Let's Take A Look At Pathfinder 2's Deities & Domains!

There's a new Paizo blog up about the way deities and domains work in Pathfinder 2nd Edition. It shows how deities are described, with the example deity Shelyn, along with new domains and domain powers.

​

Favoured weapons, edicts, and anathemas don't have mechanical effects for most characters, but provide strong roleplaying touchpoints. However, for clerics, a deity has alignment restrictions, bonus skills and spells, and more.

As for domains, there are 23 new domains (some of which were subdomains in PF1). New domains include Indulgence, Dreams, and Wealth, and come with basic and advanced powers accessed though Spell Points.

Read the whole thing here.

 

[mellored]

I'm not CapnZapp, but for me, the wizard being Vancian WAS a problem. I regard paleovancian casting to be a wart on the system and wish it to be summarily excised. I like my arcanists bookish smart. I didn't like having to pump what I otherwise consider a dump stat to be a good caster, but I did because I hate paleovancian that much.

This is why I would prefer to separate ability scores from combat.

Drop all the +Str/Dex to hit or damage, +Con to HP, +Int/Wis/Cha to DC's or spells known, etc....
*(Replaced with a flat +4 or wharever if needed.)

Then you can make a 20 Str wizard, or a 20 Int fighter, or an 8 Cha sorcerer without issue.

 

[Sunseeker]

This is why I would prefer to separate ability scores from combat.

Drop all the +Str/Dex to hit or damage, +Con to HP, +Int/Wis/Cha to DC's or spells known, etc....
*(Replaced with a flat +4 or wharever if needed.)

Then you can make a 20 Str wizard, or a 20 Int fighter, or an 8 Cha sorcerer without issue.

Then what would stats do exactly? Play into skills only? Isn't your logic of using a flat, level-based number just as applicable there?

 

[mellored]

Then what would stats do exactly? Play into skills only? Isn't your logic of using a flat, level-based number just as applicable there?

Yes, skills only.
And yes. You could also make skills not use ability scores instead.
Or get rid of ability scores altogether.

Really, any way that un-links skills and combat would work for me. So you can make a bookish bard, weightlifting wizard, charismatic barbarian, or whatever.

 

[Kurviak]

If I'm ever lucky enough to play Pathfinder again, I'll certainly consider that combo if I can't play a DSP Psion.

If you don't care to be a "face" (specializing in skills such as Diplomacy and Bluff), and I never do, Charisma is a dump stat (primary ability notwithstanding). Every other ability has class-agnostic applications (for me) beyond its role as a primary ability, and gives me a reason not to dump it. Dex/Con/Wis are save abilities, Str gives carrying capacity, and Int gives skill points. I saw having to pump Charisma (in addition to the idiotic delayed spell progression) as a "cost" of throwing off the shackles of paleovancian casting.

In pf2 charisma is more important for everyone because resonance

 

[houser2112]

In pf2 charisma is more important for everyone because resonance

Ugh, Resonance. The only thing I've seen from the PF2 previews that I truly do not like, because I don't consider the "problem" it's trying to solve as a problem. I see it as both better than and worse than 5E's "solution" to the magic item "problem". Better in the sense that Resonance is not a hard limit like 5E's Attunement; Worse in the sense that I think 5E's wand recharging system is a better, more elegant solution if you accept that being able to spam charged items is a problem.

 

[Thomas Shea]

Two handed warhammer must be added