Pathfinder 2E Paizo Update: Pathfinder 2E Core and Bestiary in Regular and Deluxe Editions

I wonder about Paizo's plans with the no-core classes (inquisitor, summoner, ninja, samurai, gunslinger, oracle, cavalier, witch..).

If dragonborns and warlocks are in the SRD of the D&D 5th Ed... Could they appear in Pth 2nd ed?


I totally agree!
I want to run all of these in 5e...The Dragon's Demand, Emerald Spire, Iron Fang Invasion, Giant Slayer, are all fantastic supplements and the world is exceptionally good.

Combine that with some of the 3rd party 5e supplements - Revenge of the Horde for humanoid options, Tome of Horrors, and a few conversion sites for pathfinder monsters and it's easy to just launch it without too many troubles.

That being said, i still have enough material as is to play for ages.

I will for sure buy the PDFs just to take a look. Always interested in what Paizo is doing. They're good folks who make good stuff.

Hehe, I worked on Tome of Horrors. Converting monsters is super easy: just completely ignore the mechanics of Pathfinder and come up with your own 5e style stuff. Keep only the theme and fluff.

log in or register to remove this ad


First Post
They've said that some of the old classes will get full class treatment, while others can be handled via dedication class feats (like multi-classing). It depends on how much the class brings to the table - I think they've said that the Cavalier is a strong candidate for the dedication route, for example.

This strikes me amusing, as it's somewhat what AD&D 2e did with "kits"


We don't know what the final product will say yet, but in the playtest the common factors seemed to be:
1. Class feat and skill feat every even level.
2. Skill increase every odd level (except first).
3. Ancestry feats at levels 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17.
4. General feats at levels 3, 7, 11, 15, and 19.
5. Ability boosts at levels 5, 10, 15, and 20.

I haven't seen any indication that they've changed this basic structure, though they may have changed the more class-specific increases.
If magic items are even close to being as ubiquitous as in PF1/3E this does not paint the whole picture.

That is, if you can increase your stats by another ten points or so from two different bonus types, or gain a couple of feats thru magical doodads...


I loved 2E Kits. I am loving the look of classes and 'subclasses' in this.

I don't play PF. I love 5E DnD and have written heaps for it. I still really want this. I want to steal/adapt ideas to 5E. But I also want to try it. I LOVE the 3 action thing, especially as far as spells go. Something that seems obvious now. All those different components should have taken an action each and a spell should benefit from adding material components. We kind of do this anyway, but I really like the action economy and lack of labels of different action types ;)

Looking forward to getting my hands on this. I bought a few PF books for ideas. Plenty of their adventures, which are awesome. But I would not run PF (1E). Just too much stuff out there and too many additions to the game. I love that they are collating their ideas and starting again. I am keen to get in on the ground level of this :)

i was excited to at least read PF2e but seeing the feats mentioned above in the at playtest version put a damper on it due to paizos 1e feat expansion that was just too much. 4 years into PF1e and there were over 2k in feats...not a fan of that kind of game so hopefully it’s not as big in 2e in the final game.


If magic items are even close to being as ubiquitous as in PF1/3E this does not paint the whole picture.

That is, if you can increase your stats by another ten points or so from two different bonus types, or gain a couple of feats thru magical doodads...

During a state of the game panel going over the changes from the play test to the final rules they have stated that they want to reduce magical item stat increases. They had a system that would seriously curtail it i the play test but it was solidly opposed by the community. In the end they opted for pull back the options a lot, but not as they had planned. There is a magical item limit, but it is still a bit large.
However one thing they did was to increase the value of training over stats, so stat boosts are less important that training. Having a legendary proficiency in something gives you a modifier of level+8. A strength 18 gives you a +4 if they strength limit to maybe 25 or so (just a guess) it is only about +3 from norm. It all will depend on how far they go.


Agreed that design by committee is often terrible, but the nice thing about 5e's Attunement was that it is easy to ignore. Just use more magic items. PF2's system was far reaching, it effected most magic items, even potions! Also such a change in magic would be hard to ignore story wise, look at 4e and the spell plague :|

If you think about it both D&D and Pathfinder acted similarly. They both switched from magic item heavy gameplay system to a very restricted one, and then to a system that places easily ignored restrictions on the players. The only difference is that D&D's restrictive system was called 4e and Pathfinders was called playtest.

Jimmy Dick

The three action economy is just sweet. I just love running sessions with that encounter economy compared to the regular PF1 encounter economy. It's like running a game at warp speed versus one in the mud. The tactical changes we encountered in the Playtest should also be in the new edition. That's also huge. I just see Second Edition as a major change from PF1 and a change in a good direction. So looking forward to it coming out.

For me the attunement was needed so it didn’t become an issue like previous editions of magic Christmas tree with 12 different slots for people to put stuff in soooo committee worked for me on that part. :)


The committee part referred to the removal of the restriction from the playtest.

(That is, you got it backwards. The idea was that if 5E had been designed by the same committee, Attunement would not have survived into the final product)


Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement