Meet Pathfinder 2's Cleric; Plus Spellcasting Basics!

On the Paizo comments a lot of people are annoyed that classes get less than PF1, less class features and have to pay feats to get them back. The counter argument is that you get those feats instead of class features, just meaning you can chose how you want your class - rather than stuck with what is written. The same applies to races/ancestries. Either argument aside it does seem that all classes and races are nerfed, you don't have enough feats at level 1 in PF2 to get all the features to equal level 1 PF1. We haven't seen what backgrounds and Archetypes exactly do yet tho. I think this is a good thing, spread the power - but people don't like having things taken away I guess.

Secondly a lot of comments about only getting, max, 3 spells memorised per spell level. Another good thing IMO, to lower the power of casters vs mundanes; and also casters won;t have the spell to do automatically what other classes roll skills etc for all the time. There is the concern about 15 min adventure day tho, but that is partially offset by scaling cantrips.

These things mostly look good to me, as a DM normally I don't care about PC's having less than PF1. As long as they are better balanced against each other and opponents, it's irrelevant - but there is a lot of the Endowment Effect going on

Very interested to see the entire Playtest tho, very hard to get a feel with these tiny titbits - not that it hasn't released the rage on Paizo!

 

[Adso]

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

Three months until the release of the playtest document. We have a lot more time when it comes to the finished project and more than enough time to make substantive changes.

Stephen Radney-MacFarland
Senior Game Designer
Paizo, Inc.

 

[Parmandur]

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.



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.

We are not three months from release, we are three months from the start of their playtest, which will last a year or so. Feedback during that period will undoubtedly have an impact on the final 2E product.

Backwards compatibility is a major value for much of their core audience: it is a risk, and a 1E/2E AD&D change was something they could have done. What they are doing means that PF1 material is, broadly, useless moving forwards and PF2 material is not useful to people who want to keep playing the old game. While the point of an edition is to bring in new blood, Pathfinder alienating their core demographic with an edition change is ironic.

 

[Sunseeker]

Three months until the release of the playtest document. We have a lot more time when it comes to the finished project and more than enough time to make substantive changes.

Stephen Radney-MacFarland
Senior Game Designer
Paizo, Inc.

Well color me mistaken then.

 

[Yaarel]

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.

Unfortunately, D&D Wisdom is a nonsense stat.

It has ‘perception’, which moreso belongs to Intelligence. And it has ‘willpower’, which moreso belongs to Charisma.

Heh, what D&D Wisdom lacks is a mechanical way to represent ... ‘wisdom’.

The D&D game is in desperate need of rethinking the abilities scores. The game improves by using Intelligence and Charisma for the mental stats − and eliminating Wisdom.

 

[Sunseeker]

Backwards compatibility is a major value for much of their core audience: it is a risk, and a 1E/2E AD&D change was something they could have done. What they are doing means that PF1 material is, broadly, useless moving forwards and PF2 material is not useful to people who want to keep playing the old game. While the point of an edition is to bring in new blood, Pathfinder alienating their core demographic with an edition change is ironic.

Some people will always want "the old game". Maybe I'll like PF2. I like 5E, but I still play 3.5 (and I'd play 4th more if I could get people to play it).

PF2 material can't be useful to people playing the old game. They might as well not bother making it if it's going to be 99% the same system.

 

[Parmandur]

Unfortunately, D&D Wisdom is a nonsense stat.

It has ‘perception’, which moreso belongs to Intelligence. And it has ‘willpower’, which moreso belongs to Charisma.

Heh, what D&D Wisdom lacks is a mechanical way to represent ... ‘wisdom’.

The D&D game is in desperate need of rethinking the abilities scores. The game improves by using Intelligence and Charisma for the mental stats − and eliminating Wisdom.

Intelligence is mental Strength, Wisdom is mental Dexterity and Charisma is mental Constitution. Makes good sense as is, no need to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Yaarel]

For P2.

Please make the supersenses (smell, hearing, eagle eyes) a bonus to SKILL. Avoid referring to ability scores for such a thing. Please, no more bats and deer with Buddha-esque Wisdom.

Heightened physical senses are a kind of skill bonus, and only if applying the relevant sense (smell, sound).

 

[Charlaquin]

Unfortunately, D&D Wisdom is a nonsense stat.

Too true

It has ‘perception’, which moreso belongs to Intelligence. And it has ‘willpower’, which moreso belongs to Charisma.

I guess? Honestly I don’t think either of those things is a good fit for the actual English definitions of those words. The six abilities really aren’t fit to bear the load of being the fundamental categories into one of which everything that could conceivably require a d20 roll must fit. Wisdom is just the most egregious example of the problems with the six abilities because it picked up the most unrelated rolls in the switch to 3e.

Heh, what D&D Wisdom lacks is a mechanical way to represent ... ‘wisdom’.

The D&D game is in desperate need of rethinking the abilities scores. The game improves by using Intelligence and Charisma for the mental stats − and eliminating Wisdom.

I’d give it a far more thorough rethinking than that. But generally speaking, yes, I agree.

 

[Yaarel]

Intelligence is mental Strength, Wisdom is mental Dexterity and Charisma is mental Constitution. Make good sense as is, no need to reinvent the wheel.

In my eyes, those popular parallels fail under scrutiny and never work mechanically.

For example, alternatively. Wisdom could easily be explained as willpower and sanity, thus be mental health and Constitution. Or Intelligence could be explained as quick thinking and mental agility, thus be Dexterity.

The truth is, the ability scores are vague and inconsistent and redundantly overlapping, and unrealistic.

D&D is in desperate need of rethinking the ability scores. (But I doubt P2 will the edition to do it.)

 

[Yaarel]

For my own tastes there are only four ability scores.

• Athletics − melee attack roll, movement (speed, run, jump, climb, balance, fall); reflex
• Toughness − melee damage, size, reach, heavy weapons, heavy armor, hit points; fortitude
• Perception − shooting attack roll (bow, gun), senses, investigation, stealth, knowledge, deception, steady-hand manual dexterity; perception
• Empathy − magic and spellcasting, social skills, sense of self, art and esthetics; willpower