Pathfinder 2E The playtest is here!!

[pemerton]

Is it too soon to talk about dissociated mechanics? Quite a few class abiliites (ie feats) and spells seem to have triggering conditions (for activation; for dispelling; etc) of being in or entering encounter mode. But encounter mode is purely a metagame construction - so how can ingame phenomena, like a Wind Walk spell, or readying your bow to pick off enemies, have regard to it?

 

[Jester David]

I just had a kind of random thought: streaming and actual play has become a big thing, due in no small part to Critical Roll, which as I understand it* started out as PF but went 5E with its second season. WHat is the likelihood of PF2 launching with a big budget stream/show, even possibly stealing CR back?

* I have never watched a full episode. They are just too long. Edit that thing down to 45 minutes or so and I'm in, but man...

Critical Role was Pathfinder when it was a homegame, for the two years before the stream started. It was never streamed as Pathfinder. They switched to 5e for its faster play.
CR has too good of a relationship with WotC to switch back now, and D&D Beyond is a major sponsor.

Pathfinder has done a few attempts at streaming.
Know Direction has one: http://knowdirectionpodcast.com/category/podcasts/kd-adventurous/
And there is an official Paizo Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/officialpaizo But few games are streamed there. They did apparently do a playtest game: https://twitter.com/JasonBulmahn/status/1025252371205697536

 

[TwoSix]

Is it too soon to talk about dissociated mechanics? Quite a few class abiliites (ie feats) and spells seem to have triggering conditions (for activation; for dispelling; etc) of being in or entering encounter mode. But encounter mode is purely a metagame construction - so how can ingame phenomena, like a Wind Walk spell, or readying your bow to pick off enemies, have regard to it?

There was already a thread about in on the Paizo forums (it even referenced the Alexandrian!), so no, probably not too early.

 

[TwoSix]

Clear rules and 4e-style layout force a clear conceptual distinction between reality ("We're a group of friends playing a game together") and fiction ("I just killed a goblin!"). Whereas the Gygax style runs these togther ("I just did 14 hp of damage to that ogre.") I think the Gygax style produces weird reificaiton of the rules that gets in the way of sensible adjudication and narration, but clearly it's very popular.

It definitely is popular. I'm grasping around the edges of the idea that for "immersion" proponents, their play exists in a state where game concepts like hit points have been internalized enough that they feel real, and don't require a mental translation to a real-world equivalent, or to a purely in-game narration. That the idea of "10 hit points of damage " has a weight and substance to it, without having to map it to a narration of a physical trauma. That's what lets them mix game concepts into actor stance without violating their sense of the character's presence. Newer game concepts, though, aren't familiar enough to be contextualized in that manner. (It's also probably easier to achieve when you're younger, too, and a lot of people learned to play that way when they were teenagers.)

 

[pemerton]

I'm grasping around the edges of the idea that for "immersion" proponents, their play exists in a state where game concepts like hit points have been internalized enough that they feel real, and don't require a mental translation to a real-world equivalent, or to a purely in-game narration.

This seems like the sort of thing that would also be more likely if you haven't played a range of systems.

There was already a thread about in on the Paizo forums (it even referenced the Alexandrian!), so no, probably not too early.

It's good to learn I'm not too out of touch with the times!

 

[Garthanos]

Is it too soon to talk about dissociated mechanics? Quite a few class abiliites (ie feats) and spells seem to have triggering conditions (for activation; for dispelling; etc) of being in or entering encounter mode. But encounter mode is purely a metagame construction - so how can ingame phenomena, like a Wind Walk spell, or readying your bow to pick off enemies, have regard to it?

Just checking is there a sarcasm emoticon missing.

 

[Ancalagon]

While minor to most, this is just one of the many, many things that this converted PF1-Forever! fan is liking about PF2.

On the more substantive plus side, character creation is far more intuitive for newbies than PF1.

I can get behind the silver standard

 

[CapnZapp]

The weird thing is that the RPG community, and perhaps even moreso the D&D/PF community, seems to have a greater proportion of IT/engineering types than the general population, and outside of some indie-ish games shows rather little influence from the humanities or literary studies.

Clear rules and 4e-style layout force a clear conceptual distinction between reality ("We're a group of friends playing a game together") and fiction ("I just killed a goblin!"). Whereas the Gygax style runs these togther ("I just did 14 hp of damage to that ogre.") I think the Gygax style produces weird reificaiton of the rules that gets in the way of sensible adjudication and narration, but clearly it's very popular.

EDIT: downloaded a playtest bundle, took about 1 minute.

People don't like to be reminded they're just playing a game.

They want to kill Ogres, marry princesses, and so on.

If that is a problem to the rules writer, so be it.

 

[Arakasius]

Just because the rulebooks clearly spell things out doesn’t mean that the game at the table plays that way. When a rules issue comes up at the table there is value to having clear and concise rules. Or you can have 5e where the DM is constantly having to house rules decisions with little idea of how a decision they make one week contradicts a decision they made another because WotC has left so many things up to the DMs discretion. If you switch 5e to playing with a different DM it’s very likely something you relied on before won’t be allowed.

 

[Reynard]

Just because the rulebooks clearly spell things out doesn’t mean that the game at the table plays that way. When a rules issue comes up at the table there is value to having clear and concise rules. Or you can have 5e where the DM is constantly having to house rules decisions with little idea of how a decision they make one week contradicts a decision they made another because WotC has left so many things up to the DMs discretion. If you switch 5e to playing with a different DM it’s very likely something you relied on before won’t be allowed.

I am of the opinion (as a professional RPG writer) that rules reference is different than reading and should be treated differently. Books (or portions thereof) written to be read should inspire and entertain. Books (or portions thereof) meant to serve as rules reference should be succinct, direct and unambiguous. It isn't an either/or situation.