Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e

[Parmandur]

Coming from a disinterested-in-the-game perspective, thinking on it solely from a business point of view, it does seem a strange move: who is the audience? Not PF1 hardliners, not 5E players, not new players...

 

[darjr]

I wonder if they identified a set of players that were done with 3.5/PF1?

 

[Parmandur]

I wonder if they identified a set of players that were done with 3.5/PF1?

I think they made the game they wanted to play, which is admirable and generally a not terrible plan.

 

[CapnZapp]

How is PF2e not a d20 game? To be clear I believe they can design a successful game, but I think the facts suggest PF2e is a d20 game (or perhaps I don't know the proper definition of the term).

I believe he's referring to the d20 OGL model of 3e,3.5e, and Pf1. It's a new system more based around their campaign world than an existing ruleset.

Pathfinder 2 is definitely not compatible with Pathfinder 1.

Pathfinder 1, meanwhile, is 90-99% compatible with 3rd edition, which is the original d20 game.

So while Paizo is still using the OGL and/or d20 license (IANAL), it is safe to say PF2 is not a d20 game in any mechanical sense other than the nearly meaningless "it uses a twenty-sided die, and F/R/W saves".

It is still heavily a dndish game, just like AD&D, but it simply doesn't use the d20 engine any longer. Only a lawyer would say it's a d20 game.

 

[S'mon]

Not liking a system is fine, but there is nothing in either PF or PF2 that scream too broken to play.

APG Summoner. The one IMC eventually stopped bothering to level up. He'd stopped using his Eidolon several levels previously. Totally dominated play.

 

[CapnZapp]

That's a bit of an exaggeration. Paizo actually did quite a bit to tone down the power of spellcasters, but it was small and obvious stuff. Clerics lost their proficiency in heavy armor. Druid wildshape worked by adjusting your own stats, rather than replacing them entirely. Save-or-Die effects were replaced with Save-or-Damage. Save-or-Hold spells started offering a new save every turn.

There's no doubt in my mind that PF1 has a better balance than D&D 3.5 did, but I still wouldn't qualify anyone at Paizo as being especially insightful based on those changes.

In my mind the clear and obvious fix to d20 is called "5th edition".

The 5E devs finally changed the d20 balance as regards LFQW in a truly meaningful way - as opposed to the cluttery futz that accomplished basically nothing - that is 3.5 and 3.75 (aka Pathfinder).

(5E did other things too, bad or good, but one of its core draws for me is FINALLY giving us a game that in many aspects plays like d20 except for the fundamental showstoppers of d20: LFQW and NPC chargen)

The way they thoughtfully went through the entire spell list and subtly (and not-so subtly) tweaked it to achieve a much better martial-magic balance is a work of beauty, no matter where the system fell short elsewhere.

 

[Nagol]

If you are looking for a game with tight math, tight encounter design, meaningful narrative uncertainty, embedded lore and modular design the actual execution here is excellent.

If that is not what you are looking for then the execution does not particularly matter.

All of that sounds fine to me and is often what I look for in systems. I have no doubt it does what the designers set out to do: I'm just less convinced what they set out to do is something I want.

What I've read of the execution (specifically that level plays a massive role in pretty much all mechanical uncertainty) leaves me skeptical I'll find the system enjoyable. 4e had too much "level improves" stuff for my liking.

That said, I'll give the system a thorough review when I can spare the time. Some of the elements are certainly intriguing.

 

[Puggins]

The Improve-by-level math has been present in all versions of D&D- PF2 just standardized it and applied it across the board.

Skill system- the new system is very much like the old system. In fact, you can makes a case that the old skill system is the math upon which the entire new system in based. Rather than apportion skill points, you automatically gain a skill point in every skill in which you are proficient as you level up. Skill Focus feats and such are replaced by the proficiency levels (trained/expert/master/legend).

Combat system- in the new system, everyone has full BAB in their chosen fields of combat. They also gain in defenses as they go up in level as well. While I'm still evaluating the system as whole, the fact that higher level characters become inherently harder to hit as they gain levels sounds very cinematic and intuitive to me- You shouldn't be able to land an easy blow on a master swordsman. differences in ability are handled by proficiency levels rather than by 1x/0.75x/0.5x multiples

Saves- as in the previous two, differences are handled by proficiency levels. Curiously, in this case, the differences between trained and legend (+6) is exactly the same as between a good save and a poor save in PF1/3e.

the design choice of scaling at 1x is really bold- 4e scaled at 0.5x across 1.5x levels, which still winds up with a slightly lower spread than PF2. But it appears to me that the level-scaling in here is so uniform that you can literally rip it out entirely far, far easier than you could do with 4e.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

In my mind the clear and obvious fix to d20 is called "5th edition".

I wouldn't go that far. Third edition is, at the very least, playable right out of the box. I would never inflict Fifth Edition on anyone, without some serious house rules.

 

[Campbell]

Regardless of how one feels about the design quality of either First Edition or Second Edition there is little continuity in the creative talent. The only meaningful continuity between the initial First Edition design is Jason Buhlman. My impression is that Jason was very involved in setting design priorities, but most of the actual day to day stuff was handled by other members of the team. These designers were responsible for Pathfinder Unchained and Starfinder, but they played no part in the foundational design of First Edition.