Pathfinder 2 Playtest Preorders, Podcasts, & "Pathfinder 1.5"

In today's Pathfinder 2nd Edition news roundup, the playtest book preorders go live, Bulmahn and Radney-McFarland appear on a podcast, and what it would take to make "Pathfinder 1.5". As always this information will be added to the Pathfinder 2nd Edition Compiled Info Page!


Screen Shot 2018-03-28 at 12.11.39.png





  • The Pathfinder Playtest book preorders are now open! You can per-order your playtest book, adventure, and flip-mat between now and May 1st. Of course, you'll b able to grab them for free in August as PDFs if you don't want the physical playtest books.
  • At Gary Con, Jason Bulmahn and Stephen Radney-McFarland hosted a seminar about Pathfinder 2nd Edition. You can listen to it on the Plot Points Podcast. The podcast is about 90 minutes long.
  • In response to how much information the Paizo preview blogs contain -- "The blogs are not going to be dropping huge excerpts of the book. There is a very simple reason for this... it is still in edit, and layout. Then it needs to be copy fit and go through a few more rounds of edit. To top it off, we are still making changes and will, much to our publishers chagrin, continue to do so until the very last moment. That said... we also had to announce it if we were going to let retailers and stores have a chance to participate in the release. Thats just how the distribution system works. So... the best we can do right now is to give everyone an idea of how things work. We've already leaked things that have been changed and I am trying to keep that to a minimum so that the game we are talking about is the game you are going to get to playtest. It's not ideal... but it is the best we can do right now. I hope that helps understand where we are at." (Bulmahn)
  • Vic Wertz talks a little about what it would take for a third party publisher to use the OGL to produce a "Pathfinder 1.5" (or "D&D 3.85") -- "There's an inherent difficulty in that concept, though. If you've been reading playtest feedback—or even if you haven't, but you just know a bunch of gamers—you will know that there's a spectrum of desire here. On one end, there are players want no changes whatsoever; on the other, there are players who want changes to anything and everything to be considered. Most people are somewhere in between. Paizo has staked out a spot on that spectrum. Playtest feedback might move us one way or the other a little bit, but as far as broad strokes go, the playtest will show you where we stand. (In our opinion, it's not all that far from 1st Edition.) Any "3.85" concept has to have SOME changes—otherwise, it's just First Edition, and there's no point republishing that, because we're keeping it in print in softcover and PDF. So 3.85 cannot capture the "no changes" audience. A successful 3.85 publisher would therefore need to capture a viable number of people who think 1E needs to change, but who also think that 2E is changing too much. Are there enough of those to form a viable audience for your work? Even if there are enough, here's where it gets really challenging: By definition, that group of people has strong opinions about what they want. But they will not be of a single mind—that is, even if they generally agree on how much things should change, they won't necessarily agree on what should change, or on how each of those things should be changed. There's not some magic set of precise changes you can make to capture them all. Some of the choices you make will lose some of them. Can you make enough of the right decisions to keep enough of them (assuming there were even enough of them to start with)?"
  • Mark Seifter on "flipping" enemy criticals -- "The best part comes when you're cruising along doing pretty well with your combo and punishing enemy crits (maybe even with a paladin buddy to also hit and debuff when they crit your druid), only to come across an opponent who does something extra and really nasty on a critical hit! Flips it back around for a double flip. Jason was the main designer of these kinds of flips, where you punish an enemy critical."
  • Seifter talks some more about rules language and terminology -- "We want language that can both be quite precise, with rules terms used consistently, but also sound plain, natural, and elegant rather than clunky. We think we've figured out a way to have our cake and eat it though, thanks to Logan's masterstroke of making certain rules elements act as nouns, certain rules elements (like actions) act as verbs, and certain rules elements act as adjectives and then allow natural language usage. So for instance, the blog mentions the Stride action, so we can say "whenever you Stride, you ignore difficult terrain" or "While Striding, you gain concealment against any reactions" or "Whenever an enemy in your reach Strides" or any other form of the verb. Like many of these wording-based decisions, this is the kind of thing that might seem like it could be "obvious" in hindsight but still takes inspiration to realize."
  • Seifter comments on the rogue's Instant Opening ability -- "Instant Opening might not seem as cool as it actually is because it might be easy to assume that it requires some kind of check (or a failed save, or a roll of some kind) in order to work. But it actually works automatically. So one action from you equals two rounds of AC debuffs and all your sneak attack-related favorites. And it's not flanking, so all-around vision-type abilities won't help them."
  • 30-40 class feats to choose from? "Compared to '3 or 4' class feats, the fighter alone has more than 10 times that number (not going to be more specific because, as Jason has said, we aren't through with copyfitting, so we don't know how many are going to fit)." (Seifter)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Arilyn

Hero
You are right of course. The only argument I have with any of what you said is the implication that Pathfinder is not D&D. I've often referred to it (and seen others do the same) as D&D 3.75. Not a bad thing. Paizo took an iteration of D&D that many people loved and improved upon it. It certainly took me away from 4th edition (which I disliked). In any case, I hope I am wrong and that we see PF2.0 thrive right alongside D&D 5e.

I just meant it doesn't carry the DnD brand name. It's very much a DnD game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Henry

Autoexreginated
Regarding Vic Wertz’ comment on the difficulty of another company doing a PF1.5 - I agree , but I think there’s plenty of monetary niche left open for a Goodman Games or Dreamscarred Press to become the next “premiere PF1 Adventure Path purveyors”. The real opening is the need for adventure material for PF1 that is well-written and requires ZERO conversion effort. No matter if you are a “PF1 purist” or a “minor changes needed only” person, they all share that need for new APs with as little prep as possible. I think that’s where we’ll see another company emerge as the de-facto prime partner.

If those numbers from Roll20 are any inkling, I can foresee... 75% to 90% switch to PF2 from PF1? Just my completely gut-feeling and u scientific prediction.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

EthanSental

Legend
Supporter
Am I reading this correctly? Fighter alone might have 30-40 class feats?

I'll probably stop reading (and posting) anything pf2 based until the edition hits print next year cause I'm not in their market now with feats being given away like Halloween candy on the 31st. Even when it does hit I'm not likely to pick it up based on what I've seen so far.
 

Jhaelen

First Post
Am I reading this correctly? Fighter alone might have 30-40 class feats?

I'll probably stop reading (and posting) anything pf2 based until the edition hits print next year cause I'm not in their market now with feats being given away like Halloween candy on the 31st. Even when it does hit I'm not likely to pick it up based on what I've seen so far.
That's pretty much my first reaction. Do they really think that a metric ton of feats is a good thing?
 

Aldarc

Legend
Am I reading this correctly? Fighter alone might have 30-40 class feats?

I'll probably stop reading (and posting) anything pf2 based until the edition hits print next year cause I'm not in their market now with feats being given away like Halloween candy on the 31st. Even when it does hit I'm not likely to pick it up based on what I've seen so far.
That's pretty much my first reaction. Do they really think that a metric ton of feats is a good thing?
Pathfinder's MO as a off-brand D&D has always been its robust character customization. The "feats" are essentially renamed class talents. Here, my preference would be to wait and see rather than cast aspersions on what little info we have.
 

EthanSental

Legend
Supporter
Pathfinder's MO as a off-brand D&D has always been its robust character customization. The "feats" are essentially renamed class talents. Here, my preference would be to wait and see rather than cast aspersions on what little info we have.

Correct - I played PF for about 5 years to fill in the gap of 4e as our group didn't like it so I'm aware of its MO. It's that MO of over 2k in feats that ended up frustrating us and the need for herolabs to even keep up with stuff and switched to 5e. I'll wait until it comes out but hard to deny that feats are going to be a heavy part of the game on what paizo has stated. Ancestry feat, class, etc.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Correct - I played PF for about 5 years to fill in the gap of 4e as our group didn't like it so I'm aware of its MO. It's that MO of over 2k in feats that ended up frustrating us and the need for herolabs to even keep up with stuff and switched to 5e. I'll wait until it comes out but hard to deny that feats are going to be a heavy part of the game on what paizo has stated. Ancestry feat, class, etc.
Most definitely, but it appears that Paizo is aiming with PF2 to integrate a lot of related systems into a more cohesive whole (e.g., feats/talents, skills/saves/weapons/initiative, etc.), and feats appear part of that integration process. I am much more interested in the whole than I am the individual pieces being previewed. I kinda find the feats system of 5e unsatisfying so I'm intrigued by how PF2 will approach this issue. (For example, unless you are a Vuman, I think that you don't get as much 1st level character customization. Backgrounds are simple, elegant, but also meh and almost meaningless.)
 

Imaro

Legend
Well, first of all, Paizo isn't trying to compete directly with WOTC, and since the two games fill two niches in the F20 space, this is not a problem. Paizo doesn't exist just to provide a haven for disenchanted WOTC fans.

But wasn't this exactly who Paizo chose to market too with Pathfinder... and I would assume makes up the lion share of their fanbase? In other words the whole point of Pathfinder was to provide a haven for disenchanted WoTC fans.

Yes, there have been a ton of books published for PF, and there are fans who state vehemently that they don't want a new edition, but this is common with every F20 edition change. I remember when DnD Next was announced. "Not another edition, we just got 4e!" And yet...

Eh... that's not what I remember the general reaction being... maybe from those who enjoyed or were hardcore 4e fans but I don't think that was the sentiment of the majority of D&D fans.
 

Imaro

Legend
Ironically, I think a lot of the people PF2 is likely to scoop up is us 4e fans. Many of us find PF1 too clunky and bloated, but 5e too shallow and boring. A cleaned up and revised version of Pathfinder may be just what the doctor ordered. All the delicious crunch PF1 offers, with a lot of the stale cruft of 3e shaved off? Sign me up!

Hmmm... I always thought most 4e fans had issues with 5e on a system/philosophy level vs. just the amount of options but I could be wrong. If we assume that is the case though I wonder how many options WotC will have published by the time PF 2 is released... I know the claim that 5e is bereft of options is popular but a ton of options have already been added with Elemental Player's Companion, SCAG, Volo's and Xanathar's... on top of those we have MToF right around the corner.

I liked PF 1 in the beginning but never got deep into buying all the sourcebooks, it was just too many for me to keep up with and the pace (at least for me) was crazy. On top of that most of my players are not the type to sift through numerous sourcebooks while creating or leveling their characters so PF1 didn't serve me well after a certain point. Honestly if PF2 has the same type of proliferation of options at an increased pace it will probably be a pass for me.

Honestly I wish they had gone with a simpler Pathfinder game based of their Basic Box set rules... now that is something I'd buy in a heart beat. Of course sadly this preference probably means I'm not their target audience anymore.
 

Aldarc

Legend
But wasn't this exactly who Paizo chose to market too with Pathfinder... and I would assume makes up the lion share of their fanbase? In other words the whole point of Pathfinder was to provide a haven for disenchanted WoTC fans.
Pathfinder was arguably created less for "disenchanted WotC fans" and more for "disenchanted 3X publishers," due to the new OGL agreement created for 4e. There was unquestionably overlap though.

I liked PF 1 in the beginning but never got deep into buying all the sourcebooks, it was just too many for me to keep up with and the pace (at least for me) was crazy. On top of that most of my players are not the type to sift through numerous sourcebooks while creating or leveling their characters so PF1 didn't serve me well after a certain point. Honestly if PF2 has the same type of proliferation of options at an increased pace it will probably be a pass for me.
Of course, as people say with just about every other edition to D&D, the easy reminder is that you don't have to buy everything and that you could keep to a small subset of books, possibly even instituting something akin to the unofficial PHB+1 rule of 5E. I personally never felt all that obligated to buy all the PF1 books because of how much of their rules were incorporated into d20pfsrd.com. So I was primarily interested in the core rulebooks and the APs.

Honestly I wish they had gone with a simpler Pathfinder game based of their Basic Box set rules... now that is something I'd buy in a heart beat. Of course sadly this preference probably means I'm not their target audience anymore.
I like that idea. Who knows? Maybe if there is enough demand for this, Paizo will consider it. That might make PF2 easier to approach for newcomers as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top