels even casters can help their party get heavy hits in combat. It costs your action, reaction, and your profieciency

Why wouldnt they make the AID dc dependent on the level of creature you are trying to use it against?

The remastered version of Aid seems to be making it very clear that auto success/crit success at higher levels is intended. When you say a Master can automatically grant a +3, you have to consider what situations they would do that instead of just making the check themselves. If someone invested into a skill to reach the +3 or +4 bonus and they aren't the one making the check then they deserve worthwhile payoff when helping someone else. Making it a scaling DC in any manner just devalues the skill investment they put in, not even mentioning kicking the Trained only people to curb. They're only ever going to grant a +2 bonus at best, and since they're only scaling is level (and maybe ability bonus) they'll probably even get worse at Aiding at higher levels.

My table has been playing the focus point rule since it was leaked some months ago. So far it really hasn't changed encounters too much. We still have very difficult challenges. I play a monk. Playing with a full focus pool really has made the game more engaging. To those saying it removes a need for resource management, we've had several encounters back to back at different points since we started playing that have prevented refocusing beyond 1 point. This has put into the mind to be strategic still about use of the full pool. Most of the time it is still possible to get it back but it provides a fun dynamic of thinking about location and where we are after the encounter.

Wizard school are going to open up a lot of options for homebrew. Will be really neat. I like the holy/unholy thing too.

I personally think the change to the meta from focus points will be positive. For martial's getting more focus points comes at the expense of powerful early martial feats so it's still a major tradeoff. This just makes a magical martial viable rather than outright better imo. Take Monk for example, at lvl4 they could have 3 Ki points from taking the Ki Strike, Ki Rush and Wholeness of Body feats. Previously this was pretty suboptimal as you can only use one per combat. Now it's a viable build but it's still a tradeoff as you're giving up other great feats like stances, stunning strike, stand still etc. Champion is the problematic edge case because they both get a focus spell for free and have (had?) subpar low lvl feats. But the fix for that, and hopefully what they've done in the remaster, is to improve their low lvl feats so Deity's Domain isn't an auto pick.

Aid specifically says "the GM might adjust this DC for particularly hard or easy tasks", so it is already technically a flexible DC. Sure, they don't give you other specific values to use, but they leave it optional for just that case. If your players are abusing it when they shouldn't, make it harder.

I may be missing it, but here is the overview for 2e remaster video?

Damn Enfeeble seems really good, Enfeebled 2 for a whole minute?

14:05 - 14:40 I can't help but notice you auto-crit-success the exact same level as Helpful Halfling becomes available now, which means you're not waiting until level 15 for a guaranteed +4, you're getting it at level 9. As much as I love resourceless support, this strikes me as both baffling and terrifying, and I suspect tables may start banning the combo, especially with One for All or similar abilities.