Pathfinder 2e - Looks interesting
SorcererV1ct0r
Member Posts: 2,176
DISCLAIMER : My impressions are according to what i've read on reddit. No final rules are decided yet!!!
You can see an session recorded from paizocom here>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z63SMouuiJ0
And there are an huge topic showing what alterations they are making for 2e > https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/9etyxz/pathfinder_2e_playtest_rulebook_updated/
The spell casting and melee combat system for eg looks completely different.
"Into the mid and late game, I think that this will harm non-magic classes. In Pathfinder 1e most combat classes get 2nd, 3rd, and 4th attacks faster than say a wizard or a summoner. However, in 2e it seems that the amount of attacks won't be changing as we level. This issue is compounded by the fact that it will now require an action to "Raise you shield" to receive your shields AC bonus, which will reduce sword and shield fighters to one attack per round." source > https://qareth.fandom.com/wiki/Pathfinder_2e
Looking to some sources, some changes i liked, for eg, now there are 10th tier spells and is not like epic spells on 3.5e, they are few spells like Time Stop that was tier 9(again, not sure), and depending the bloodline, the sorcerer access different spell tables. One thing that i din't liked is that Sorcerers and Wizards are much more similar
According to an blog that i've read
source > https://qareth.fandom.com/wiki/Pathfinder_2e
IMO looks like they simplified pathfinder rules without compromising what you can and cannot do in the game. I an not sure.
You can see an session recorded from paizocom here>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z63SMouuiJ0And there are an huge topic showing what alterations they are making for 2e > https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/9etyxz/pathfinder_2e_playtest_rulebook_updated/
The spell casting and melee combat system for eg looks completely different.
"Into the mid and late game, I think that this will harm non-magic classes. In Pathfinder 1e most combat classes get 2nd, 3rd, and 4th attacks faster than say a wizard or a summoner. However, in 2e it seems that the amount of attacks won't be changing as we level. This issue is compounded by the fact that it will now require an action to "Raise you shield" to receive your shields AC bonus, which will reduce sword and shield fighters to one attack per round." source > https://qareth.fandom.com/wiki/Pathfinder_2e
Looking to some sources, some changes i liked, for eg, now there are 10th tier spells and is not like epic spells on 3.5e, they are few spells like Time Stop that was tier 9(again, not sure), and depending the bloodline, the sorcerer access different spell tables. One thing that i din't liked is that Sorcerers and Wizards are much more similar
According to an blog that i've read
- It seems spells level with you, and are more flexible that's cool!
- Sounds like classes are going to be closer to each other in power level.
I- like the idea of initiative bonuses based on how an encounter starts
- Spell crits!
- Level 10 spells!
- Making it so illusions can resist detect magic
- Critical hits being based on attack vs AC rather than a Nat 20
- Less linear feat progression, and more player choice.
- Crafting changes (Kinda)
source > https://qareth.fandom.com/wiki/Pathfinder_2e
IMO looks like they simplified pathfinder rules without compromising what you can and cannot do in the game. I an not sure.
4
Comments
Bit of a shame though. From the current bits and pieces Pathfinder 2nd Edition as a rule system shapes up to be even better than D&D 5th Edition in my book.
Not only that. Paizo is much more tolerant with online gaming and OGL content than WotC. Pathfinder 2e sounds interesting enough.
I still wanna see if they will port more interesting stuff from 1e, like Witch class to 2e.
Yes, i saw some people saying that 2e looks similar to some aspects than 4e > https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/9pq1fd/me_and_my_group_will_not_continue_with_pathfinder/
But i don't think that only because they took one thing from 4e, they are copying the homogenization and mmoish mechanics. Mainly because Pathfinder is only an good game because 4e failed miserably.
For example - the guy in the video counts every single time he gets the choice to select between "Strength or Dexterity" as a choice. It technically is (as he could go with either). However, it's largely going to fit whatever original choice he made. If he was going to raise his Strength up really high (as he did), then I'd posit each time he made a "choice" to select strength, he wasnt making a new choice, just reinforcing an old one.
Someone in the comments of the video makes a good argument. In 5e, you get a +2 to your stats at five separate points (level 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20). If the game splits that into getting + 1 at level 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20) - You'd end up with the same point value. You've "technically" made twice as many choices... but were those choices meaningful? Not really. They're a little meaningful at level 2 when I have a +1 that I wouldnt otherwise have, but in the grand scheme of things you wind up in the same place.
Anyways. My last point is that I think it's incumbent upon the DM to offer the appropriate amount of choice for the group. If the 5e system is too constrictive for your players, then you can just give them additional abilities and choices. I've done this in my game, so that each character feels special both due to their class progression and due to the progression foisted upon them by my story.
I would agree with this. Also 5E gives enough flexibility that you can fit in rules. We're looking as my group into fitting in several different rules from previous editions/other games into it (stuff like bloodied from 4E). It's like, it gives you that core edition and then if you want to you can build off it.
- Bluff is now Deception, Heal was renamed into Medicine, Spellcraft is now Occultism, Disable Device and Stealth are now included in the new Thievery skill, ect.
Also, Goblins are core?! Paizo now officially left WotC with its D&D 5e in the dust!
I find the info about fighters not getting more APR an odd choice, but if they instead add more actions they can take in a round other than swinging their weapon, it could perhaps be something good. Personally I wouldn't mind if Owlcat stayed with the current PF for their next game. Considering how well-made PKM is, I'd want another on expanded on that instead of them starting from scratch again. I hope they get massive success and instead make their third game using these next edition rules.
Thanks for the bump, I had missed this thread the first time around.
Spells are almost always a 2-action so warrior types still have more "attack actions" than a caster ( they could only cast 1 spell per turn normally).
Even dual-weapon strikes and dual shots are 2-actions, you make 2(or three with triple shot) attacks but you do not have the same hit-rate penalty as if you do 2 consecutive normal attacks ( In the case of normal attacks: first attack is at full bab, 2nd is -5, third is -10, +2 if you have a light weapon or fist because they are less tiresome)
Rangers can actually make 2 attacks per action against their hunted preys once per turn, but it is like the multishot of D&D, not a new action. It´s as if you shoot two arrows at the same time with the same shot.
Monks of course still have furry of blows, but also once per turn.
Fighters specialize in other things instead of more APR.
I seem to recall that Owlcat already confirmed that their next game will stay in Pathfinder 1e, because they want to use the game rule mechanics they already have instead of making the 2e new ones. They are a relatively small indie studio. If I found the link I will post it but it must be in the net.
Technically the paladins still exist, but they are the LG champions only, the Redeemers are the neutral good and the Liberators are the CG champions. You can even change your alignment and still be a champion, but you change from one subclass to the other without losing your deity`s favor (if your new alignment is also favored by your god). ex: Paladin to Redeemer.
Unless you become evil, of course.
Divine grace of the paladins had a huge nerf, so many people dislike this change.
Ed: They really love shorties in Paizo
Also goblins ftw. They have feats called "burn it!" "very sneaky" and "very, very sneaky". You gotta love them.
Though I would be happier if Champions could actually be non-good for followers of neutral or evil deities. But knowing Paizo this is only a matter of time to have archetypes like that.
A bit late, but I finally found my Half-Orcs in there. Really didn't imagined they were now treaded as a Human heritage, aka subrace. Not really a fan of it myself.
Anyway, i loved that now, different bloodlines for sorcerers gave different spell books and that now there are 10 tiers of spells, who received the most powerful tier 9 spells now are tier 10 that can only be used once / day.
About Owlcat, i wish that their next game becomes easily moddable with custom modules like nwn1/2... People will put even Kitsune in the game ( http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/uncommon-races/arg-kitsune )
With the possibility to speak goblin lines when you´re talking with those strange longshanks, please.
Also Potion-gulper class and "lyrics-mangler" bard kit.
But looks like have an limit of 4 minions. IMO the 3.5e rule (CL * 2 HD worth of minions) is the best rule...
We're not supposed to expose hat secrets...
I want to paint in how ridiculously fuckhuge her skull has to be to fit that hat breadth.
Magic
off topic again.
Edit; oh wait, maybe she's a Twilek storing her head tails up the hat?
... for no selfish reasons, I am sure.
DM house rules
Neh-thalggu and Yah-thelgaad of Pathfinder are as ugly as impronunciable (And I am pretty sure nobody will understand the meme joke). I prefer ye olde Ctulhu squidfaces XD
I like the Paizo TT game very much, but the alien races and monsters and space ships always strike me as a little out of place in a fantasy "medieval" world.