[PF2] Cleric class preview + spells per level

[Charlaquin]

They even had a CHA flaw in PF1, so I don't think it makes too much sense to give them a boost now. If they wish to include the Goblin in PF2 core, I guess they'll need to fit the +2 to 2 stats (one mental, one physical), -2 to 1, +2 flex pattern. So why not +2 to Int to make them better alchemists?

I still think Wisdom is the score to give them +2 in, (and Charisma the one to give them -2 in) but since I’m tired of arguing about it, I’ll say I’d rather their mental boost go to Intelligence than Charisma.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm gonna be "that guy" for a moment and say this: everything you see in the pre-release is final. Nothing will change. What you see is what we'll get.

Well, I dunno how much reason there is to believe there will be no change. Both PF1 and 5E made significant changes from public playtest feedback. But, their response to naysayers in public is not promising in regards to an open and critical process. So, in all likelihood, they will push forward with an incompatible system, which doesn't strike me as good business.

 

[Parmandur]

I like linking stats to narrative, and visaversa, so for me it is a plus to generate scores via choices. At the same time, I hope customization is easy to do within this system.

It's interesting, but unlike random generation it does seem like it will lead to backstory optimization...which is weird.

 

[Yaarel]

It's interesting, but unlike random generation it does seem like it will lead to backstory optimization...which is weird.

Heh, as long as players are even thinking about backstories, I am happy.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It's interesting, but unlike random generation it does seem like it will lead to backstory optimization...which is weird.

Might lead to at least /thinking/ about backstory more.

I've used systems like that, before, and they can deliver pretty good characters in the hands of RP-first types, and pretty good backstories in the hands of optimizers.
I say 'can,' not 'will,' or 'always' - they need to be pretty straightforward and neatly balanced to do so at all consistently...

 

[Yaarel]

I still think Wisdom is the score to give them +2 in, (and Charisma the one to give them -2 in) but since I’m tired of arguing about it, I’ll say I’d rather their mental boost go to Intelligence than Charisma.

If you mean ‘Wisdom’ in the sense of a good sense of smell, maybe.

But if by ‘Wisdom’ you mean courageous and making sound judgments, then Wisdom seems highly improbable for a goblin. Heh, unless you count Yoda as a goblin.

If P2 symmetry forces goblins to get a mental score boost, Intelligence seems the only surviving score left.

In folklore, goblins are fairy creatures, known for magic, who make potions.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's interesting, but unlike random generation it does seem like it will lead to backstory optimization...which is weird.

It’s worth noting that they have said there will be an option for rolling to generate ability scores, and that they’re planning to include that option in the playtest book so people can see it (though they want playtesters to use the Ancestry, background, class method for the purpose of testing it.)

If you mean ‘Wisdom’ in the sense of a good sense of smell, maybe.

But if by ‘Wisdom’ you mean courageous and making sound judgments, then Wisdom seems highly improbable for a goblin.

Right, and the “having a good sense of smell” interpretation of Wisdom is supported by the mechanical effects of wisdom, where the “being courageous and making sound judgments” interpretation is not. In my assessment, anyway.

 

[houser2112]

I'm reading the blog post on Paizo, and this comment from Mark has me dismayed:

...and if you think you'll need more healing than this provides, you can always prepare more heal spells using your normal spell slots...

It sounds like old vancian casting is sticking around. I was really hoping that this sacred cow would be slaughtered and the pieces scattered among the cosmos for good.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm reading the blog post on Paizo, and this comment from Mark has me dismayed:



It sounds like old vancian casting is sticking around. I was really hoping that this sacred cow would be slaughtered and the pieces scattered among the cosmos for good.

Pretty sure Vanciab casting being in has been well broadcast: not sure why you thought that would go away?

 

[Sunseeker]

I'm also skeptical of their "nothing is set in stone" stance. I believe small tweaks here and there based on the playtest might be possible, but major design elements aren't going anywhere.

Yep. We're 3 months out from their release date. There is, realistically, no time to make substantive changes.

We might see a +2 or -2 move around a bit, maybe some fine-tuning of the text, but there's not going to be any fundamental changes.

Well, I dunno how much reason there is to believe there will be no change. Both PF1 and 5E made significant changes from public playtest feedback. But, their response to naysayers in public is not promising in regards to an open and critical process. So, in all likelihood, they will push forward with an incompatible system, which doesn't strike me as good business.

I'm gonna say, I think the "incompatible system" arguments are a bit thin. The point of a new game is to sell a new product. An incremental change over a previous product isn't going to do that. That's why 4E was such a change from 3.5, why 5E was such a change from 4E (if similar to 3.5) and why PF2 will be different as well.