Pathfinder 2E Lets Read and Review Pathfinder 2E

[Mycroft]

4th Ed hit points at level 1 (race+class+con modifier)

That's not how level 1 hit points work in 4th Ed, it's a set value from your class (4, 5, 6, or 7) + your Con score.
Though 4th Ed and PF2 both boost 1st level hit points compared to 3rd and 5th Ed.
In the first D&D Next playtest, you got 1st level hit points = max hit points from 1 class hit dice (10 for fighter, etc) + your Con score.

 

[Zardnaar]

That's not how level 1 hit points work in 4th Ed, it's a set value from your class (4, 5, 6, or 7) + your Con score.
Though 4th Ed and PF2 both boost 1st level hit points compared to 3rd and 5th Ed.
In the first D&D Next playtest, you got 1st level hit points = max hit points from 1 class hit dice (10 for fighter, etc) + your Con score.

The concept is from 4E though the basic idea is more hp at level one. The book does give off a 4E vibe but the playstyle is different.

 

[Mycroft]

The book does give off a 4E vibe but the playstyle is different.

Yes, I agree, and that might have to do with one of designers being heavily involved with 4th Ed design.
Though 4th Ed is less byzantine than PF2, to me.

 

[gargoyleking]

Worth noting the free +2 can cancel the ability flaw if you wish. You can also optionally take an additional two -2 flaws for one additional +2 boost. You can't use them to raise any attribute above 12 or to drop any attribute below 8 at this stage, but you could use them to turn one of your boosted 12 attributes to an 8 and then combine the two boosts to raise your flawed stat to a 12 attribute. Makes playing against type for more viable Ancestry/Class combinations, which I like.

Also worth noting that this is an optional rule. (Pg 26 in the sidebar for reference) It may be something rhat a DM may deny you if they want to minimize min-maxing.

 

[CapnZapp]

Also worth noting that this is an optional rule.

He did note that

Cheers

 

[CapnZapp]

You can't use them to raise any attribute above 12 or to drop any attribute below 8 at this stage

I believe it is important to remind readers this refers to the Ancestry step of assigning boosts to your attributes.

There is no "maximum 12" rule. It's just that you're not allowed to raise the same attribute as the ones you just raised from Ancestry. (You can't use this rule to leave the Ancestry step with a 10+2+2=14 anywhere.) Also, you are not allowed to lower the same attribute as the one you just lowered from your Ancestry. (You can't use this rule to leave the Ancestry step with a 10-2-2=6 anywhere.)

The only relevant max and min rules are: you can't start above 18 or below 8.

 

[Aldarc]

The concept is from 4E though the basic idea is more hp at level one. The book does give off a 4E vibe but the playstyle is different.

That may have a lot more to do with the new critical system than anything else. Needing a 10 point spread to crit, generally means that it happens more often. So the initial bonus HP from your ancestry acts as an additional buffer.

And I think the main reason why HP is set per level is so that the designers and GMs (see organized play) have a better approximate sense of character HP totals. If you have the GM that wants you to roll, and you get a lot of 1s and 2s on your HP dice rolls, whether as a fighter or a wizard, then that can lead to so fairly large HP differentials, which makes it more difficult for Paizo to account for.

 

[Zardnaar]

That may have a lot more to do with the new critical system than anything else. Needing a 10 point spread to crit, generally means that it happens more often. So the initial bonus HP from your ancestry acts as an additional buffer.

And I think the main reason why HP is set per level is so that the designers and GMs (see organized play) have a better approximate sense of character HP totals. If you have the GM that wants you to roll, and you get a lot of 1s and 2s on your HP dice rolls, whether as a fighter or a wizard, then that can lead to so fairly large HP differentials, which makes it more difficult for Paizo to account for.

Good luck with that lol. Homogeneous rubbish.

Encounters and combat are two subjective so I think rules and assumptions for it are inherently flawed. No modern D&D/Pathfinder had pulled this off yet. Basically IMHO none of them have made a better system than AD&D.

 

[CapnZapp]

That's the true grognard spirit!

 

[Aldarc]

Good luck with that lol. Homogeneous rubbish.

Encounters and combat are two subjective so I think rules and assumptions for it are inherently flawed. No modern D&D/Pathfinder had pulled this off yet. Basically IMHO none of them have made a better system than AD&D.

No need to get so bent out of shape about it. There is a reason why 5e also provides with the option for average HP per level. There is a reason why average damage exists as an option for monsters. There is a reason why proficiency bonus exists as a steady bonus for assumed proficiency in your main attack method. Regardless of the encounter subjectivity or randomness, designers still need known assumptions when designing adventures, encounters, monsters, etc.