• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.

PF2 What are you most looking forward to when it comes to Pathfinder Second Edition?

mewzard

Explorer
Well, it's about time for a brand new RPG, Pathfinder Second Edition. We've spent several months getting various bits of info, spoilers, teases, and other such things. I'm personally very excited, and thought a topic discussing the aspects we're most interested in/excited for could be fun.

So, what are some of the things you're looking forward to most?

For me, one thing that comes to mind is the focus on Skills. My first major attempt at a Bard in Pathfinder during my Hells Rebels game was where my appreciation for skills truly grew. Sadly, I found a lot of classes were more limited in their skilling options, and the need for feats to optimize many classes for combat did eat into what I could do them.

PF2e's split of feats letting us have ten entire feats dedicated to skills (eleven with the background) plus another five general feats that could also be used for skill feats has me particularly excited. No more will I have to ask how much must I give up in skills to be the best I can for my party in my combat role, instead I can be damn good in those skills on top of having a large number of options for combat.

Of course, if I want to go full Skillmonkey, there's still the Rogue, which has the unique advantage of getting twice as many skill feats and skill improvements, one of each per level, rather than alternating between the two every other level. I've heard the Bard still has some means of taking care of some skills with their performance, but I'm not 100% on that.

Naturally, the improvement of skills also means giving martial characters some options that improve their capabilities. Let the Cleric become an Avatar of their god with their fancy Tenth Level Spell, I'll use Cloud Jump to get to Mr. "Circle Strafe and Breath Weapon", grapple his giant ass with Titan Wrestler, and German Suplex him through a mountain. Got Catfall at Legendary Acrobatics? You just dust yourself off like it was nothing. You can turn into Zeus, I'll be Hercules.

Casting does seem fun, though. I really like the change of spellcasting to include four traditions of magic. Arcane and Divine are classics, but letting Druids rock Primal and Bards enjoy being freaky with Occult is quite nice. As is bloodline dictating what king of Sorcerer you are. A party of four Sorcerers could be quite different based on said bloodlines.

I'm also down with full caster Bards. It's a class near to my heart and one I can't wait to try out. In addition to standard Cantrips (which are no longer 0th level, but scale by level), I'm always down with Compositions whether Cantrip or otherwise.

Tenth level magic is also a nice touch. You only get one slot though (unless you drop a 20th level feat for a second), but hey, the good stuff is bound to be amazing. Like Fabricate Truth, where you make multiple people believe anything you tell them...and if they crit-fail? They believe your BS forever. Why kill that Devil when you can convince him that his life's calling has always been that of a Druid, and that he's just been hiding his passion for gardening?

Speaking of Crit-fails, the four degrees of success system is something I'm really into. No longer just Save or Die as it were. Now while a Critical Success can be consequence free and a Critical Failure can leave you with some life-ending condition, standard successes and failures can be used to meet a middle ground area so even a success doesn't waste the spell and even a failure isn't necessarily the end.

Of course, that also applies to attacks. Critting isn't just natural 20s now, but beating a foe's AC/DC by ten, and Crit Failing is failing to beat a foe's AC/DC by ten. Meaning, a lot of lower level foes will feel your full power, and you'll truly struggle against foes in another realm of power. That said, natural 20s and 1s alter the degree of success by one, so a natural 1 would turn a guaranteed crit into a normal hit, and a natural 20 make the worst case scenario a normal miss.

That's just a few things I'm personally excited for, I'd love to know what comes to mind for everyone else.
 

Arilyn

Explorer
I like the 3 actions/turn. I like the idea of spending more actions to improve your spells, or to raise your shield. It gives interesting choices to tactics, without being overly complicated or heavy.
 

mewzard

Explorer
I like the 3 actions/turn. I like the idea of spending more actions to improve your spells, or to raise your shield. It gives interesting choices to tactics, without being overly complicated or heavy.
Oh definitely, the action economy is going to make things a lot more enjoyable. Not only the three actions, but the numerous options for reactions.

I once did a Wizard in PF1e focused on Abjuration and Counterspelling, that could definitely work reaction wise.

Spellcasting does give you choices. Do you focus on multiple spells with single actions? Do you go for a full three action monster? Or do you augment a two action spell with some Metamagic?

Reading the new classes. See where it goes from there.
Well, starting with the core of your characters is important. What class are you most interested in seeing?
 

MockingBird

Explorer
The more I hear about the 3 action mechanic the more I like it. That and the shield mechanic had peaked my interest now.
 

Zardnaar

Explorer
Oh definitely, the action economy is going to make things a lot more enjoyable. Not only the three actions, but the numerous options for reactions.

I once did a Wizard in PF1e focused on Abjuration and Counterspelling, that could definitely work reaction wise.

Spellcasting does give you choices. Do you focus on multiple spells with single actions? Do you go for a full three action monster? Or do you augment a two action spell with some Metamagic?



Well, starting with the core of your characters is important. What class are you most interested in seeing?
Bard, Druid, Ranger.
 

Aldarc

Explorer
Bard, Druid, Ranger.
Before my first game of 5e, my group was playing Rise of the Runelords with PF1. I was playing a storm-themed druid. It was a bit OP, especially casting spells as a lightning elemental. I would welcome a nerf. But I am glad to see that the storm druid is one of the themes available for the PF2 druid. So one of my first character creation exercises in PF2 will probably be recreating the character.
 

Zardnaar

Explorer
Before my first game of 5e, my group was playing Rise of the Runelords with PF1. I was playing a storm-themed druid. It was a bit OP, especially casting spells as a lightning elemental. I would welcome a nerf. But I am glad to see that the storm druid is one of the themes available for the PF2 druid. So one of my first character creation exercises in PF2 will probably be recreating the character.
I'm not to worried about the Druids power level it's been a favorite class going back to 1E. It was also the last 1E class I played in 2014.

3.5 was kinda cheating.
 

kenada

Explorer
I got my books last week, so this feels a little like cheating. What I like is that they appear to have taken 3e/Pathfinder and rebuilt it on top of consistent framework. I like that all checks resolve the same way (no different crit/auto success/failure for attacks, saves, and skills). That should make the game easier to teach, though I fear the written rules may be a bit intimidating to new players.

As a GM, I’m looking forward to running monsters with interesting abilities. For my players, I’m looking forward to their having more options for their characters. The three action economy should be fun. We used the Unchained action economy in PF1, and I thought it had evolved nicely when I played in a demo at Origins last year.
 

Kaodi

Adventurer
I particularly particularly like how multi-classing integrates with the feat system. And the different levels of success or failure. I look forward to seeing if multi-classing has been refined in the final product.
 

JesterOC

Explorer
Coming from 5e DM and occasional player I am looking forward to monster's being more dynamic (was hoping for more of a 13th age vibe but at the same time the bestiary is filled with great monsters), access of Paizo adventure paths, 3 action economy, PC's that feel a bit more epic, and more character options in general.
 

mewzard

Explorer
The more I hear about the 3 action mechanic the more I like it. That and the shield mechanic had peaked my interest now.
Oh definitely, the shield mechanic has potential, more than just getting the AC bonuses (which are nice of course). Given the Champion can pick their Shield as the host for their Righteous Ally, I'm imagining they can do the most overtly crazy things with the mechanic.

Bard, Druid, Ranger.
I can see why, all three are interesting classes. I really need to try a Druid one of these days. The closest I ever came was the Hunter. I had fun with that, but I'd like to give full casting nature a shot.

Before my first game of 5e, my group was playing Rise of the Runelords with PF1. I was playing a storm-themed druid. It was a bit OP, especially casting spells as a lightning elemental. I would welcome a nerf. But I am glad to see that the storm druid is one of the themes available for the PF2 druid. So one of my first character creation exercises in PF2 will probably be recreating the character.
I fully relate to recreating a character as my first exercise. My longest running character ended up being a Svirfneblin Unchained Monk I eventually multiclassed into a Serpent Fire Adept, hit level 20 by the end. He was insane in all the best ways. Going to try and recreate him as best as possible (with a few improvements, as with Titan Wrestler, his grappling potential will be much more viable).

I got my books last week, so this feels a little like cheating. What I like is that they appear to have taken 3e/Pathfinder and rebuilt it on top of consistent framework. I like that all checks resolve the same way (no different crit/auto success/failure for attacks, saves, and skills). That should make the game easier to teach, though I fear the written rules may be a bit intimidating to new players.

As a GM, I’m looking forward to running monsters with interesting abilities. For my players, I’m looking forward to their having more options for their characters. The three action economy should be fun. We used the Unchained action economy in PF1, and I thought it had evolved nicely when I played in a demo at Origins last year.
Man, you're lucky! The wait is rough on my end.

A solid, consistent framework was definitely something I hoped was the case. Consistency will go a long way to making to making it easier for new players to learn the basics.

While I've used some of the Unchained Classes, my group never did the Unchained action economy. So for us, this will all be new.

I particularly particularly like how multi-classing integrates with the feat system. And the different levels of success or failure. I look forward to seeing if multi-classing has been refined in the final product.
Yeah, I pretty much never multiclassed in Pathfinder 1e due to how messy it was. 2e's system seems much more viable. Especially with caster multiclassing.

Coming from 5e DM and occasional player I am looking forward to monster's being more dynamic (was hoping for more of a 13th age vibe but at the same time the bestiary is filled with great monsters), access of Paizo adventure paths, 3 action economy, PC's that feel a bit more epic, and more character options in general.
Oh yeah, that epic feeling is something I'm looking forward to as well, especially for Martials. Character options are also nice. That was something that I felt was lacking from 5e.

Of course, Paizo's adventures are also always great. My group is currently running through two of them right now, with a third on pause. We tend to do a mix of their stuff and original campaigns.
 

Celtavian

Dragon Lord
Three action mechanic.

Death mechanic. I prefer death to be a little more dangerous. I'm glad pop up healing is gone.

Initiative. I like not having to make a Perception check, then roll initiative. Removes one encounter step in a fashion that fits pseudo-realism.

I'm glad PF monsters kept spell-like abilities and longer duration abilities that can be used out of combat. One major thing I did not like about 5E is every monster block being heavily focused on combat with no non-combat abilities I can recall.

Shrinking the gap between fighting styles was very nice too. I like every type of fighting style being viable.
 

Saelorn

Explorer
I'm looking forward to potentially playing in a game while the edition is still new, and nobody has any system mastery. The freedom to experiment, and get things wrong, is a refreshing change of pace from a game that's already been solved.
 

mewzard

Explorer
Three action mechanic.

Death mechanic. I prefer death to be a little more dangerous. I'm glad pop up healing is gone.

Initiative. I like not having to make a Perception check, then roll initiative. Removes one encounter step in a fashion that fits pseudo-realism.

I'm glad PF monsters kept spell-like abilities and longer duration abilities that can be used out of combat. One major thing I did not like about 5E is every monster block being heavily focused on combat with no non-combat abilities I can recall.

Shrinking the gap between fighting styles was very nice too. I like every type of fighting style being viable.
No doubt, the Action Economy will be getting a lot of love and attention for how it shakes the game up.

Death does seem interesting, to be sure. Even the risk of injuries from revival has potential. I'm curious to see how many will try for the Ritual casting to resurrect if they lack a proper caster with such a spell. Ritual Spells in general I'm curious about.

Also, I like that Initiative is impacted by your actions. Perception being the default is good, but I also like that it can factor in, say, your stealth result if you sneak into combat, or your Diplomacy perhaps if you steer a conversation in a way to give yourself a chance to act quickly.

Agreed, not every single encounter or action should revolve 100% around combat. Sometimes you want to beat someone with prose or a good ol' fashioned Rock Off.

Between various weapons and armors having little abilities and stances for combat plus the massive number of feats, it does feel like it's going to be easy to play multiple of the same class and make them come off as quite varied.

I'm looking forward to potentially playing in a game while the edition is still new, and nobody has any system mastery. The freedom to experiment, and get things wrong, is a refreshing change of pace from a game that's already been solved.
That's also quite an exciting aspect. Avoiding "I know the perfect broken feat path" or "I need to follow this guide exactly to be good", you just go for what feels right. If something doesn't work out, give it a bit of retraining down the line. Learning from one's own failings can be quite exciting.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
Some of my favourite things:

3-action economy
Less complexity with more depth
Initiative
 

Aldarc

Explorer
* Initiative not keying off Dexterity as default (something I find ridiculous) but is instead linked with (1) Perception per default, but can be keyed off other skills (e.g., Stealth, Survival, Diplomacy, etc.) depending upon what the players are doing in the fiction.

* No Dead Levels: You get something every character level apart from simply more spells.

*3 Action Economy: I appreciate more tactical depth with a simple, intuitive system. I also like how this can also be used to alter (some) spell effects.

* Shields: I appreciate that PF2 made shields more meaningful than bonus AC. They are an active part of combat and round-to-round tactical decision-making process.

* Monsters: They are more than boring stacks of HP. They have lots of cool things that they can do that individualize them. It was one of the most popular aspects of 4e that was surprisingly not brought over into 5e.

* Class/Feat/Archetype Integration: Sure, it's a wall of feats** but it's a sleek design that looks incredibly modular. Combining multiclassing, archetypes, and prestige classes is also a smart move that streamlines the game.

** It is INCREDIBLY REMINISCENT of some of the d20 era's favorite spinoff systems: d20 Modern, Grim Tales, True20 / Blue Rose, and Star Wars Saga Edition, etc.
 

Gladius Legis

Explorer
It's going to come down to how the classes turn out. I was terminally unimpressed with most of them in the playtest, so there'd better be some serious changes there. Especially to the Paladin, which if it's anything like it was in the playtest, would be the single worst class ever in the combined history of D&D and Pathfinder.
 
Gladius, I was a huge fan of the PF1 paladin, having run a campaign with four paladin PCs all the way to 17th level. I've asked a lot of questions about the PF2 Champion over at the Paizo boards, from people who have the books.

The PF2 champion (of which paladin is a subtype) doesn't feel right to me. The paladin probably got the most class features of anyone in PF1, but it feels like they took away a lot of those powers to get them on par with fighters, and then made those powers feats. I would have preferred if all the classes got upgunned to a number of powers equal to the paladin.
 

Advertisement

Top