Let's Make A Pathfinder 2nd Edition (Remastered) Character 

The reason why druids don't wear metal isn't because it's "civilized", it's because traditionally in many european and asian cultures, iron is a ward against natural spirits. Technically druids should also be unable to wear metal talismans and amulets. Metal tools and weapons aren't supposed to be wards, they are, well, tools. It's essentially real-life lore from the time when D&D had a lot of it.

24:16 A small correction: The Shield only grants the AC Bonus when you use the 'Raise shield' Action for the round and you may only use 'Shield block' reaction with a raised Shield.

It’s been two months, but 11:50 yeah the reason behind the omission of certain classes is known. Alchemist is gone because they want to completely remake the class and wanted more time, the rest are because they have dragon based subclasses and, while dragons aren’t an OGL thing, chromatic/metallic dragons are, and needed to be removed. So dragons are getting a big restructure.

A friend once talked about a Leshy they played. It changed names based on what it was CURRENTLY doing (Like, at the moment) So it had to announce its name every time it did something so others knew what to call them and it got angry when they got it wrong. For instance, once it walked away from the party after an argument and shouted "'SQUATTING ANGRILY IN THE GRASS' WON'T TALK TO YOU NOW!"

The mechanical difference with having "spell attacks and spell DC" instead of "primal spell attacks and primal spell DCs" is that if you multiclass with a different spellcasting tradition it will scale off of your normal proficiency instead of having a separate spellcasting proficiency for that tradition.

I have more than 200 sessions of pathfinder and a lot of ancestries appear with some frequency. Also all of them have their "personality archetype" but all are pretty much human in nature, so Goblins would easily accept a quest even more if requires someone to pass trough a dangerous area(they love danger)

The scaling per level is quite useful. Someone trained in a skill with loads of experience wont make many mistakes on minor tasks. Setting up camp in adverse conditions? DC 20 is no sure thing for a Wisdom +0 charakter trained in survival. It is a sure thing for a experienced one at lvl 8.

If you ARE a competent DM, you absolutely can say yes to a player wanting to be something that isn't in the book. As the DM, you CAN say no to any rules you want to.

I'm playing a Dwarf/Tiefling Barbarian with a Kineticist and Wrestler dedication. With a criminal background, he accidentally ended up being the most morally complex "hero" in the party, as well as the one who de-escalates from violence the quickest. I managed to pin an undead T-rex at level 8 followed by helping to rebuild a town by pulling worked worked bricks directly from the plane of earth. I love that Pathfinder 2e has so many more choices in each level compared to 5e, and the combat seems much less centered around dps and more about maneuvering and controlling the field.

Adding level to proficiency means that instead of bounded accuracy, difficulty is relative to level, since pretty much every DC/modifier (including enemy attack bonuses/AC/saves) also scale with level. This means that as you level up, easier tasks (and lower level enemies) become less challenging for your character, while harder tasks become more feasible.

Honestly, I wouldn't sell yourself short for coming up with the name "Dusty Sunset". It genuinely goes kinda hard, is memorable, fits the theme you were going for and can be handily shortened to "Dusty" for the ease of the rest of the party. So pretty much the perfect player character name.

I will say they told us alchemist need more time in the oven and barbarian and sorsoer had to wait until they figured out dragons with the new beastiairy. Monk I got no idea

Will say the paladin/champion is a personal favorite namely the more exotic flavors (oath of ancients , conquest, watchers and redemption) all of which aren't the typical "Good vs evil " as much as "Doing what I feel is the right thing for divine reasons "

There is actually a rules variant where you just add the Proficiency mod, not your level. It's called Proficiency without Level in the Gamemastery Guide in the Variant rules section. I haven't done a deep dive into the Game Master Core to see if they have it in there as well.

The change from specific spell attack rolls and DCs to using more generic spell attack roll and DC proficiency does actually have an impact on the mechanics of spellcasting, specifically when taking spellcasting archetypes and gaining spells from outside your class (such as from ancestries and general feats). Pre-remaster, spellcasting archetype and non-class spell DCs wouldn't scale at the same rate as your main class's spell DCs (or at all for the latter), so spells from those, and especially more offensive spells that rely on those attack rolls and DCs, would be weaker compared to your main class's spells. Additionally, you would have to take the basic/expert/master spellcasting feats from those archetypes to even allow those spells to scale in the first place. Now, they all use the same DCs and attack mods, and you aren't as pressured into taking those basic/expert/master spellcasting feats and can instead take those if you want a greater breadth of spells. They still possibly varying in strength based on the spellcasting stat of the spell however.

For the classes: The 8 remaining classes are coming in Player Core 2 and the reasoning for the Alchemist is due to it getting more Remaster changes than any other class. The Sorcerer and Barbarian are in Player Core 2 due to the changes to the New dragons, which matters for Bloodlines and Rage types. Champion is in player core 2 due to the big changes to alignment and gods, as the most affected by these changes Monk is there for... Reasons probably :P

4:44 i just noticed that you put the Leshies ability flaw as (-1 Str) in the graphics box on the botem right of the screen insted of (-1 Int)

@6:33 If you just have the Core book, it's a perfectly valid point - but Pathfinder 2e most definitely has "a wide variety of well-defined human cultures within their game world that they could potentially draw on for interesting human Heritage options"... ... they are just represented as Ancestry Feat options and are found in the Lost Omens: Character Guide book.

Paizo is not really there for momey as all the rules are up for free on Archives of Nethys. Seriously as long as you have an internet connection you can find any rule for spells, creatures, ancestries, feats, and so on.

The level to proficiency thing is mostly there for balance I think. The way they set it up makes it really, really easy for a gm to balance encounters. Basically: While proficiency is increasing by level the thing you roll against often increases by level aswell. So basically what's left is just the difference in level + all the other boni to the roll. So at first glance it might seem that those +2s and so on are irrelevant looking at how high those numbers get, but actually they are what's making the difference from the base chance. Now what's making the balancing easy is that unlike in dnd5e, pf2 has some pretty robust math from what I can tell, so the guidelines on how to a balance encounters actually mostly work and those expected differences in proficiencies are baked into that. Hence why the optional rule of removing the level from proficiency has a warning that balancing will be a bit more wonky.

The thing about humans losing heritage options is even more perplexing sense they do exist in the supplementary lost omens material but then again i think there's something like 16 of them. Tbh i feel like they need to have the skilled and versatile traits be universal and just completely re-think the human race in a 3rd edition. They did change it so that you can pick the given attributes and flaws for the race OR just take a bonus in any 2 like the orc/human. Makes it a lot easier so that you dont feel like you can't play say, a dwarf cleric or druid with a handicap.

"That +1 wont make difference" yeah, it does, it does a **LOT** +1 in PF2e can do a lot, those numbers are not arbitrary everything is based on you having X in something if you can gain bonuses outside X you will have a great time if you have lower than X you will fall behind a lot. So casters basically must increase their key attribute or else your magic is useless.

Champion isn't a paladin though. Pre-remaster, you could already use any of the good or evil alignments, they were only missing out on the neutral alignments, but those were supposed to be coming later down the line. Champion is about being the representative of you deity, sticking to their moral code instead of society's, which makes sense in a world where deities are factually existent.

Seriously, the hate that Paladins/Champions get from so many people is getting really frustrating.

I watched this as a palate cleanser between all the FATAL videos (morbid curiosity got me in for the long haul, lol), and it's really refreshing to hear opinions on PF2 from someone with much broader TTRPG experience and less investment in the edition war. It was also nice to see how you handled a system I'm personally familiar with, as it gives me a good idea of how your tastes compare to my own, so I can take that with me while watching your videos on stuff I've never played before. I've personally found the whole "add level to everything" bit that PF2 does to be really helpful for combat-as-sport encounter design--it makes for easy balancing and more frequent spicy crits--but the incredibly linear power scaling makes it hard to craft natural-feeling sandboxes. You can tell it's made to support the kind of products Paizo likes to sell: semi-episodic adventures on a predictable release schedule. Very strong on the "gamist" part of the gamist-narrativist-simulationist three-way spectrum, a bit weak on the other two.

I would personally allow changeling and nephilim heritages as an outer influence on the vessel or the nature spirit itself. Thinking about it I would allow mixed-ancestry even, because the vessel might be made to embody an orcish strength or elven grace

the “primal spell proficiency” to “spellcasting proficiency” change is to make multiclassing as a spellcaster better. now if you multiclass into a class with a different spell list, your spellcasting with that other list won’t suck anymore, i.e., if you’re a bard multiclassing into an oracle, your dc’s and bonuses will be the same instead of only ever being trained in your divine spells all the way to level 20.

There are few things cooler than Leshy. So many fun and cute and scary options. The Adventure Path “a fistful of flowers/ a few flowers more” have a team of awesome characters.

The reason why Leshy became a core ancestry was beause they were extremely popular in organized play (personally, I would've preferred Kobolds, who are about as popular, but I guess Paizo wasn't to add a distinctly 'Paizo' ancestry) The human cultures in Pathfinder aren't heritages, partly because I think Paizo is hesitant to stat 'Asian Culture' but they do still exist via feats humans can take. A number of human feats are 'Ethnicity locked', though it's almost never enforced at tables in my experience. Honestly heritages don't really follow any strict rules in what they are; some are based around culture and land (like orc) while some are based more off occupations and ranks (hobgoblins) and others are based off cultural trends (goblins). I do agree that humans being the generic option is lame, especially when elves already fill the role of being the broad ancestry anyway given their longevity feats. Alchemist was removed from PC1 because it had a lot of problems and they're taking more time to try to revise it. Same with Barbarian to a lesser extent. Champion needs a lot of reworking to fit with the new rules, and Monk is apparently getting an overhaul to their magic (it was really messy and convoluted) as per revealed in a recent blog post. I do like how this comment section is filled with different 'truths' as to why Druids don't use metal armor. The real reason is the reason why so many norms in TTRPGs make no sense: it's because Gary Gygax said so. Why do spears and polearms in almost all TTRPGs work differently than IRL spears and polearms? Because Gary Gygax misunderstood how they worked. Why do Clerics use maces? It's because Gygax wanted them to. Though with this there are a few documented instances of Christian monks defending themselves or even going into battle with maces so who knows. Holy shit I truly have no life... sorry for the long comment, I'm kinda sick this morning and needed a distraction lol.

I love goblins as a core ancestry

"Very few versatile heritages/backgrounds fit a Leshy" is hilarious to me. Those options are here to expand your character, not reinforce a one-note cardboard cutout. Looking at the options in player core alone, I can find a character idea for all versatile heritages (Aiuvarin and Dromaar grouped under mixed ancestry of course), and most, if not all (only spent about 30 seconds looking at them) backgrounds. Here's one idea: A coven of hags has been performing rituals in the Drumish town of Macridi, cursing births in the the town and its surrounding forest in an attempt to make their coven grow with changelings. A druid of Macridi begged the primal forces of nature to help, creating a vessel for a protector spirit. Unfortunately, the leshy born that way was not spared from the hags' curse, making them a changeling. The leshy set off to find the hags' hideout, while getting to know the forest and its denizens from a mortal perspective. There you have a changeling, animal whisperer leshy, that would work great as a druid, ranger, beast eidolon summoner, sorcerer, or thaumaturge, and with a backstory and motivation for free. You can even expand on this simple idea to create an actual character, how cool is that? And that's by relying on the ancestry for a character concept, which is completely optional; a street urchin Leshy can work just as well

literally 2 days ago i came to your channel looking to learn 2e and was like "damn they only have the old version" so its cool to see this now in my frontpgae

Really fail to understnad how is a goblin wierd but gnomes are super duper normal okay as a base race based on your logic.

Hellspawn and Angelkin are lineages inside Nephilim those already existed in the core as lineages for tiefling and aasimar. Planar versatile heritages(geniekin and nephilim) can be applied to any ancestries as per the lore of Golarion. Planarscions occurs when someone is exposed to the energies of a plane normaly before they are born. Alchemist needed more time because of the rework of the alchemical items which weren't many in the core 1 and GM Core because they are still working on it. The large numbers make the game extremely balanced since it scales with level you can garantee that players will be able to take creatures of certain levels. The change on spell DC and Spell attacks make so when you take an multiclass archetype that give other traditions it scales with your normal spellcasting simplifying things and making caster archetypes better with each other.

The original goblins were definitely more like the stereotype, but, just like any group of people, there were others that wanted something different in life. We see them ultimately connecting to civilizations, looking to grow like any other people, especially in Absalom. Will they have some old habits based off of this tradition or that "old saying"? Yes, just like with any other people. However, this is what I like about Pathfinder in that they continue to move the history of the world, and its peoples, forward with all that entails.

Honestly all the pc2 classes need way more help than the pc1 ones. Alchemist is so versatile that it's never the best user of it's own items, aberrant sorc just doesn't work, champions lost alignment, oracle curses and refocusing, etc....

I feel like this Remaster was likely rushed out faster then intended thanks to Hasbro deciding that DnD was "undermonitized", and starting off the whole OGL fiasco. There's a few aspects that scream that (Like Humans having no real Heritages, Alchemists being missing, the high stat inflation, or Tiefling and Aasimar lore being deleted over rewritten), but the Leshy are definitely the biggest flag that they scrambled to get what they could out the door to capitalize on the backlash. They're supposed to be one of the main races of the world now, one that most people in the world should at least baseline know-of, yet they have no way of being produced naturally. They're supposed to be able to be halfkin and have unusual heritage, yet no possible method of obtaining those backgrounds are given. They're supposed to have backstories, yet a Leshy player can literally be conjoured up by a druid as the first action in the story. Seed pods are straight up unfinished, and its very unclear how a Leshy familiar is different from a Leshy player. I do trust that these issues will be fixed/addressed, especially with how easy it would be, and i can't blame Paizo too much for rushing this out, no one was really prepared for Hasbro to just gut their golden goose like that (Not sure why that was, though... I mean one look at what they've done to MTG would have been a massive red flag for things to come), but still, releasing an unfinished product is releasing an unfinished product. Its just a little disappointing that the edition meant to fully differentiate it from DnD... Doesn't actually do that, and explicitly because it was rushed out *to do that.* And as far as fixing the issues around Leshies being purely artificial; there's actually already a solution in the game! Your Leshie druid can create another Leshie, thats it, thats reproduction! We can even use this to give Leshies some cultures/settlements across the map based on heritage to give them a more solid foot in the world; Its said that Leshies enjoy life, and maybe, some enjoy it so much they refuse to die, instead growing into giant Elder leshie and becoming obsessed with Spawning more of their Kin to experience the joys and wonders that are life! You can have a Giant Siguaro Leshie in a desert, a Humongous Mushroom Leshie in some dark, dank, wet caverns, a massive Fruit Leshie in the middle of a massive Orchard, a spread-out Vine Leshie occupying an entire abandoned castle, and plenty more possible source points for non-Familiar Leshies. And as far as the universal heritages are concerned, maybe a Changling leshie was Created by a hag, an outsider Leshie was forged from plants from heaven/hell, and a Leshie half-breed could be born primarily from plants that feasted on the decay from the race in question. The Leshie are both the Remasters' biggest strength and biggest weakness; They clearly have a *lot* of love, thought, and heart put into them, and the charm is through the roof. But they're also not fully fleshed out, and need more work done before they're fully ready to become a major new *base* race. They're a microcausm of the whole thing.

Champion is not outdated baggage. Clerics are divine casters, so why are only divine martials contradictory to the complex morality?

13:39 It's for if you take a feet or archetype that let you learn new spells, if you choose the new spells from the Primal Spell-list, You keep this modifier, otherwise you need to be trained with the appropriate spell attacks / DC and that proficiency lvls up separate from your Primal spell attack proficiency. I don't think anyone's going to miss that tbh.

To clarify a little bit about ranged attacks: Ranged attacks never add an ability modifier to the weapon's damage, as a general rule. The exceptions to this rule are attacks using ranged weapon with the "thrown" or "propulsive" traits. "Thrown" weapons add your full strength mod to the damage, and "propulsive" weapons add half of your strength to damage if your mod is positive or full strength if it's negative. Unarmed strikes typically list their tags (if any) in their entry, and as the Seedpod has neither of those traits, it only does 1d4 damage. Edit: And as an objection to your objection against Leshies with Versatile Heritages, I say nay! It's entirely reasonable for a leshy to be built with a versatile heritage! Changelings and Nephilim and such are simple - your shell was created by a being of considerable connection to those heritages, or even built within a site that has substantial influence, or perhaps your spirit resides in such places of power for a while - for example, a nature spirit who stalks the Worldwound could easily be given a leshy form with connection to the Outer Rifts and their demonic inhabitants! Even humanoid heritages could be explained away - perhaps the druid who created you had a friend or loved one whom they wished to honor with a familiar shape, or you were born in the influence of a large settlement of a certain ancestry! It's entirely reasonable to describe a leshy created by druidic magics around Kyonin to be described as "almost elven" due to the influence of the society and local nature there - especially if the creator in question gave them pointy, ear-like leaves!

The thing about using spell DC and class DC as different things is not for the casters really, but for champions, monks and other focus users

Great video as always

I just, freaking LOVED this video! I need to incorporate betting on squirrel fights into my next campaign.

Okay just a few thoughts: The pessimism and at times blatant mischaracterization of the system, whether intentional or not, is really not a good look. It just seems like you're trying to join in on a trend of hating it, rather than really trying to understand it. I'm not saying you need to be a seasoned veteran to form an opinion, or that you can't have a negative opinion, but the misinformation about certain topics, that you could google search in less than 5 minutes, is just really frustrating. The goblin and leshy rants were really unnecessary, I understand you might not like the ancestries but they work, and make sense, despite you seeming to think otherwise. Not being able to imagine goblins do quests is a non argument, it is a game of make believe so if you have even a smidge of creativity you can think of reasons why they would. A half orc leshy might be a little more weird but still plausible to pull off with some ingenuity, and calling someone incompetent because they think that, is not really valid criticism. As others in the comments mentioned, Pathfinder 2e does have a variety of well defined human cultures, which are represented by the ancestry feats in the Lost Omens book. I understand if you don't have it, but then again considering all pathfinder content is available online for free (and a quick search would let you find this), it's a really poor comment. I don't understand the hate on Paladins/Champions at all. Outside of the fact that Pathfinder 2e Champion is quite different from the D&D 5e Paladin to begin with(again just do basic research please), even if they were almost the same, I don't understand calling them "dead weight that is only in the game because it has been in the game". The holy warrior is a common archetype that people enjoy whether you realize it or not, and is one of the most widely recognized fantasy tropes even completely outside of the D&D space. The reason why you add level to proficiency is also very widely known and it isn't just number bloat, the math in the game is actually very tightly designed so that obstacles scale to your level (this makes the job very easy for a GM), so things that used to be hard become easy and things that use to be impossible become hard, a +1 bonus is very significant since it's not only increasing hit chance by 5% but also crit chance. I'm saying all of this because I usually really like your content, and I do agree with some of the takes in this video such as the weird identity crisis of the Witch class, or the unnecessary distinction between Class DC and Spell DC outside of rare circumstances, but I just can't get past the feeling that this was done in poor taste. It is fine to dislike something, but it's not okay to mischaracterize it whether it be intentionally or due to poor research.

Barbarian and Sorcerer most likely got held back because their most popular subclasses are both Dragon related and the new dragons weren't fully defined yet when they were putting together Core 1

I bet you add your level to your rolls so that your level as a number has an immediate use instead of just being a signifier of your advancement. It does generally flatten itself out numerically but adding your level to rolls feels good, like in a specific situation where two characters who are equal in every way relevant to a particular task other than level, I like that the difference in level gives a small edge.

18:10 It's probably just like being an android with a robot dog familiar kind of thing. Leshy in this case sounds like it just generically means "plant based animal" instead of "meat based animal"

Good stuff. Merry Chrisler btw

I think they are saving barbarian/sorcerer for player core 2 is due to them having dragon themed subclasses and dragons were not remastered by the time PC1 came out

Its easy to justify, a nephilim or changeling leshy, is just dependent on the source of magic that animated your body.

Is betting on a squirrel fight considered anathema?

Even in an alignment system, you can't just say, "My Alignment says I'm Good, and thus all my actions are automatically good." Thsts... Never.... How it worked. Like ever.

You going to make a redux of the tmnt rpg character with the remastered version of their rpg when it comes out ?

22:50 adventures pack also includes bagpack which allows you to skip first 2 bulks

Okay, it seems I've always missunderstood the class DC calculation. I thought it was 10 + Lvl + Class Proficiency wich would be 14 at level 1. Also, did they change the part of the Leshy where their nurishment depends on their heritage? Because I seem to remember that fungus Leshi explicitly don't need sunlight.

i would play a leaf order druid with the leshy familiar being their offspring.

I'm not very convinced that the remastered 2e actually solves the alignment problem you mentioned, since a player character can just gain the Holy trait to the same effect, I also don't really get the hate for champion, like having a martial class parallel to the magical cleric

>Versatile heritage Oh thank fucking god.

I would totally play a leshy druid with a leshy familiar. They're your apprentice!

I'll be honest, never liked the lol you need two boosts to get higher bonuses from this point on, I tend to just ignore that myself, I want my Epic Hero's and VIllians to be Epic after all lol

Looking at pronouns & the Leshie names i could not help of a wow shaman guide of all things that parodied druids. "my pronouns are tree/trem"

Could you do a video on Wraith: the Oblivion? It's probably the coolest WoD setting and I don't see one, at least not in your "build a character" playlist.

As someone who "likes" Pathfinder 2e and don't like the level tied proficiency progression, let me say, that extra +1 at level 10 matters, simply because in Path 2e everything levels with you (and the game is balanced assuming you'll get this +1). When you level up, monster will get weaker compared to you but your GM will just put new higher level monster to compensate (and their modifiers are determined by their levels too), the DC for challenges will increase (as I've seem someone saying : "As you get stronger the bolder you're pushing gets bigger"), basically making the level in your proficiency redundant. People argue that this makes you feel stronger because at higher levels you can on-shot a lot of weaker monsters, but let be honest, how many times do you fight goblins and bandits when you're level 10+?

okay so about adding the LV to proficiency while it doesn't matter when you are fighting equal level monster but 1 level difference makes monsters noticeably weaker/stronger and this is fundation of balancing the encounters and one of the resons why it works really well also with +10/-10 crits it helps to separete low level barely an adventures form legendary heroes

the alchemist is a class well known in optimizer circles for being.... underpowered and complicated for little return on investment? so I'm certain that's why they are keeping that in the oven a bit longer, although your proposition doesnt seem UNLIKELY.

If a Leshy is a plant, and is an herbist, does that count as cannibalism? Asking for a friend. Great video, Remastered Pathfinder seems to be a better game overall, so I’m considering picking up the Remasters.

where is the remaster for pathfinder 1e?

4:44 NOPE!!!(something on the screen is wrong at least)!

a company that gives its game for free in a very convenient format (AoN) is excused for dividing the remaster in 2~4 books. and everything that distances itself from WotC and Hasbro has my approval... besides , for who already plays the game or wants to get into it, the remaster is full of great changes, in quality of life, balancing, fun and player options. now that the final remaster book is out, you maybe could do a quick follow up for this one?

Druids not being able to wear metal armor never felt right, like we already can use metal weapons and, in nature the only rule is might makes right, so if a bear could make armor it would make armor and wear it. So why couldn't we? Like if you said you cannot wild shape in metal armor I could get it...

1:56 You need to read about Zusgut and the Crookedtoes Tribe then!!!

Goblins have really expanded in the lore over the last decade

btw, don't know if you read my comments, but despite I criticising and complaining a lot, I actually really like your videos, specially these character making ones, and I _(usually,_ sometimes I too annoying even for my standards) try to criticize and correct what I have a reasonable argument for, and isn't pure preference. ex: I don't agree with your opinion on goblins and monstrous races, but eh, at the end of the day, it's just preference

I thought that Leshy takes -1 to Str.

stop goblin prejudice!!!! (love your videos btw

1:56 - "Assassination is murder with political intent. Stealth is not required!"

Why is it bad for a leshy to be a half elf, for example? I'm starting a new campain and I told one of my players to be that lol. Looks fun, tbh.

Champion is not a paladin class. I would compare more to a martial defender from 4e than to 5e paladin

Ttrpg recommendation theres a game called weaverdice I think would actually be a good game for a character creation video.

I was always surprised Pathfinder 2e didn't use more of their own classes. Replace Cleric with Oracle. Replace Wizard with Witch (and keep sorcerer for a more blasty spellcaster since they've always shared spell lists). Also people begged for Summoner for literal DECADES because of Final Fantasy....and didn't include that in the core 2e.

Ah, yes, _Pathfinder 2nd Edition (2nd Edition)_

But there is no Adavtange in Pathfinder, that's a 5e thing, silly 😅

So Leshy had -1 to Strength or Intelligence? Because WTF?

6:33 Does this guy ACTUALLY know Pathfinder or is he just trying to jump on a bandwagon?! 6:59 And now I'm being called incompetent because I don't see any issue with a Demonic or Angelic Plant person! Half orc is bit more weird though!

the reason its okay for a druid to use simple metal weapons and tools and not shields and armor has to do with scale. You could make something small like a dagger, a sickle, some arrowheads, or simple jewelry with a small forge, primitive tools, and sustainably gathered ore. Armor is completely different, you need more advanced tools and metalsmithing to create the necessary parts, and larger quantities of metal, it would be difficult to make metal armor without disrupting nature somewhat.

_aktchually_ there's nothing prohibiting you from make a leshy from a versatile heritage, maybe your changeling Leshy was created by a hag, or corrupted by the 1st world, and your hellspawn leshy could be a pepper that an demonic druid made or something, there's many ways to go around it, and restricting player options for no reason isn't in the style of this game

the way pf2e is balanced, your level basically doesn't matter for things of your level that you are proficient in, so every extra +1 matters. the level is relevant for things with a different than you, which usually is the majority of stuff; making them not only easier or harder to succeed, but more/less likely to critically fail or succeed. I myself think that every number growing every level is annoying, but it not only works, but tells better stories. a lvl 1 wizard has 0% chance of hitting an ancient dragon with a sword, let alone criting. the best chance it has is a 5% chance of not critically failing, which generally works way better than how dnd does. though of I were the designer I'd have gone for ½ level proficiency, or having a 4th type of bonus, a level bonus, that is applied to basically everything that has a level difference from your character equal to thwt difference; but as you can see, these "solutions" are just more convoluted versions of how the game already works, and the biggest problem with ½ level (although I still think it could work, maybe I'll try some day) is that half of the levels become a more noticeable bump in power for no reason, depending on how you round them

So like… 2.5e?

I m heavly playing with the idea for a Fungi-Leshy Leaf-druid who is harmlessly cute and sits himself in almost every corpse then grows nuts or sone fruit for my companions..they are going to be so grossed out😂 but i just a cute little mushroom

10:38 THANK YOU.I keep saying it and all the Pfanatic still get mad.

Your comment sections are basically 99% "umm, actually"

As a gm, I say no all the time. But not every time

i think from the anathemas standpoint, the druid should be allowed to use metal, but not iron specifically. given that traditionally, iron (and maybe lead) was harmful to fairies and nature spirits

If we're cutting Champion, we're cutting Flumphs. Champion is the only divinely linked martial class. It does not cast spells, in the traditional sense.

If there is a third edition, i do hope they bring back proper multi-classing and make the movement less clunky even if its "accurate." Also, im still mad that they made AOO a martial only feature and wish for that to be reversed. Also bring back 1e style archetypes. They may have been clunky at times but they offered a lot of character customisation. You could have a whole party of human fighters in 1e, and they all play completely different due to feat selection and archetype. And i was in a game that was close to that. DM restricted magic classes and fantasy races, so a cople of us played human fighters. I was the mutation warrior fighter melee damage dealer and mundane item crafter, and the other human fighter (not sure if he even had an archetype) was ranged damage (then we also had an alchemist(in his setting alchemists where only mostly mundane), a wizard with an archetype that replaced cantrips with a gun, and a ranger druid multi class with a homebrew mundane ranger archetype adapted for extreme cold and some sort of rogue all human other than the wizard... he was an elf)

Adding level to proficiency isn't there just to make numbers bigger, but to make higher level creatures higher level threats. A dragon will feel like an actually untouchable beast for a measily commoner for reasons outside of the commoner dying within a single swipe of it's claws or it's breath weapon, and the same thing applies to the player. If you're a battle hardened, level 20 warrior, you're gonna wanna feel like you're in a completely different ballpark to a measily goblin, to the point where it's essentially as threatening as a bug would be to the average commoner. It serves to properly convey a greater creature's might within combat, and thus better reflecting how great of a feat it is to defeat, or even just survive an encounter with such dreadful beasts.

EEEEE-dicts

30:47 that's wrong no matter the level +1 is exactly the same let say that DC is 10 and you got your bonus incresed form 0 to +1 that's +5% chance to succeed and let say DC is 50 and your bonus moved from +40 to +41, this is exactly tha same +5% increase and due to +10/-10 crits this +1 really matters

a familiar aka a slave that obeys your every command even ones that counter self preservation, and they can be 1 of the sapient species, I am having horrible flashbacks to fatal. In what world is murder of an animal since you think their skin looks better on you, or their flesh will taste good, is a necessary reason? when done to humanoids that's called being a serial killer. killing an animal only makes sense in self defence when you're not the 1 invading their home.

6:37 i can't tell if this is satire......