List features of Pathfinder 2 that you like and might use in D&D 5e

[MonkeezOnFire]

The rules on being revived from being knocked out seemed interesting and is something that I have seen quit a lot of discussion about in 5e forums. A character must be stabilized before they regain consciousness, even if they receive healing. This requires at least two actions to be performed on a character to get them back into the fight which makes hitting 0 hp more of a penalty.

My group typically already does preemptive healing instead of letting characters drop, so I don't think I would have to implement something like this, but I'm curious to see how it affects play.

 

[guachi]

Can I wait until I see the actual playtest material in August before I decide?

No. This is the internet. Having an opinion without all the facts is a requirement.

Sorry.

 

[Zardnaar]

Can I wait until I see the actual playtest material in August before I decide?

This from me.
Pathfinder 2 might have better weapon and armor rules which I think 5E kind of screwed up.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[darjr]

Not shure that makes it better.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

This isn't anything official, but I figure they might use monster roles to differentiate certain kinds of monster (like 4e did with the chromatic [and metallic] dragons where originally there was one dragon per role), and it seems like the area with the most potential (outside of dragons) would be outsiders: something like make the default build for devils be skilled, demons be soldiers, and daemons be brutes* (although in 5e it would be skilled devils, soldier yugoloths, and brute* demons), so the old "demons play just like devils" saw wouldn't mean as much, since there would be different mechanics involved. Again, I don't know if they would do something like that, but if they did and it looked like it would work out, I might borrow some of what they did and apply it to 5e fiends.

* I am working under the assumption that brutes are the best way to do nihilistic evil that doesn't care if it lives or dies so long as it kills something.

 

[ccs]

Or 'Heritage.'

It's one of those things where you see it and wonder why D&D didn't do it decades ago....

Or you pass your intelligence check & realize that they really were talking about different races.

Elf, dwarf, human, etc - they really are different races.
Sure, within an individual race they also have ethnicities & heritages (wood elf, drow, assorted human cultures in GH/FR & whatever else). But that doesn't stop there from being 5+ actual races to choose to make your character from.

 

[Hjorimir]

I kind of liked the notion of allowing somebody who is hidden to roll their stealth for their initiative. It's a line of thought that's worth exploring.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Elf, dwarf, human, etc - they really are different races.

Oh, yeah, that was always my go-to defense of it, too. They're different species, it's not the same as the modern concept of race. But, heck, ancestry or heritage sounds better, too, and can be more specific & flavorful as well as not being so loaded.

(Of course, who know how many variations on elves that'd let D&D have...
... there's always a trade-off.)

 

[Yaarel]

Or 'Heritage.'

Maybe

Heritage (race)
Tradition (subrace)




(All useful words: heritage, tradition, culture, ancestry, ethnicity.)