Pathfinder 2nd Edition (no, don't get excited!)

[DaveMage]

Since we play it quite happily with no house rules, I'm very satisfied with the game as is. No improvements come to mind (though I would like epic rules).

 

[Varthol]

re

I'd like the barbarian to have a spell list like the ranger's

Yes, the barbarian should, there is a lot of tribalism and shamanistic fluff on the class so why not

And also let monks have any alignment

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

1. Fewer skills (a la 4E).
2. 4E-style monster and NPC design guidelines.

 

[billd91]

I assume there will eventually be a PF 2nd edition. I assume it's still several years away. I also assume any changes will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. I assume these things mainly because I think Paizo will remain successful with the current PF game for a while and have learned what not to do by observing WotC.

Things I wouldn't mind seeing:
- monks given full speed BAB and hit points
- values for weak saves increased to 1/2 level rather than 1/3 level
- more skill ranks for fighters

 

[Morrus]

Not even half the needed/wanted material is out, so I doubt we'll get a 2nd edition anytime soon. I'd feel a bit weird abut it if there is not even a complete world map out before they do, if ever.

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.

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).

Not publish it for at least another decade?

Since we play it quite happily with no house rules, I'm very satisfied with the game as is. No improvements come to mind (though I would like epic rules).

Well, you guys certainly got into the spirit of the thread!

 

[Steel_Wind]

Pathfinder 2E will be an iteration on the rules. It will not be a wholesale break from the past, but will be a more smooth progression.

Vancian magic will remain a centrepoint of its design.

It will change some core concepts in the way that a round is broken down. I expect we will see something more akin to the direction that Star Wars: Saga Edition took with standard, move and swift actions. In terms of changes to combat rounds, the emphasis will be on opening up movement within the combat round and moving away from the static full attack action - which remains the worst design element in the whole of 3.x.

I would also suggest that simplification and consolidation of the various conditions in the game would benefit from smoothing out a la Star Wars: SE. There are WAY too many conditions in both Pathfinder and 4E. SW:SE had the better design.

Character design will continue to be complex. I see more variation in special talents available for a class to be taken within that character class; some will be available at lower levels, while a few will be available only at a higher level. We see this already within Pathfinder RPG -- and I expect it will be a more centralized and general mechanic in 2E, much in the same way as it was in d20 Modern and SW:SE. It's flexible (which is good), promotes system mastery (which is good for sales, but bad in the view of some players), and is a natural iteration on the existing rules.

The biggest changes I expect to see would be in the world setting for Pathfinder RPG 2E. There is a point in time where the world setting becomes so expansive that it is beyond any hope for a new player/GM to feel that they can easily understand and access all the history and precedent created by the existing setting. Golarion has grown in under five years from a blank slate to the 2nd most detailed world setting in RPG history. Only the Forgotten Realms has had more ink spilled over it in RPG land. When you surpass Greyhawk in a mere five years? That's a LOT of detail in a very short period of time.

If you are a new Pathfinder GM, there is SO MUCH material out there that it is an extremely intimidating setting to just jump into with both feet. In another five years? It will time to put it to bed.

Given their demonstrated ability to create a new world and do it quickly, I would hope that Paizo ultimately restarts a new kichen-sink world setting as their "current" world to open up new possibilities for Pathfinder 2E.

If all of this happens five to seven years from now? I'm good with that timeline.

 

[Azgulor]

1. Fewer skills (a la 4E).
2. 4E-style monster and NPC design guidelines.

If these or any other 4E cornerstones make its way into a future edition of PF, I won't be buying it.

 

[Azgulor]

The biggest changes I expect to see would be in the world setting for Pathfinder RPG 2E. There is a point in time where the world setting becomes so expansive that it is beyond any hope for a new player/GM to feel that they can easily understand and access all the history and precedent created by the existing setting. Golarion has grown in under five years from a blank slate to the 2nd most detailed world setting in RPG history. Only the Forgotten Realms has had more ink spilled over it in RPG land. When you surpass Greyhawk in a mere five years? That's a LOT of detail in a very short period of time.

If you are a new Pathfinder GM, there is SO MUCH material out there that it is an extremely intimidating setting to just jump into with both feet. In another five years? It will time to put it to bed.

But the amount of printed setting material for Goalrion is irrelevant, for the following reasons:
1. A starting GM wishing to use Golarion could start with something as simple as the Inner Sea Gazetteer or stop at the Campaign Setting hardcover. Nothing else is required.

2. No metaplot. Unlike the Forgotten Realms, there are no world-shaking events impacting large swaths of setting.

3. Modularity. By design, Golarion's regions/nations are designed to self-contained. If I want to have Ulfen influences from the Lands of the Linnorm Kings in Varisia, I can. But if I don't want/can't afford/ or am a new GM, nothing is requiring me to purchase setting material where I set my campaign. (And just like the old days, the campaign setting could just be the area around a village like in Crypt of the Everflame.)

Despite the amount of material out there, there are nations and regions that haven't received more than a two-page treatment in the Campaign Setting book. Factor in continents and other unexplored areas...

By doing things the way that Paizo has, Golarion's lore is a feature, not a barrier to entry.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

As someone disgruntled w/ PF's changes, even I don't think they should make a 2E for many years. They should just keep making money off adventure paths with the existing rules and garner good will for not putting out a new edition every 5 years or less, like WotC does.

When they do make 2E, however, I'd basically like to see almost all the PF changes reversed back to 3E...

At the very least, un-nerf the monk and rogue and then massively buff them along with the other noncasters. Give the noncasters tons of thematically appropriate Su abilities at mid and high levels. Monks can jump super high and control their descent/hover to basically fly. Rogues can slip into the shadows and be undetectable even by true seeing as they move in to strike; or they can short range teleport as a swift all day along for Nightcrawler-style attacking, like with the dimensional dervish feat line...except all day and actually better on the noncaster than the wizard. Barbarian can just plain old not die from hp damage a la 3E Frenzied Berserker while raging. Samurai can strike and ignore all hardness of objects. Stuff like that.

I'd like to see a much greater emphasis on encounter-based abilities. PF has avoided them like the plague, to my great annoyance.

I'd like to see spellcasters nerfed, at least to 3E levels, if not further. And yes, casters are stronger in PF.

Basically, I want them to reverse course 180 degrees from where they've gone. But that's never going to happen.

 

[Lwaxy]

More optional rules for magic would be cool, not that we didn't houserule them but still.