What about the Weapon Tricks class feature? Rogues get trained proficiency with martial weapons initially, but does that scale to expert at 5th? Do they gain critical specialization with agile or finesse martial weapons too?
I believe Eldritch Trickster will return as a magical Class Archetype, similar to Spellshot for Gunslingers, which I find excellent for ET is mechanically awful as it is atm.
I think the reason why Eldridge trickster is gone is because most people even if they wanted to play a magical rogue they'd just play another racket and take an archetype, all magical trickster actually did was give you a single archetype feet for free and let you take a 4th level feat 2 levels early and you still had to pay a feat for it with there being a good chance at level 4 you'd grab a 2nd level feat cause rogue has amazing 2nd level feats, you were effectively trading you whole subclass for a single free feat, further it became genuinely useless if your using free archetype, i suspect though in the future we'll see it as a full class archetype
The Ruffian change is *only* a buff, since they already couldn’t go above 1d8 after all die size changes. They just got access to a subset of martial and advanced weapons they didn’t have before. Funnily enough, since it got nerfed, Flickmace is a ruffian weapon now.
We can still use the eldritch trickster, the biggest disapointment is that many of us were hoping for it to be changed/overhaul/buffed. As someone that like martial/caster hybrids characters, is one of the changes i was looking forward the most (even more now that i discovered how well psychic archetype can complement martial classes)
Still take multitalented on human for that free 60ft teleport once per combat. My class DC and crappy casting proficiency don't mean squat if I never have to roll dice.
One cool thing about ruffian rogues. If you come across a creature immune to precision, you can have a weapon that has the two handed trait that goes above a d6, andaince you can't get sneak attack anyways, make up on some of the laost damage dice by using the two handed version of the weapon, such as a Klar or a Katana.
Eldritch Trickster was definitely a step below the other rackets. Because casting was an archetype, it was always down proficiency. And if they used their casting stat, then their weapon attacks were down a step too. It required further archetype feats to gain magic, and requiring multiclassing feels odd. And only targeted spells were enhanced. Fixing this seems a bit more than a racket could cover. I expect that they might come out with a new class after the remaster is over.
And if you think about it, the racket only reduce the requeriment of level for the archetype and a feat. So nothing stop you to take the mastermind o Scroundel rackets and take a Int o Car magic archetype at level 2 and magical trickter at level 4. The eldritch trickster wasn´t a step below, it gave you nothing.
Eldritch Trickster was originally not in the CRB Rogue, not until the APG. So it's possible they're waiting until Player Core 2 to include a new version of it that has a new ORC license friendly name, and reimagined mechanics.
The remaster contains materials from both Core and APG, not that it's not possible but Mastermind is in the Remaster so it would be strange for Eldritch Trickster to be the only Racket not present
Looking at the old CRB, the Ruffian didn’t gain many weapons. The three big ones are the Pick with Fatal d10 (vanilla damage), the Flail with Trip, Disarm, and Sweep (really handy for Athletics builds), and the Shield Boss/Spike (which would let you be decently armed while having a Shield to raise and a free hand). But mostly I’m glad that the old option of the Longspear is still viable. Ruffian Rogue was one of the few characters who would actually use an actual spear. Because Spears/Longspears are simple weapons, they’re simply outclassed for nearly every class by Martial weapons, although they’re much more iconic than Glaive and so forth.
If that's the case why wouldn't they make a feat similar where you can recall knowledge on a creature by using percerption?(Yes it would make mastermind very good)
Battle Assessment was probably removed because its effects are now the default for recall knowledge. I'm personally not too offended by the removal of the trickster, my guess is that since it differs form other rackets significantly, it might warrant getting a print in a different book or even a class of its own for its theme to be properly executed. All in all the changes seem fine to me
No, Battle Assessment is not gone because it's effect is default for RK. Neither old or new RK were a Perception check vs the higher of Deception or Stealth DC that can apply to any enemy regardless of type but as a tradeoff you don't get control over what you get and it can only weakness or save related info. People need to stop actiing like RK allowing a question somehow steps on or invalidates options that work differently than Recall Knowledge. Why do people keep pointing to things that aren't making a check with the default skills and asking a question and saying it's the same thing?
I'm not saying RC and battle assessment are the same, rather that what battle assessment does is both covered by RC and less exhaustive than. Having both of them as options in the game creates confusing situations where you have to guess if your knowledge skills are less applicable than a perception check or if it is worth it asking a question not covered by BA despite a possible lower success rate. They don't have to be 'the same' to be in conflict@@cheezeofages
Thanks for previewing this. Rogue is my favorite class, and this is the first system I have played where the rogue feels good to play outside of video games.
For Ruffian, the changes to them are strictly a buff (unless Paizo ever introduces a simple weapon into the game that has 1d10 weapon damage dice). How ruffian was written before was that it could gain sneak attack on any simple weapon, but it could only gain the effects of a Critical Specialization effect with their weapon if the simple weapon did more more than a d8 of weapon damage. The kicker there is that t here are no simple melee weapons that deal anything higher than a d8 currently, so this was just a case of "Future Proofing" the feature. However now that it's been more strictly specified that sneak attack only applies to simple weapons that deal no more than d8, this is 'technically' a nerf if they do ever introduce a simple weapon that can deal more than a d8... which is probably just their way of saying they don't really think Rogues should be using two-handed weapons, likely. But overall it's a rather big buff to Ruffian given a muuuch larger, diverse pool of weapons and weapon traits at it's disposal now. I for one can't wait to make a Kobold Ruffian Rogue who uses a Pickaxe because that sounds fun as hell. As for the lack of inclusion of Eldritch Trickster... given that Paizo never really discussed it's 'removal', like with some other feats that didn't make the cut for some of the remastered classes (i.e: Command Undead for Cleric isn't included in the remaster), this doesn't necessarily mean that it has been removed from the game, as you said with prior books still being legal for play unless strictly stated within the rules. It is still legal, it just likely means that Paizo didn't deem it necessary to include it in the Remaster. Given how they had discussed why Snares were not being included in the remaster for Ranger, I would assume that Eldritch Trickster was not included for similar reasons... it's a very clunky and unintuitive subclass, unfortunately. We also have to consider that in the current day, the most prominent houserule at tables that play PF2E is the Variant Free Archetype rule, which has almost entirely pretty much invalidated the existence of the Eldritch Trickster by design. I for one have always been a huge fan of the Arcane/Eldritch Trickster fantasy in TTRPG's since I started playing back in 3e D&D, and it was one of my favourite prestiege classes in PF1E, but sadly the subclass was greatly lacking and just seemed a bit poorly thought out within PF2E's rules... This is probably due to Paizo's heavy intent on not repeating past mistakes with PF1E having insane amounts of feature issues by not trying to future proof content on both sides of the spectrum of certain options being either way too weak or way too strong. It's sad they didn't really see it worth fixing up for the remaster? But I also don't necessarily fault them if their ultimate goal is to do the same thing that they plan on doing with Snares and Snare Crafting, in that the Snarecrafter archetype in Player Core 2 is getting a big rework and will be the 'ideal' way to be playing that class fantasy, rather than have it be a weird and not very thought out thing that was eating up page space within the Ranger section... I do just find it extra weird that, unlike with Ranger with it's declared non-inclusion of it's prior Snare related feats, we haven't recieved any information on this from Paizo yet. So in short, I would HOPE that in Player Core 2, or 'sometime' in the future we will instead be getting an archetype that is designed to achieve the Eldritch Trickster fantasy, rather than it being a rogue subclass that also required a bunch of feat tax and such...
Expanded weapon choices for ruffians is mostly a side grade. Ruffians could already sneak attack with shortswords and rapiers, those are d6 martial weapons. Standard simple weapons don't get damage higher than a d8 with the two handed longspear and two handed thundermace being the only melee choices, and ruffians were already restricted to a d8 damage die cap in the event of them enlarging or something. You lose the ability to enlarge and sneak attack with a shortsword as a ruffian. But you also have d6 weapon choices that don't spend any of their budget on finesse or agile. So it's pretty much a wash.
Rogue was good already. Eldritch Trickster didn't have much going for it. The extra abilities are really nice so I expect people to play rogue a lot more.
I hope they make eldritch trickster into a class archetype. I think it would be cool if it were a bounded caster like magus or summoner. I'm not going to get my hopes up though.
I hate the bounded caster idea because it always just seemed too limiting. 6-8 slots always seemed more balanced, even if you had to take a feat to get there. I agree though that that would be a good way to go for eldritch trickster.
What's your take on the Fatal trait on the Ruffian? It says to apply abilities that alter damage die first, but I'm undecided yet. In most cases I'd run it as doing sneak attack regardless of Fatal, but I've seen some people say that it does sneak attack on hits and doesn't on crits.
Fatal is a trait, not an ability. An example of something that wouldn't work would be taking the Cleric archetype to become a cleric of Lubaiko (favored weapon: longspear), then taking Basic Dogma to get Deadly Simplicity to make longspear into a 1d10 simple weapon. If you did that, you wouldn't trigger Sneak Attack.
Hrm. The thing that makes me nervous now is Two-Handed. Only the Gnome Hooked Hammer and Katana qualify in the old CRB, but there could be more elsewhere. I personally think Fatal is results-wise fine. It’s just a another way of doing Deadly, with a slightly different value in the trait budget (Pick is d6 Fatal d10, rapier is d6 finesse, disarm, deadly d8-both about equal to a d8 weapon over time). However, Two-Handed seems different. I don’t want it to apply, because that seems to mess up the balance they’re attempting. While I don’t mind the Katana finding a niche, it would easily overtake all the other weapons for Ruffian in a way I find distasteful. D10 deadly d8 is just a lot more damage than anything else.
I felt the same way at first but then I kind of like being directed to choose some less common weapons. D8 weapons you've got all your classic hero weapons. Longsword, Bastard Sword, Warhammer, Battleaxe and you've got a few less standard but still pretty solid hero weapons, like Glaives. D6 though, that's where you get your rough and rowdy goon weapons. Hatchet, Flail, Boarding Axe, Breaching Pike, Dogslicer, oh, and the Machete. You tell me a guy's a ruffian, okay I'll trust you I guess, he comes at you with a Boarding Axe as his weapon of choice, and I'll believe you.
@@Jermbot15eh even stuff like hatchet can be used by all rogues now seems like. Machete is cool but what kind of Rogue is trying to use the Sweep trait? There’s actually a very short list of weapons usable by Ruffians that weren’t before
@@cajeb5396 "What kind of rogue is trying to use the Sweep trait." Sneak attack applies every hit which incentivizes Rogues, more than most, to try to hit multiple times a round. But they don't have fighter weapon proficiencies so to get those hits they want traits to offset MAP, which are sweep and agile. Machette only has sweep which is fine, Hatchet has both which is best. I think you're right in that there will be best use weapons for ruffians and that will always be a smaller list than all the weapons they can use. I think the ones that will fall by the wayside though will be choices that are only useful if both hands are full, like flails, or boarding axes.
@@Jermbot15 hmm you’re right Sweep might be okay. Regardless there’s not a ton of variety added by this change. Would have been nice to be able to go to d8. I also with Ruffian got the crit spec lvl 1 for unarmed attacks.
6:30 Not a lot of spells or not a lot of cantrips? Because there are plenty of spells, some of which, like Scorching Ray, allows you to theoretically sneak attack 3 targets with no MAP, and some are just plain awesome. Imagine a rogue sneak attacking some poor bastard with a freaking Disintegrate Frankly, I just glad pre-remastered content is always working and viable for picking. Because ET, with their ability to pick any caster multiclass AND pick any mental ability score to boost, was so cool. I was always memeing about Cleric ET, but honestly... Too bad ET didn't get anything fancy, like Debilitating Strike which would give an opponent a penalty to saves against ET's spells...
The ruffian already had the restriction of not being able to use simple weapons that deal more then a d8 to sneak attack. As far as I can see they just gained the ability to sneak attack with martial that deal d6 or less.
I was responding the bad luck gamer saying he doesn't know if it was a nerve or not. The point that I was trying to make is that the ruffian didn't lose anything as far as I could tell. I should have said martial/advanced in my original post but was a bit sloppy because that wasn't what I was trying to talk about. My point was Ruffian gain cool stuff and didn't lose anything.
Hey BLG, would really like to know if you will do similar breakdown for the ranger soon, I want to see if they manage to do them well since there were gonna be some changes, specially on how they get spells. Appreciate the work for this ones mate, thanks for it.
Page 304 describes the Daze cantrip as making enemies off-guard. Unfortunately it's not in the actual cantrip. I'm thinking this, removal of spell attack from most spells, means some kind of change for Eldritch Trickster and Magus will be implemented. I don't know how they'd roll those changes out, via Errata or in the upcoming books, but I really hope it happens. I personally see ET as the opposite of Magus, instead of using your weapon attack roll to deliver a spell, you use spell to make the enemy off-guard and deliver sneak attack.
We can still hope that Eldritch Trickster is coming with Player Core 2. It wouldn't be the only case where a large chunk of a class is plucked out to get some polish for later release: the same is happening to ranger snares and snares in general, after all.
The Ruffian has an excellent combo, if I can say so myself - with the nonhuman races: for example, a Dwarf can take the racial weapon feat and next thing you know he can sneak attack with, say, a battleaxe (that, to him, is a simple weapon)... and the same pretty much goes for most races, from the mighty Orcs to the astute Gnomes. And if a human wants he can join the party with the appropriate feat...
I'm afraid not. Those racial weapons are simple weapons only "for the purposes of proficiency." Meaning they don't magically become simple weapons for the purpose of circumventing the limitations on sneak attack.
And who says they are not, and just have not put anything out for it yet? There may have been a change in the system they need to adjust it for. @@philopharynx7910
afaict Ruffian is getting only buffs, the Legacy version also put a d8 limit on simple weapons but didn't work with martial weapons at all, so the Remaster added some martial and advanced weapons and removed nothing
Head stomp good... wut? He's already off gaurd because he is prone, why would I waste an attack action when I can just stab? Scoundrel's surprise bad... wut? You just have to be disguised at the start of any combat to use it, you don't even have to be disguised as someone they know, just look like an old man, make them all take a perception against your deception and instantly make eveyone who fails offgaurd... its basically instant opening at level 4 for a whole group once per combat. Just redisguise between combat and boom, no downside. Nimble roll requirement kills nimble strike so much and I don't know why it would be required logically either. At least powerful sneak is useful, still a level 18 feet but...hey.
Head Stomp was almost completely useless before but now it's merely terrible...which is a shame because thematically it's very cool. If a caster is prone at your feet, wasting an attack to give them a -1 to a bunch of things isn't high on the list of my priorities. You know what else disrupts a caster's ability to use spells? Death. (or unconsciousness I suppose)
@@RawFiVideos Opposed to being able to use your full item bonus from your weapon and getting in sneak attack damage because a prone target is already off guard?... nah. Remember that unarmed strike works against MAP. If they wanted it to be enticing it would have been a reaction when a target falls prone and it would have been stunned 1 instead of stupified 1. This is not worth a class feat even if you want to specialize in trip.
I'm holding out on updating to the remaster, untill *all* character options and features have been ported in some way. Even then, I hesitate to buy the physical books thogh, because I probably don't have the space.
As someone who is a HUGE fan of the "concept" of eldritch trickster it sadly has too many incompatibilities with one of the most popular house rules, that being Free Archetype. And not only that after having played eldritch trickster despite how much I wanted to love doing it, getting that free first level archetype was rather meaningless outside of the first level... couldn't get any other archetypes/feats until level 4 anyways so all it did was move a feat down one level and treated that as basically the entire power budget for the class, where every other racket got bonuses that where good though out their entire classes existence and still had the ability to pick up that same archetype as well at level 2 and be just as good as the Eldritch Trickster by level 4. I personally tried everything I could to make it work even slightly better than the other rackets and it just couldn't after 4th level. Honestly laughing shadow magus actually pulls off the concept of an Eldritch Trickster more so than the actual Eldritch Trickster did, and I think the Devs may have known this. If we see an archetype in the future that helps pull off the concept better that'd be amazing... If you want to be an actual rogue with magic just go any of the other rackets and grab a magical Archetype when you can, plus an ancestry which gives a cantrip or two and you will have basically the exact same play as the Elderitch Trickster pre Remaster gave you, even better if the GM is doing Free Archetype.
Removing Eldritch Trickster makes me wonder if that idea's going to be better rolled into a revamped Spell Trickster archetype. I would suggest they could make it a full class archetype for Rogues, but let's be honest Paizo has no interest in doing class archetypes unless it changes how a spellcaster casts their spells.
considering the other class changes, i think they are just trying to force all the classes into neat little boxes. they dont want rogues doing magic or having anything in common with the Investigator, they dont want Rangers having traps because thats all crafting mechanical and alchemical items (snares often have those things involved in them) which is for Alchemist and Inventor. i bet at this rate, when we get Investigator remastered, it wont have the Alchemical subclass anymore. i miss the old Paizo who would release stuff like the Vigilante which had barrowed abilities from rogues, rangers, fighters, wizards, ect. and thats before adding archetypes! back when they would put out hybrid classes like Brawler and Bloodrager. i am aware that the new archetype system lets you more or less get those characters to work but they are so focused on balance and keeping the classes defined by one gimmick each that the creativity is slipping away. guess how you deal with an unbalanced party? you give the player who made a weak character access to some magic weapon or armor to bring him up to the other players level. you dont nerf the rest of the party to bring everyone down so that one guy who spent less time on his character and chose a core class with no archetype can feel like he's just as good as the others who spent hours reading and planning to make their characters unique. if the design ethos of the game is completely shifted to only giving players options when they take a dedication then make the Free Archetype rule a standard rather than optional!!!
@@theebadluckgamerWhat about the Weapon Tricks class feature? Rogues get trained proficiency with martial weapons initially, but does that scale to expert at 5th?
If I'm not wrong, Eldritch Trickster is also from Advanced Player's Guide, so i don't uderstand the complain of the people. Thief is from Core and it's not mencioned in the video, and Mastermind and Eldritch are from Advanced. Maybe Archive of Nethys 9s wrong but you can read the source there@@avianascent @erjavier1995
3:00 Maybe a nerf for Deadly Simplicity builds? Premaster there are no Simple Weapons with more then D8. And any bigger then D6 are 2H weapons. So it would only penalize Deadly Simplicity builds. A pity they are still excluding Unarmed Attacks. And that Crticial Spec is still limited to those weapons. 4:50 Also no unarmed Attacks covered. 10:20 "A platypus?" puts on glasses and hat "Perry the Platypus!?" It also seems pretty worthless compared to Suprise attack. It is at best avoiding a Feints Randomness.
I don't think it's accurate to say any content is removed when Paizo has said old content is still legal, and PFS says old content is legal. The only time old content is "removed" is if they republish something with the exact same name, in that case you have to take the new version.
this is a travesty! look how they massacred my boy! and i dont mean rogue, i mean magical rogue SPECIFICALLY! i have been playing magically inclined thieves on and off sense D&D3.0! sneaky and smart has been one of my 2 favorite character types and normally one of my GO-TO options when im looking at a new RPG (the other being Alchemist/Inventor because i like making things)
Possibly, but 5e called theirs the “Arcane Trickster”. And Eldritch Trickster was different enough due to PF2e’s different archetype system. Mage Armor and True Strike remained by renaming to Mystic Armor and Sure Strike. I think it’s more likely what other folks said that it’ll be a Class Archetype. Class Archetypes were mentioned in Core, but never appeared until G&G and SoM. I feel like this is them trying to do the ET right instead of the hampered mess. That could also mean the Bloodrager as a Barbarian class archetype could be done too. But that’s hopium on my part. The Remaster has been both exciting (woot Witch changes!) and disappointing (more renaming than really changing things).
I don't see anything in Ruffian that would prevent me from cheesing whether a weapon is considered a simple or martial weapon using weapon familiarity ancestry feats. RAW I think a Goblin Ruffian could sneak attack with a Horsechopper if they took Goblin Weapon Familiarity.
@@theebadluckgamer This doesn’t work. Goblin Weapon Familiarity, unless it’s changed in the remaster, only makes a horse hopper a simple weapon for purposes of proficiency. It is still a martial weapon and so disallowed for sneak attack due to its d8 damage.
I did miss a small bit in this video, Thief Racket now also applies their benefits to finesse melee unarmed attacks now as well, good catch!
What about the Weapon Tricks class feature? Rogues get trained proficiency with martial weapons initially, but does that scale to expert at 5th? Do they gain critical specialization with agile or finesse martial weapons too?
@@dontreadway2718 Yes to both.
I believe Eldritch Trickster will return as a magical Class Archetype, similar to Spellshot for Gunslingers, which I find excellent for ET is mechanically awful as it is atm.
I think the reason why Eldridge trickster is gone is because most people even if they wanted to play a magical rogue they'd just play another racket and take an archetype, all magical trickster actually did was give you a single archetype feet for free and let you take a 4th level feat 2 levels early and you still had to pay a feat for it with there being a good chance at level 4 you'd grab a 2nd level feat cause rogue has amazing 2nd level feats, you were effectively trading you whole subclass for a single free feat, further it became genuinely useless if your using free archetype, i suspect though in the future we'll see it as a full class archetype
The Ruffian change is *only* a buff, since they already couldn’t go above 1d8 after all die size changes. They just got access to a subset of martial and advanced weapons they didn’t have before.
Funnily enough, since it got nerfed, Flickmace is a ruffian weapon now.
We can still use the eldritch trickster, the biggest disapointment is that many of us were hoping for it to be changed/overhaul/buffed.
As someone that like martial/caster hybrids characters, is one of the changes i was looking forward the most (even more now that i discovered how well psychic archetype can complement martial classes)
Still take multitalented on human for that free 60ft teleport once per combat. My class DC and crappy casting proficiency don't mean squat if I never have to roll dice.
holding out for it in core 2
One cool thing about ruffian rogues. If you come across a creature immune to precision, you can have a weapon that has the two handed trait that goes above a d6, andaince you can't get sneak attack anyways, make up on some of the laost damage dice by using the two handed version of the weapon, such as a Klar or a Katana.
Eldritch Trickster was definitely a step below the other rackets. Because casting was an archetype, it was always down proficiency. And if they used their casting stat, then their weapon attacks were down a step too. It required further archetype feats to gain magic, and requiring multiclassing feels odd. And only targeted spells were enhanced. Fixing this seems a bit more than a racket could cover. I expect that they might come out with a new class after the remaster is over.
And if you think about it, the racket only reduce the requeriment of level for the archetype and a feat. So nothing stop you to take the mastermind o Scroundel rackets and take a Int o Car magic archetype at level 2 and magical trickter at level 4.
The eldritch trickster wasn´t a step below, it gave you nothing.
Eldritch Trickster was originally not in the CRB Rogue, not until the APG. So it's possible they're waiting until Player Core 2 to include a new version of it that has a new ORC license friendly name, and reimagined mechanics.
The remaster contains materials from both Core and APG, not that it's not possible but Mastermind is in the Remaster so it would be strange for Eldritch Trickster to be the only Racket not present
@@theebadluckgamer As I asked seperately, is the Mastermind Racket in the Remaster?
Looking at the old CRB, the Ruffian didn’t gain many weapons. The three big ones are the Pick with Fatal d10 (vanilla damage), the Flail with Trip, Disarm, and Sweep (really handy for Athletics builds), and the Shield Boss/Spike (which would let you be decently armed while having a Shield to raise and a free hand).
But mostly I’m glad that the old option of the Longspear is still viable. Ruffian Rogue was one of the few characters who would actually use an actual spear. Because Spears/Longspears are simple weapons, they’re simply outclassed for nearly every class by Martial weapons, although they’re much more iconic than Glaive and so forth.
Change comments
- Battle Assessment: redundant with (remastered) Recall Knowledge
If that's the case why wouldn't they make a feat similar where you can recall knowledge on a creature by using percerption?(Yes it would make mastermind very good)
@@MrNegetZhow would it?
I wish the Ruffian got text about none agile/finesse unarmed.
Battle Assessment was probably removed because its effects are now the default for recall knowledge. I'm personally not too offended by the removal of the trickster, my guess is that since it differs form other rackets significantly, it might warrant getting a print in a different book or even a class of its own for its theme to be properly executed. All in all the changes seem fine to me
No, Battle Assessment is not gone because it's effect is default for RK. Neither old or new RK were a Perception check vs the higher of Deception or Stealth DC that can apply to any enemy regardless of type but as a tradeoff you don't get control over what you get and it can only weakness or save related info.
People need to stop actiing like RK allowing a question somehow steps on or invalidates options that work differently than Recall Knowledge. Why do people keep pointing to things that aren't making a check with the default skills and asking a question and saying it's the same thing?
I'm not saying RC and battle assessment are the same, rather that what battle assessment does is both covered by RC and less exhaustive than. Having both of them as options in the game creates confusing situations where you have to guess if your knowledge skills are less applicable than a perception check or if it is worth it asking a question not covered by BA despite a possible lower success rate. They don't have to be 'the same' to be in conflict@@cheezeofages
“Now, don’t get me wrong, Rogue never didn’t lose any class power…”
My brain just had to reboot.
So ruffian rogue can now use a gnome flickmace or other options like a asp coil. Dope.
Yes, they can use picks and tricky picks
@@pedroroch4 depends on how fatal interacts with the dice restriction though.
@@cosmoniums5990 You apply the die change first and check the limitation second. Ruffian rogue probably wants to stay away from Fatal weapons.
@@Ghost.in.the.Machine though Two-Handed (the trait) seems like a nice alternative for when facing the odd precision damage immune foe.
Starknife as an upgraded thrown weapon for rogues instead of dagger or throwing knifes seems nice.
Thanks for previewing this. Rogue is my favorite class, and this is the first system I have played where the rogue feels good to play outside of video games.
Mistake on thumbnail? (Fighter text)
For Ruffian, the changes to them are strictly a buff (unless Paizo ever introduces a simple weapon into the game that has 1d10 weapon damage dice). How ruffian was written before was that it could gain sneak attack on any simple weapon, but it could only gain the effects of a Critical Specialization effect with their weapon if the simple weapon did more more than a d8 of weapon damage. The kicker there is that t here are no simple melee weapons that deal anything higher than a d8 currently, so this was just a case of "Future Proofing" the feature. However now that it's been more strictly specified that sneak attack only applies to simple weapons that deal no more than d8, this is 'technically' a nerf if they do ever introduce a simple weapon that can deal more than a d8... which is probably just their way of saying they don't really think Rogues should be using two-handed weapons, likely.
But overall it's a rather big buff to Ruffian given a muuuch larger, diverse pool of weapons and weapon traits at it's disposal now. I for one can't wait to make a Kobold Ruffian Rogue who uses a Pickaxe because that sounds fun as hell.
As for the lack of inclusion of Eldritch Trickster... given that Paizo never really discussed it's 'removal', like with some other feats that didn't make the cut for some of the remastered classes (i.e: Command Undead for Cleric isn't included in the remaster), this doesn't necessarily mean that it has been removed from the game, as you said with prior books still being legal for play unless strictly stated within the rules. It is still legal, it just likely means that Paizo didn't deem it necessary to include it in the Remaster. Given how they had discussed why Snares were not being included in the remaster for Ranger, I would assume that Eldritch Trickster was not included for similar reasons... it's a very clunky and unintuitive subclass, unfortunately. We also have to consider that in the current day, the most prominent houserule at tables that play PF2E is the Variant Free Archetype rule, which has almost entirely pretty much invalidated the existence of the Eldritch Trickster by design.
I for one have always been a huge fan of the Arcane/Eldritch Trickster fantasy in TTRPG's since I started playing back in 3e D&D, and it was one of my favourite prestiege classes in PF1E, but sadly the subclass was greatly lacking and just seemed a bit poorly thought out within PF2E's rules... This is probably due to Paizo's heavy intent on not repeating past mistakes with PF1E having insane amounts of feature issues by not trying to future proof content on both sides of the spectrum of certain options being either way too weak or way too strong. It's sad they didn't really see it worth fixing up for the remaster? But I also don't necessarily fault them if their ultimate goal is to do the same thing that they plan on doing with Snares and Snare Crafting, in that the Snarecrafter archetype in Player Core 2 is getting a big rework and will be the 'ideal' way to be playing that class fantasy, rather than have it be a weird and not very thought out thing that was eating up page space within the Ranger section... I do just find it extra weird that, unlike with Ranger with it's declared non-inclusion of it's prior Snare related feats, we haven't recieved any information on this from Paizo yet.
So in short, I would HOPE that in Player Core 2, or 'sometime' in the future we will instead be getting an archetype that is designed to achieve the Eldritch Trickster fantasy, rather than it being a rogue subclass that also required a bunch of feat tax and such...
Focus spell based Eldritch trickster would be sweet.
What about the Mastermind rogue?
Mastermind rogue is completely unchanged, in both its description as a racket as well as it's specific feats.
Expanded weapon choices for ruffians is mostly a side grade. Ruffians could already sneak attack with shortswords and rapiers, those are d6 martial weapons. Standard simple weapons don't get damage higher than a d8 with the two handed longspear and two handed thundermace being the only melee choices, and ruffians were already restricted to a d8 damage die cap in the event of them enlarging or something.
You lose the ability to enlarge and sneak attack with a shortsword as a ruffian. But you also have d6 weapon choices that don't spend any of their budget on finesse or agile. So it's pretty much a wash.
Rogue was good already. Eldritch Trickster didn't have much going for it.
The extra abilities are really nice so I expect people to play rogue a lot more.
Eldritch Trickster definitely needs to be its own archetype and not a subclass
I hope they make eldritch trickster into a class archetype. I think it would be cool if it were a bounded caster like magus or summoner.
I'm not going to get my hopes up though.
I hate the bounded caster idea because it always just seemed too limiting. 6-8 slots always seemed more balanced, even if you had to take a feat to get there. I agree though that that would be a good way to go for eldritch trickster.
What's your take on the Fatal trait on the Ruffian? It says to apply abilities that alter damage die first, but I'm undecided yet. In most cases I'd run it as doing sneak attack regardless of Fatal, but I've seen some people say that it does sneak attack on hits and doesn't on crits.
Fatal is a trait, not an ability. An example of something that wouldn't work would be taking the Cleric archetype to become a cleric of Lubaiko (favored weapon: longspear), then taking Basic Dogma to get Deadly Simplicity to make longspear into a 1d10 simple weapon. If you did that, you wouldn't trigger Sneak Attack.
@@robinbernardinis Ah! I missed that part, thank you!
Hrm. The thing that makes me nervous now is Two-Handed. Only the Gnome Hooked Hammer and Katana qualify in the old CRB, but there could be more elsewhere. I personally think Fatal is results-wise fine. It’s just a another way of doing Deadly, with a slightly different value in the trait budget (Pick is d6 Fatal d10, rapier is d6 finesse, disarm, deadly d8-both about equal to a d8 weapon over time).
However, Two-Handed seems different. I don’t want it to apply, because that seems to mess up the balance they’re attempting. While I don’t mind the Katana finding a niche, it would easily overtake all the other weapons for Ruffian in a way I find distasteful. D10 deadly d8 is just a lot more damage than anything else.
Heh.
Thumbnail still says fighter
I really wish it limited it to d8 for all weapons instead of a d6 for martial and advanced.
I felt the same way at first but then I kind of like being directed to choose some less common weapons.
D8 weapons you've got all your classic hero weapons. Longsword, Bastard Sword, Warhammer, Battleaxe and you've got a few less standard but still pretty solid hero weapons, like Glaives.
D6 though, that's where you get your rough and rowdy goon weapons. Hatchet, Flail, Boarding Axe, Breaching Pike, Dogslicer, oh, and the Machete. You tell me a guy's a ruffian, okay I'll trust you I guess, he comes at you with a Boarding Axe as his weapon of choice, and I'll believe you.
@@Jermbot15eh even stuff like hatchet can be used by all rogues now seems like. Machete is cool but what kind of Rogue is trying to use the Sweep trait? There’s actually a very short list of weapons usable by Ruffians that weren’t before
@@cajeb5396 "What kind of rogue is trying to use the Sweep trait."
Sneak attack applies every hit which incentivizes Rogues, more than most, to try to hit multiple times a round. But they don't have fighter weapon proficiencies so to get those hits they want traits to offset MAP, which are sweep and agile. Machette only has sweep which is fine, Hatchet has both which is best.
I think you're right in that there will be best use weapons for ruffians and that will always be a smaller list than all the weapons they can use. I think the ones that will fall by the wayside though will be choices that are only useful if both hands are full, like flails, or boarding axes.
@@Jermbot15 hmm you’re right Sweep might be okay. Regardless there’s not a ton of variety added by this change. Would have been nice to be able to go to d8. I also with Ruffian got the crit spec lvl 1 for unarmed attacks.
@@Jermbot15Thank you for adding, “Rough & Rowdy Goon Weapons,” to my vocabulary! 👍❤️💪
6:30 Not a lot of spells or not a lot of cantrips? Because there are plenty of spells, some of which, like Scorching Ray, allows you to theoretically sneak attack 3 targets with no MAP, and some are just plain awesome. Imagine a rogue sneak attacking some poor bastard with a freaking Disintegrate
Frankly, I just glad pre-remastered content is always working and viable for picking. Because ET, with their ability to pick any caster multiclass AND pick any mental ability score to boost, was so cool. I was always memeing about Cleric ET, but honestly... Too bad ET didn't get anything fancy, like Debilitating Strike which would give an opponent a penalty to saves against ET's spells...
The ruffian already had the restriction of not being able to use simple weapons that deal more then a d8 to sneak attack. As far as I can see they just gained the ability to sneak attack with martial that deal d6 or less.
Martial *or* Advanced (hello Gnome Flickmace/Breaching Pike rogues).
I was responding the bad luck gamer saying he doesn't know if it was a nerve or not. The point that I was trying to make is that the ruffian didn't lose anything as far as I could tell. I should have said martial/advanced in my original post but was a bit sloppy because that wasn't what I was trying to talk about. My point was Ruffian gain cool stuff and didn't lose anything.
Hopefully they rework Eldritch Trickster as if you are playing with Free Archetype it was basically useless and you couldn't get anything at level 2.
Great stuff as always dude!!
Hey BLG, would really like to know if you will do similar breakdown for the ranger soon, I want to see if they manage to do them well since there were gonna be some changes, specially on how they get spells.
Appreciate the work for this ones mate, thanks for it.
he says near the end that ranger will be the next video in this series
Page 304 describes the Daze cantrip as making enemies off-guard. Unfortunately it's not in the actual cantrip. I'm thinking this, removal of spell attack from most spells, means some kind of change for Eldritch Trickster and Magus will be implemented.
I don't know how they'd roll those changes out, via Errata or in the upcoming books, but I really hope it happens.
I personally see ET as the opposite of Magus, instead of using your weapon attack roll to deliver a spell, you use spell to make the enemy off-guard and deliver sneak attack.
We can still hope that Eldritch Trickster is coming with Player Core 2. It wouldn't be the only case where a large chunk of a class is plucked out to get some polish for later release: the same is happening to ranger snares and snares in general, after all.
The Ruffian has an excellent combo, if I can say so myself - with the nonhuman races: for example, a Dwarf can take the racial weapon feat and next thing you know he can sneak attack with, say, a battleaxe (that, to him, is a simple weapon)... and the same pretty much goes for most races, from the mighty Orcs to the astute Gnomes. And if a human wants he can join the party with the appropriate feat...
I'm afraid not. Those racial weapons are simple weapons only "for the purposes of proficiency." Meaning they don't magically become simple weapons for the purpose of circumventing the limitations on sneak attack.
If memory serves correct, Eldritch Trickster falls heavily into the OGL Camp
Yes, but they could have put a new name on the concept. Spell Trickster. Magethief. etc.
And who says they are not, and just have not put anything out for it yet? There may have been a change in the system they need to adjust it for. @@philopharynx7910
Whoops, spell trickster is already taken, but there are other options.
Ruffians can now use flickmaces!
So, does the Mastermind Racket not exist? It was a Adv. Players Guide along with the Eldritch Trickster ?
It's still there, the videos are on what changed so 9f it wasn't mentioned it did not change
Scoundrel's Surprise is just stealing from the Vigilante.
afaict Ruffian is getting only buffs, the Legacy version also put a d8 limit on simple weapons but didn't work with martial weapons at all, so the Remaster added some martial and advanced weapons and removed nothing
Head stomp good... wut? He's already off gaurd because he is prone, why would I waste an attack action when I can just stab?
Scoundrel's surprise bad... wut? You just have to be disguised at the start of any combat to use it, you don't even have to be disguised as someone they know, just look like an old man, make them all take a perception against your deception and instantly make eveyone who fails offgaurd... its basically instant opening at level 4 for a whole group once per combat. Just redisguise between combat and boom, no downside.
Nimble roll requirement kills nimble strike so much and I don't know why it would be required logically either.
At least powerful sneak is useful, still a level 18 feet but...hey.
Head Stomp was almost completely useless before but now it's merely terrible...which is a shame because thematically it's very cool. If a caster is prone at your feet, wasting an attack to give them a -1 to a bunch of things isn't high on the list of my priorities. You know what else disrupts a caster's ability to use spells? Death. (or unconsciousness I suppose)
@@ninjamummysquid also keep in mind that sneak attack can also add debilitations and it makes the trade even worse.
the effects of headstomp lasts until the end of your next turn, which is very good indeed.
@@RawFiVideos Opposed to being able to use your full item bonus from your weapon and getting in sneak attack damage because a prone target is already off guard?... nah. Remember that unarmed strike works against MAP. If they wanted it to be enticing it would have been a reaction when a target falls prone and it would have been stunned 1 instead of stupified 1. This is not worth a class feat even if you want to specialize in trip.
I'm holding out on updating to the remaster, untill *all* character options and features have been ported in some way.
Even then,
I hesitate to buy the physical books thogh, because I probably don't have the space.
As someone who is a HUGE fan of the "concept" of eldritch trickster it sadly has too many incompatibilities with one of the most popular house rules, that being Free Archetype. And not only that after having played eldritch trickster despite how much I wanted to love doing it, getting that free first level archetype was rather meaningless outside of the first level... couldn't get any other archetypes/feats until level 4 anyways so all it did was move a feat down one level and treated that as basically the entire power budget for the class, where every other racket got bonuses that where good though out their entire classes existence and still had the ability to pick up that same archetype as well at level 2 and be just as good as the Eldritch Trickster by level 4. I personally tried everything I could to make it work even slightly better than the other rackets and it just couldn't after 4th level.
Honestly laughing shadow magus actually pulls off the concept of an Eldritch Trickster more so than the actual Eldritch Trickster did, and I think the Devs may have known this. If we see an archetype in the future that helps pull off the concept better that'd be amazing... If you want to be an actual rogue with magic just go any of the other rackets and grab a magical Archetype when you can, plus an ancestry which gives a cantrip or two and you will have basically the exact same play as the Elderitch Trickster pre Remaster gave you, even better if the GM is doing Free Archetype.
I think you missed a pretty impactful change to gang up feat.
It was already mentioned to me but thank you
If you want an eldritch trickster, just get a wizard dedication feat at level 2
Removing Eldritch Trickster makes me wonder if that idea's going to be better rolled into a revamped Spell Trickster archetype. I would suggest they could make it a full class archetype for Rogues, but let's be honest Paizo has no interest in doing class archetypes unless it changes how a spellcaster casts their spells.
considering the other class changes, i think they are just trying to force all the classes into neat little boxes. they dont want rogues doing magic or having anything in common with the Investigator, they dont want Rangers having traps because thats all crafting mechanical and alchemical items (snares often have those things involved in them) which is for Alchemist and Inventor. i bet at this rate, when we get Investigator remastered, it wont have the Alchemical subclass anymore. i miss the old Paizo who would release stuff like the Vigilante which had barrowed abilities from rogues, rangers, fighters, wizards, ect. and thats before adding archetypes! back when they would put out hybrid classes like Brawler and Bloodrager. i am aware that the new archetype system lets you more or less get those characters to work but they are so focused on balance and keeping the classes defined by one gimmick each that the creativity is slipping away. guess how you deal with an unbalanced party? you give the player who made a weak character access to some magic weapon or armor to bring him up to the other players level. you dont nerf the rest of the party to bring everyone down so that one guy who spent less time on his character and chose a core class with no archetype can feel like he's just as good as the others who spent hours reading and planning to make their characters unique.
if the design ethos of the game is completely shifted to only giving players options when they take a dedication then make the Free Archetype rule a standard rather than optional!!!
I think Eldritch Trickster didn't mesh well with Free Archetype, which is how most people play the game.
You didn't talk about the buff on gang up! :)
What buff?
@@dontreadway2718 the target is off guard to the ally which you are benefiting from gang up. It's like your ally has gang up too for free.
True, I did miss that
I think you forgot to show Thief Racket
I only showed what changed, thief didn't change thus wasn't shown
@@theebadluckgamer I heard Thief now covers unarmed attacks.
Indeed you are correct, I missed that small addition in my read over
@@theebadluckgamerWhat about the Weapon Tricks class feature? Rogues get trained proficiency with martial weapons initially, but does that scale to expert at 5th?
Mastermind rogue is gone too?
mastermind was advanced players guide not core rulebook so they mightve omitted it for that reason
If I'm not wrong, Eldritch Trickster is also from Advanced Player's Guide, so i don't uderstand the complain of the people. Thief is from Core and it's not mencioned in the video, and Mastermind and Eldritch are from Advanced. Maybe Archive of Nethys 9s wrong but you can read the source there@@avianascent @erjavier1995
Mastermind is still in the game this video was all about changes and Mastermind didn't change
@@theebadluckgamer How's it feel to have to say that same thing over and over and over? ;-)
3:00 Maybe a nerf for Deadly Simplicity builds?
Premaster there are no Simple Weapons with more then D8. And any bigger then D6 are 2H weapons. So it would only penalize Deadly Simplicity builds.
A pity they are still excluding Unarmed Attacks. And that Crticial Spec is still limited to those weapons.
4:50 Also no unarmed Attacks covered.
10:20 "A platypus?" puts on glasses and hat "Perry the Platypus!?"
It also seems pretty worthless compared to Suprise attack. It is at best avoiding a Feints Randomness.
I don't think it's accurate to say any content is removed when Paizo has said old content is still legal, and PFS says old content is legal. The only time old content is "removed" is if they republish something with the exact same name, in that case you have to take the new version.
There are two Eldritch Tricksters in our local game (Elven Wizardly ET and Gnomish Druidic ET). This is a major disruption. I am not liking this. 😡
Well everything in the Remaster is compatible with the initial release material so they can continue as is with no problems
Battle Assessment got removed because Recall Knowledge got overhauled, and Battle Assessment is now redundant.
this is a travesty! look how they massacred my boy! and i dont mean rogue, i mean magical rogue SPECIFICALLY! i have been playing magically inclined thieves on and off sense D&D3.0! sneaky and smart has been one of my 2 favorite character types and normally one of my GO-TO options when im looking at a new RPG (the other being Alchemist/Inventor because i like making things)
The d6/d8 thing feels weird to me.
eldritch trickster i think is removed, because 5ed.
Possibly, but 5e called theirs the “Arcane Trickster”. And Eldritch Trickster was different enough due to PF2e’s different archetype system. Mage Armor and True Strike remained by renaming to Mystic Armor and Sure Strike.
I think it’s more likely what other folks said that it’ll be a Class Archetype. Class Archetypes were mentioned in Core, but never appeared until G&G and SoM. I feel like this is them trying to do the ET right instead of the hampered mess.
That could also mean the Bloodrager as a Barbarian class archetype could be done too.
But that’s hopium on my part. The Remaster has been both exciting (woot Witch changes!) and disappointing (more renaming than really changing things).
I don't see anything in Ruffian that would prevent me from cheesing whether a weapon is considered a simple or martial weapon using weapon familiarity ancestry feats. RAW I think a Goblin Ruffian could sneak attack with a Horsechopper if they took Goblin Weapon Familiarity.
Totally you are correct as long as the weapon meets the damage die requirements and is considered a martial or simple weapon it totally works
@@theebadluckgamer This doesn’t work. Goblin Weapon Familiarity, unless it’s changed in the remaster, only makes a horse hopper a simple weapon for purposes of proficiency. It is still a martial weapon and so disallowed for sneak attack due to its d8 damage.
Eldritch Trickster was simply weak. There were several better ways in the game to simulate that play style.