This blog post got me hyped! Everything in here looks awesome, especially the formatting of the spells, which is very nostalgic for me as a 4e fan.
This goes a long way. I appreciate the response.
for me it has to do with reading things like "first introduced in ..." "never played 5e so not aware of what they are doing" paraphrasing
but as a video game designer for 20+ years ... I play everything. And, I am honest when we get inspired by other games.
If I read an article, or interview mentioning hey yes we loved some of the changes that 5e & 4e did and we feel our spin on those same ideas is what's good for pathfinder, then I might be more interested in it.
I've read more of we're doing our own thing and yet those ideas are so similar that it feel disingenuous to me. I dont care if they are similar, or complete clones of mechanics. Good idea is a good idea. I just want to feel like it's not paizo being afraid of the backlash if they mention the other game as inspiration or do you truly believe that PF2 is completing designed in a pathfinder 1 vacuum?
I have to admit ... I normally do not have negative emotional feelings when a new game comes out. If anything I'm the opposite. I am actually not having any bad feelings about the game designs I am reading. It's the PR.
thank you for your time
I think he's holding too much to a comment made about the magic system in that it was one of the first things made for PF2 3 years ago when D&D 5e was also in development. I think it was Mark who said that he didn't play 5th but ended up getting to a similar type system.
As far as other folks are concerned, I've yet to have a good chat with a 3.X loyalist that had a good argument for why they don't want PF2 other than spending money. This is fine, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the game itself or merits compared to other versions.
Be well
KB
Not only in your experience. That was also the main reason why we didn't care for magic item creation in 3e (okay and the fact that using myriads of exp for high level items would have made no sense at all for the creator... You wish to buy a headband of intellect? Okay, gotta slay a dragon to get enough "resources")
They do like rolling dice, in fact their new method for scaling magic weapons is very much like that. +1 weapon being roll an extra damage dice for the damage bonus instead of +1 static. I don’t think they’re willing to go as far as advantage. Advantage suits 5e fine, but PF does want more skilled players (or higher level ones) to have advantages. Thus bounded accuracy is not something they are going for and neither is advantage. There is still going to be static bonuses, they just won’t be as big as they were in PF1 or with as big a number spread.
btw I wasnt suggested they do that ... it was just a hypothetical example. They should make design calls for what is best for their game based on design instincts and player data.
Getting actual play feedback is invaluable and I am sure they know that, which is why they're doing a public playtest. Watching players actually play is more valuable than any survey or random internet post.
I'm a bit curious why they didn't go for a simple inexpensive download playtest document and instead did an arted up printed book series along with the download. Seems like a lot of work, and not like people need proof in their ability to create high production products. They have a very long history of showing that.
Well, having to find or acquire a diamond worth 25k gold is still a significant restriction. You cannot just cast the spell whenever you feel like it."Wish" in Pathfinder has a material cost (a diamond worth 25K gold) and not an XP cost. "Wish" in 5e has no associated cost other than a 9th level spell slot.
Well... “no way to restrict the casting of wish spells” is definitely not how I would describe it. It’s simply that the restriction doesn’t come in the form of a resource cost, beyond the spell slot. In addition to the standard “the DM interprets your wish and has permission to give it unintended consequence if they want” clause, if you use Wish to do anything other than reproduce the effect of a spell of 8th level or lower, you start taking damage every time you cast another spell until you rest, your strength drops to 3 for 2d4 days (days spent doing nothing but rest count as double), and there’s a 33% chance that you’ll never be able to cast Wish again.Well, having to find or acquire a diamond worth 25k gold is still a significant restriction. You cannot just cast the spell whenever you feel like it.
I've not really looked into 5e beyond the initial beta phase. So there's no way to restrict the casting of wish spells in any way? Interesting. I wonder how that works out. At least that explains why the Pathfinder 2 designers are fine with the idea, I guess.
I see. That's rather harsh, actually.Well... “no way to restrict the casting of wish spells” is definitely not how I would describe it. It’s simply that the restriction doesn’t come in the form of a resource cost, beyond the spell slot. In addition to the standard “the DM interprets your wish and has permission to give it unintended consequence if they want” clause, if you use Wish to do anything other than reproduce the effect of a spell of 8th level or lower, you start taking damage every time you cast another spell until you rest, your strength drops to 3 for 2d4 days (days spent doing nothing but rest count as double), and there’s a 33% chance that you’ll never be able to cast Wish again.
@Ancalagon
The third comment by JRutterbush is very interesting. They speculate that there will be four spell lists (Mental, Spiritual, Material, Vital) and that different classes will get access to a portion of those lists.