-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Pathfinder 2nd Edition (no, don't get excited!)
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
humble minion
Legend
(Firstly, I'd be quite surprised if it DOES exist in any meaningful fashion, given that Paizo's business model seem to be much more AP-centred rather than rules/supplements centred and I think they'll probably keep it that way, and I ESPECIALLY don't think they'll be considering 2e until they've got D&D 5e in their hands to analyse, but that's not what you were asking...)
PF has many of the main issues as 3.5 did, inevitably, given its committment to back-compatibility. As such...
- fix the diverging maths at high level (PF is an improvement on 3e with its various fighter bravery bonuses etc, but something more structural is needed)
- trim down monster/NPC stat blocks (not necessarily to the one-page 4e size, but at least make them a bit more easily handleable!)
- reduce layering of combat buffs which require large-scale on the fly recalculation of stats, particularly at high level
- some sort of hero point system to give a level of narrative control - I thinik Paizo already like this approach given the number of their APs which hand out rerolls or bonuses through various Harrow deck mechanisms etc
- a simplified mook/minion system for unimportant flunkies - 4e had the right idea there
- it might be a sacred cow (longswords not doing 1d8 all the time! Gasp!), but rebalance the damage output of weapons so that the dice count for more and the bonuses less. Again, this is mostly a high-level issue, but it's a bit ridiculous when you're rolling 1d8+27 hp of damage. Have level/specialisation bonuses boost a weapon's dice size, or cap bonuses at the max damage of the base weapon, or something.
PF has many of the main issues as 3.5 did, inevitably, given its committment to back-compatibility. As such...
- fix the diverging maths at high level (PF is an improvement on 3e with its various fighter bravery bonuses etc, but something more structural is needed)
- trim down monster/NPC stat blocks (not necessarily to the one-page 4e size, but at least make them a bit more easily handleable!)
- reduce layering of combat buffs which require large-scale on the fly recalculation of stats, particularly at high level
- some sort of hero point system to give a level of narrative control - I thinik Paizo already like this approach given the number of their APs which hand out rerolls or bonuses through various Harrow deck mechanisms etc
- a simplified mook/minion system for unimportant flunkies - 4e had the right idea there
- it might be a sacred cow (longswords not doing 1d8 all the time! Gasp!), but rebalance the damage output of weapons so that the dice count for more and the bonuses less. Again, this is mostly a high-level issue, but it's a bit ridiculous when you're rolling 1d8+27 hp of damage. Have level/specialisation bonuses boost a weapon's dice size, or cap bonuses at the max damage of the base weapon, or something.
Kaodi
Hero
Hard to say. I do not think Pathfinder 2nd Edition would necessarily need to be backwards compatible as Pathfinder was to 3.X, nor does it necessarily need to maintain as many of the sacred cows.
As such, I think I would be interested to see them move away from Vancian spellcasting to a more point based model, for starters. Perhaps they could also afford to move away from the 3-18 model for stats and into stat # = bonus . I would be strongly tempted to say that they should keep all of the base classes they have, but should reorganize the NPC classes. NPC classes should be weak, not completely uninteresting as they are now. Simplified monsters should be a shoe in. Classwise, I think a big question would be whether to bring psionics back inhouse. Psychic warrior and wilder could probably be ditched or merged into soulknife and psion.
Another big thing: I think that there should be a definitive system for heading into epic levels. It does not need to be fleshed out per se, but it should be completely apparent from the core rules how you would do it.
As such, I think I would be interested to see them move away from Vancian spellcasting to a more point based model, for starters. Perhaps they could also afford to move away from the 3-18 model for stats and into stat # = bonus . I would be strongly tempted to say that they should keep all of the base classes they have, but should reorganize the NPC classes. NPC classes should be weak, not completely uninteresting as they are now. Simplified monsters should be a shoe in. Classwise, I think a big question would be whether to bring psionics back inhouse. Psychic warrior and wilder could probably be ditched or merged into soulknife and psion.
Another big thing: I think that there should be a definitive system for heading into epic levels. It does not need to be fleshed out per se, but it should be completely apparent from the core rules how you would do it.
SkredlitheOgre
Explorer
Personally, I'd say that there doesn't need to be a 2E Pathfinder, because I like Pathfinder the way it is. Could there be changes made? Of course. Do I really want to buy another edition of rules for a rules system that I already like? No.
Ahnehnois
First Post
PF is such a minor change; probably less different from 3.5 that 3.5 is from 3.0.
If there were to be a PF 2e, I would think it would have to be significantly different to justify reprinting their entire line of rules. OTOH, I imagine their goal of backwards compatibility would not change. Even in a thought experiment, it's hard to say what would fit the bill.
I for one would like to see them throw out hit points and try a new health system, throw out daily abilities and redesign the classes according, throw out base attacks and saves and make everything incremental and skill-based and simplify magic and make it into something more "old-school" and magical. While keeping all the good stuff. But it won't happen.
If there were to be a PF 2e, I would think it would have to be significantly different to justify reprinting their entire line of rules. OTOH, I imagine their goal of backwards compatibility would not change. Even in a thought experiment, it's hard to say what would fit the bill.
I for one would like to see them throw out hit points and try a new health system, throw out daily abilities and redesign the classes according, throw out base attacks and saves and make everything incremental and skill-based and simplify magic and make it into something more "old-school" and magical. While keeping all the good stuff. But it won't happen.
I would rather they publish a book full of rules variants--not new rules but optional rules like 3E's Unearthed Arcana which would replace what's in the Core Rulebook and Ultimate books. A spell point system might go in the book along with the bare minimum of changes to the rest of the game that would be needed (e.g. Wizards would have to spend all their points at the beginning of the day and have a pre-written spell list to use all day, whereas Sorcerers could spend their points as needed and not have to choose anything beforehand).
Instead of a Pathfinder 2e, could I imagine a Pathfinder Basic Edition?
As much as I love Paizo, the PFRPG has about 300% more rules and options than I want or need for my game. I'd much prefer an expanded line branching from the Beginners Box. Limited options don't mean limited fun, it just means less time is spent planning PCs and optimizing builds and more time spent just having adventures.
But if I had one major concept change for PF2e, though, it'd be to make fewer spellcasting classes. As it stands, 13 of the 19 base classes have spellcasting abilities. At the very least, I'd like the core 2e paladin and ranger classes to be the spell-free options.
As much as I love Paizo, the PFRPG has about 300% more rules and options than I want or need for my game. I'd much prefer an expanded line branching from the Beginners Box. Limited options don't mean limited fun, it just means less time is spent planning PCs and optimizing builds and more time spent just having adventures.
But if I had one major concept change for PF2e, though, it'd be to make fewer spellcasting classes. As it stands, 13 of the 19 base classes have spellcasting abilities. At the very least, I'd like the core 2e paladin and ranger classes to be the spell-free options.
