Leveling Up!

Monday, March 12, 2018

With the Pathfinder Playtest, we're looking to level up the entire Pathfinder game. And that means leveling up... leveling up! Gaining new levels and the toys that come with them is a core part of Pathfinder First Edition, and we want to make it more rewarding in the new edition. So how do you level up?

Well, first you're going to need some Experience Points. You can get those XP by fighting monsters, encountering traps, solving puzzles, and accomplishing goals. Once you hit 1,000 XP, you level up! (That's for every level, so whenever you have 500 XP, you'll always know you're halfway to leveling up again! And if you have any extra Experience Points after leveling up, they count toward the next level.)

Once you have enough Experience Points to level up, you'll increase your proficiencies, then get some more Hit Points (8 + Constitution modifier for a cleric, for example), and then get to make the choices for your new level. What choices? Those are all covered on your class's class advancement table. For instance, at 2nd and 3rd levels, the cleric gets the following:

2Cleric feat, skill feat
32nd-level spells, general feat, skill increase

(Wait... what if I multiclass? We'll cover that in a future blog, but let's just say you'll still be referencing only one advancement table.)

One thing we knew we wanted to include in the new edition was a good number of choices for all characters. In first edition, this could be pretty unequal. Even though over time, the game incorporated more ways to customize any type of character, we wanted to build in more robust customization into the structure of every class. That's why every class gets specific class talents (which include spells for spellcasters) at 1st level and every other level thereafter, increases to skills every other level, and feats at every level!

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Feats Feats Feats!

How does gaining feats at every level shake out? Every class has special feats just for them, which you gain every other level. When your cleric hits 2nd level and gets that cleric feat, do you want to become a better healer? Learn another of your deity's domains? Turn undead away from you? Your class feats give you these options, so you're not locked into the same path as every other cleric.

On any level when you don't gain a class feat, you gain a skill feat to change the ways you can use skills, a general feat that's useful to any character regardless of class, or an ancestry feat that reflects the training or advantages of your people. Skill feats are part of the general feat category, too, so if you really want to invest in your skills, you can drop 15 feats on improving them!

Many of your feats—especially class feats—give you new actions, activities, and so on that you can use. They have a special format to tell you how they work with your three actions and one reaction. Formatting them this way means that it's easier to tell whether a feat is something you can always do or a special action you can take. In Pathfinder First Edition terms, this would be like the difference between Weapon Focus and Vital Strike.

One of our goals with feats was to make them easier to choose and to use. Most feats require very few prerequisites, so you won't need to worry about picking a feat you really don't want in order to eventually get one you do. Any prerequisites build off your level, your proficiency, and any previous feats the new feat builds onto.

The Best of Your Ability

You'll also amp up several of your ability scores every 5 levels. The process might be familiar to those of you who've been playing Starfinder for the last several months! There are, of course, a few tweaks, and we made all ability boosts work the same way instead of being different at 1st level. Learn it once, use it in perpetuity.

Second Chances

So you get all these choices. Let's say you make a few bad ones. It happens!

Retraining your abilities is now in the game from the get-go, covered by the downtime system. You can spend your downtime to swap out choices you made for other ones. (Though you can't swap out ones that are a core part of your character, like your ancestry, unless you work out a way to do so with your GM.

Some classes give you ways to retrain your choices automatically. For instance, some spells get less useful as you go up in level, so spontaneous spellcasters get to replace some of the spells they know with other ones when they get new spells.

Leveling in the Playtest

The playtest adventure will have you playing characters at various levels, and tells you when to level them up (or tells you to create new characters for certain chapters). Our goal has been to make your options expansive and satisfying, but not overwhelming. We look forward to you telling us which decisions you're making, trading tips with fellow players, and agonizing over two feats when you really want them both.

Logan Bonner
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest
201 to 250 of 579 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
JoelF847 wrote:
I'm hoping that slow, medium and fast level progression is in the core book ...

There's only one progression in the Playtest Rulebook so people who playtest outside the adventure (which doesn't use XP due to its structure) have a stable baseline for when they give us feedback.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
Is rolling for hit points an option? (Or is it easy to just introduce - like do classes all have the same hit die?)

I think hit dice may finally be gone from the game. As best I can tell from the playtest info released so far, the hit points per level equal the old hit die maximums.


Logan Bonner wrote:
There's only one progression in the Playtest Rulebook so people who playtest outside the adventure (which doesn't use XP due to its structure) have a stable baseline for when they give us feedback.

I'm hoping that leads to what I'm looking for. That the baseline advancement winds up being something well paced that people can confidently adjust from day one instead of having to guess at and risk spoiling a few levels with a pace they didn't intend.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I noticed the Cleric’s hit points gained upon advancing wasn’t a hit die roll, but a fixed amount. I mean, it was likely given how Starfinder works, but still glad to see this.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Logan Bonner wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
I'm hoping that slow, medium and fast level progression is in the core book ...
There's only one progression in the Playtest Rulebook so people who playtest outside the adventure (which doesn't use XP due to its structure) have a stable baseline for when they give us feedback.

I actually think that you can do away with "tracks" now that you have made levelling up linear.

A simple statement of "If you want your players to level up faster or slower, then simply multiply the XP rewards by an appropriate amount (eg. doubling the XP will cause them to level up twice as fast, halving XP will make it take twice as long). You can also use double XP for levels 1 to 5, and provide half from then on if you want them to progress through low levels quickly and then spend quite some time per level after that." should allow anyone to pace their game at whatever rate they want.

The only request I have is if you aren't going to reset XP to 0 on each level up then can you start level 1 characters at 1,000 xp (as life experience before starting adventuring or whatever excuse is required), as this

a) gives people that like to run 0th level/npc class stuff before becoming PC classes space on the XP track to play,

and, far more importantly,

b) makes the thousands column in your XP equal your level, rather than being off by one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Logan Bonner wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Is this on your radar and are you taking steps to ensure you don't make the same mistake?
It is on our radar. We're already considering some changes to monsters based on our playtests. (They're kind of the last thing scheduled to get done since the document doesn't need to be printed.) We'll also be closely monitoring people's satisfaction with combat speed and complexity during the playtest.

Great to hear! Thanks! I'm looking forward to August!

Sovereign Court

I wonder if multiclassing means you just start at the bottom of their abilities(ie level 1 as we do now) and earn the class/general/ancestry feats based off of that new line. ie you do 3 levels of cleric then move to rogue, which may mean your level 4 feat is a class feat rather than a general feat that you would normally have gotten (or however the progression is set). WHich might mean that multiclassing gives you less general feats but more class feats?

I wonder if it is that way or something similar, when you level up as wizard as a wizard/fighter multiclassing, could you use your wizard class feats to buy feats from the fighter group, or if it is hard limited to the class you just leveled up in.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Cards, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's great to see more info with each blog post. There's one detail here that could be a problem, though, depending on how it's implemented.

Paizo blog wrote:
Many of your feats—especially class feats—give you new actions, activities, and so on that you can use.

As long as the "new action" is something extraordinary that most people wouldn't be able to do, great. The risk is having actions that anybody should be able to do locked behind feats.

I'm hoping that Joe Ordinaryman with no special "new action" feats will be able to take a very wide variety of actions right out of the gate, and that the "new actions" will all represent something extraordinary that will be cool, but understandably limited to folks with special training or exceptional skill.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't worry about "Mundane thing is gated behind a feat" considering.

Mark Seifter wrote:
It's a fundamental design goal that someone with enough martial prowess, especially if they're legendary (but not precluding those who are not) can do unbelievable and completely unrealistic-in-the-real-world things. So much so that down the line we've gotten questions back about some of the more powerful skill feats "Can you really do Extreme-Thing-X just because you're that good at the skill?" Yes. Yes you can.

link


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:

As long as the "new action" is something extraordinary that most people wouldn't be able to do, great.

The risk is having actions that anybody should be able to do locked behind feats.

Yes, this. For such cases, "Do you have the feat for that?" must go away.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Anything that behaves like a feat should be called a feat. There should not be talents, Do's, etc... fi they all function similarly. So, I'm happy with everything being a feat.

One of my big must-haves is that characters have options... options when building, and options when playing. This blog demonstrates that there'll be a great deal of choice when building a character... choice of feats every level! Sweet!

I like that sometimes they have to be ancestry or skill feats... like someone said earlier, in Pathfinder 1.0 it's tough to pick the cool/flavorful feat when there's an optimal combat feat to take.

(Also happy to see someone said you'd be able to build a Magus from the playlets material....)

Grand Lodge

12 people marked this as a favorite.
mach1.9pants wrote:
Chaotic_Blues wrote:
Please tell me there are multiple exp track options. I never was a fan of the fast xp progression track.
it sepulchre be very easy to cater to your desired rate of advancement, just change the retired do per level from 1000. Level every 500, 600,...2000 xp. Changing it to 2000 means you know it will take twice as fast as normal. An advantage of the new xp system.

Jeez never post from your phone....


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
David knott 242 wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Is rolling for hit points an option? (Or is it easy to just introduce - like do classes all have the same hit die?)
I think hit dice may finally be gone from the game. As best I can tell from the playtest info released so far, the hit points per level equal the old hit die maximums.

That would be good enough for me. As long as I have some benchmark to measure against I can juggle the numbers as necessary.

Cheers.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, calling everything feats solves the problem of "treat x as y for the purposes of [whole list of things]" since now you can just say "feats".


9 people marked this as a favorite.

I will say this, and I think this is something a lot of people are missing with the whole naming of everything feats. It makes it easier to compare classes. In PF2, your special thing is called a feat. In PF1, your special thing is called:

Domain Power
Rage Power
Rogue Talent
Slayer Talent
Fighter Feat
Bonus Feat
Combat Style Feat
Combat Feat
Utility Talent
Infusion
Wild Talent
Deed
Discovery
Judgement
Teamwork Feat
Magus Arcana
Mystery
Revelation
Hex
Bonus Combat Feat
Investigator Talent
Exploit
Aura
Trick

Many of these will be replaced by just the word "Class Feat" to make things universal across the board. Talents are a thing. You get them at level one. Some of the above will be reclassified as talents, like Judgement and Spellcasting and Sneak Attack, while the rest will be called Feats as they're something you pick as you level.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Speaking of levels and naming. Can we get spell levels renamed? As it is a 9th level wizard casts 5th level spells. Intuitively you might think they'd be able to cast 9th level spells because they're 9th level. Wouldn't it avoid some confusion to simply call them something else? 5th order spells, 5th tier, 5th magnitude, 5th aardvark or whatever. Not a huge deal, but it always has been a minor annoyance.

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Speaking of levels and naming. Can we get spell levels renamed? As it is a 9th level wizard casts 5th level spells. Intuitively you might think they'd be able to cast 9th level spells because they're 9th level. Wouldn't it avoid some confusion to simply call them something else? 5th order spells, 5th tier, 5th magnitude, 5th aardvark or whatever. Not a huge deal, but it always has been a minor annoyance.

But is that Wizard at the 3rd level of the dungeon or the 4th one, because that makes a major difference...


27 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Speaking of levels and naming. Can we get spell levels renamed? As it is a 9th level wizard casts 5th level spells. Intuitively you might think they'd be able to cast 9th level spells because they're 9th level. Wouldn't it avoid some confusion to simply call them something else? 5th order spells, 5th tier, 5th magnitude, 5th aardvark or whatever. Not a huge deal, but it always has been a minor annoyance.
But is that Wizard at the 3rd level of the dungeon or the 4th one, because that makes a major difference...

He's a 12 level character, 9th caster level, on the 4th level of the dungeon and 5th level spells, on the 2nd level of hell, with level terrain, a level head and a spirit level.

You can trust me, I'm totally on the level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bardic Dave wrote:


While I am cautiously optimistic about PF2's development and am following it with great interest, I'd like to point out that 4E D&D used the same rationale for similarly inflated HP numbers. This HP inflation was largely responsible for the "every combat is a 4 hour slog" criticism that gets levelled against 4e so frequently.

Is this on your radar and are you taking steps to ensure you don't make the same mistake?

HP inflation wasn't exactly the cause of long combat in 4e, in reality it wasn't inflated at all.

First the relationship between HP and Damage is most important as opposed to the actual values.

However HP in 4e was only inflated at first glance. A 12 CON wizard at level 1 has a staggering 22 HP, now that might see high for a first level character but let's look at level 10. CON would remain 12 because you only adjust your primary 2 during level growth (And wizards often use dex, wis, or cha as secondary requirements). Now your HP is 58, again looking outward to level 20 you have 99 HP, your CON now only 13 (from level 11 auto growth).

Using pathfinder a same wizard with 12 con would have 7 Hp at level 1, by level 10 one would typically have 16 CON (+4 enhancement) you would have 72 and at level 20 you would have 18 CON (+6 enhancement assuming no fancy bonuses you might have by now) you would have 162 HP.

In short 12 CON starting Wizard 4e/PF1
Level 1: 4e 22 / PF1 7
Level 10: 4e 58 / PF1 72
Level 20: 4e 99 / PF1 162

If we Increased this to a High focus on Con wizard 16 Base with focused growth
Level 1: 4e 26 / PF1 7 (CON 16)
Level 10: 4e 64 / PF1 92 (CON 18/20)
Level 20: 4e 108 / PF1 202 (CON 21/22)

However the most important thing PF2 is doing and 4e did was padding first level so you don't go from 1HD value to 2HD value massively altering the HP damage ratio in the first 3 levels creating a dramatic shift in feel and power of CR1 to CR3 critters


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Add me to the list of people who are not fans of Starfinder ability increases. It's not so much what you get, as when you get it that bothers me. I'd rather have more distributed chunks. I'm also not a fan of the diminishing returns thing.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Phantasmist wrote:
Is it just me or is naming everything feats confusing anybody else?

I think this is probably one of my favorite bits. It allows a single feat to be a skill feat, and a general feat, and perhaps a fighter feat. It solidifies the capabilities in a standard format, no matter where the ability is coming from.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Phantasmist wrote:
Is it just me or is naming everything feats confusing anybody else?
I think this is probably one of my favorite bits. It allows a single feat to be a skill feat, and a general feat, and perhaps a fighter feat. It solidifies the capabilities in a standard format, no matter where the ability is coming from.

That reminds me - also add me to the chorus of people who like the idea of a more streamlined naming system for these abilities.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

So do feats have level requirements as well? It'd be great to see something like:

Sudden Charge (Fighter 1, General 5) - meaning a Fighter can take the feat as a class feat at level 1+, and any other character can take it as a general feat at level 5+.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
CraziFuzzy wrote:

So do feats have level requirements as well? It'd be great to see something like:

Sudden Charge (Fighter 1, General 5) - meaning a Fighter can take the feat as a class feat at level 1+, and any other character can take it as a general feat at level 5+.

What I wouldn't mind, just as it would save space in the long run and really show the idea of customization is just have a general rule of "you can take any class level feat as a general feat, as if your level was 4 lower"


Although this is labeled

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Paizo Blog: Leveling Up!

I can't find it on the Playtest Page that links the other three blogs so far. I've been checking that page for a while, and only came across this by accident.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

In 3.5 we had the "level" joke because of character level, class level. caster level, and spell level.

I'd like to avoid that in PF2 with feats.

Any optional class ability upgrade specific to a class is likely better off being called a talent.

The other feats can be feats and I dont think it will be a problem


Malk_Content wrote:
CraziFuzzy wrote:

So do feats have level requirements as well? It'd be great to see something like:

Sudden Charge (Fighter 1, General 5) - meaning a Fighter can take the feat as a class feat at level 1+, and any other character can take it as a general feat at level 5+.

What I wouldn't mind, just as it would save space in the long run and really show the idea of customization is just have a general rule of "you can take any class level feat as a general feat, as if your level was 4 lower"

Can't really think too far along those lines until we understand how multiclassing works - the blog did mention that you'd only be working off of a single advancement table, even for multiclassed characters - so there's a lot of unknown in that direction right now.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

In 3.5 we had the "level" joke because of character level, class level. caster level, and spell level.

I'd like to avoid that in PF2 with feats.

Any optional class ability upgrade specific to a class is likely better off being called a talent.

The other feats can be feats and I dont think it will be a problem

I think in pf2, a feat is a feat. You just can only select feats with the 'fighter' tag with a fighter class feat, and only select feats with the 'skill' tag with a skill feat, etc. But that doesn't mean there can't be feats that have both those tags - and THAT is why making them all the same is advantageous from a design perspective.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

This kind of sounds like it completely kills archetypes unless theres something here that I am missing. Are classes still going to have "core functions" , like say Martial Flexibility or Cavaliers Challenge or Smite Evil at all?


Starfinder has a similar hit point progression and weapons with very different damage values from 1d4 to 16d8 or something.

I hope the latter won't be the case for PF2nd. I'd like most damage increases coming from the character rather than from the weapon.

Scarab Sages

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Everyone is like "Please, don't make the fight too long" when I am always feeling that they are way too short in Pathfinder.


Shaheer-El-Khatib wrote:
Everyone is like "Please, don't make the fight too long" when I am always feeling that they are way too short in Pathfinder.

Agreed, honestly. If I can make an ecounter longer than three rounds I consider that a success.

of course, every now on then there are encounters that go on for two hours or so, but those are exceptions and mostly happen when the players decide on a completly wrong tactic


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem isn't how many rounds a fight takes, but how much real world time it takes. Now that's going to differ from group to group, but you had to be military precise to get 4th ed fights down to a reasonable amount of time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of the many reasons why I don't play 4E, but play PF

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Shaheer-El-Khatib wrote:
Everyone is like "Please, don't make the fight too long" when I am always feeling that they are way too short in Pathfinder.

I’d rather get through more rounds of combat faster in PF2E.


Logan Bonner wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Matthias W wrote:
A dev (Seifter?) mentioned being able to make a functional Magus from the playtest materials,
In that you could attack with a weapon and cast a spell in the same round because of the new action system. That was it.
There's at least a small amount of feat support for the build too.

Just seems that a lot of hybrid class will be possible with this new, modular-style classes. Is that true? Will I be able to play "warpriest", "investigator", "brawler" and similar with only the Core?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Bruno Mares wrote:
Logan Bonner wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Matthias W wrote:
A dev (Seifter?) mentioned being able to make a functional Magus from the playtest materials,
In that you could attack with a weapon and cast a spell in the same round because of the new action system. That was it.
There's at least a small amount of feat support for the build too.
Just seems that a lot of hybrid class will be possible with this new, modular-style classes. Is that true? Will I be able to play "warpriest", "investigator", "brawler" and similar with only the Core?

In the Know Direction podcast they said that Warpriest would be doable fairly easily, but Investigator would be more work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paul Watson wrote:
In the Know Direction podcast they said that Warpriest would be doable fairly easily, but Investigator would be more work.

Which I find odd, since the main thing about investigator is that it's an alchemist but with a high focus on skills. I'd have thought that'd mean Alchemist + many Skill feats would suffice for that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CraziFuzzy wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

In 3.5 we had the "level" joke because of character level, class level. caster level, and spell level.

I'd like to avoid that in PF2 with feats.

Any optional class ability upgrade specific to a class is likely better off being called a talent.

The other feats can be feats and I dont think it will be a problem

I think in pf2, a feat is a feat. You just can only select feats with the 'fighter' tag with a fighter class feat, and only select feats with the 'skill' tag with a skill feat, etc. But that doesn't mean there can't be feats that have both those tags - and THAT is why making them all the same is advantageous from a design perspective.

The levels had tags also. A caster level is definitely not the same as a character level, and some people still got confused.

I'm still in the camp of not calling so many things a feat.


Shaheer-El-Khatib wrote:
Everyone is like "Please, don't make the fight too long" when I am always feeling that they are way too short in Pathfinder.

In game they are short. In real life they do take up a fair amount of time.

Most people saying they're too long are talking about real life time, not the number of rounds.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

My husband and I have been playing Pathfinder since it first came out, but over these many years it has definitely been brought home that the system could use streamlining. Having played D&D 5E, however, we believe that 5E represents a level of simplicity (and sometimes vagueness) that we weren't comfortable with. A happy middle-ground – something which gives us the crunch to build interesting characters or adventures with, but a smooth ruleset for just playing the game at the table – seems pretty good to me.

I might not necessarily cheer at every design element I've heard of (noooo, skill ranks, what will I do without you?!), but I am keen to follow where it goes and get involved with the playtest. I think seeing the rules as a whole and how they feel as part of the play experience is as or possibly more important than studying and critiquing each aspect of them in isolation.

One of my big questions, however, is actually not about the mechanics of Pathfinder 2, but about Golarion. Will Paizo be incorporating one or more world-shaking events into 2E's Golarion / Inner Sea Region, thus prompting new scenarios and adventures? Will it go through the same dramatic edition-makeovers that the Forgotten Realms campaign setting did every single new edition? I am uncertain how I feel about this prospect right now.

On the whole: optimistic about the new system and the design goals of the team. A little trepidation about the thought that Cheliax might be exploded into another plane or my favorite gods will suddenly vanish from the pantheon* >_>

*Again. Ahem, Starfinder.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
quillblade wrote:


One of my big questions, however, is actually not about the mechanics of Pathfinder 2, but about Golarion. Will Paizo be incorporating one or more world-shaking events into 2E's Golarion / Inner Sea Region, thus prompting new scenarios and adventures? Will it go through the same dramatic edition-makeovers that the Forgotten Realms campaign setting did every single new edition? I am uncertain how I feel about this prospect right now.

No. Other than assuming that PF1 APs have happened.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
quillblade wrote:
One of my big questions, however, is actually not about the mechanics of Pathfinder 2, but about Golarion. Will Paizo be incorporating one or more world-shaking events into 2E's Golarion / Inner Sea Region, thus prompting new scenarios and adventures? Will it go through the same dramatic edition-makeovers that the Forgotten Realms campaign setting did every single new edition? I am uncertain how I feel about this prospect right now.

They have said that there will be no world shaking event. The timeline will advance ~10 years (1 year of game time for each year of real world time since the original game came out) and the outcome of some adventure paths will be incorporated into the timeline, but no TSR style Time of Troubles or WotC style Spellplague with the associated enormous time jump.


@ quillblade

If you're looking for streamlining, try Savage Worlds. It lacks the simulationist stuff that I like about d20, but it is streamlined and has a moderate amount of detail for building characters and does so in a very flexible way.

Honestly, d20 can learn a lot from Savage Worlds. It is the first thing I suggest reading for anyone wanting to homebrew fixes for d20 (or any system really).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Shadrayl of the Mountain wrote:
Add me to the list of people who are not fans of Starfinder ability increases. It's not so much what you get, as when you get it that bothers me. I'd rather have more distributed chunks. I'm also not a fan of the diminishing returns thing.

I was okay with Starfinder stat increases, but now that you mention it getting a heap of stat points every 5 levels is bizarre. If all the stat boosts were spread out evenly you wouldn't see a weird spike in PC capabilities.

Of course it'd be more difficult to make sure someone isn't applying multiple increases from each set to the same ability, but you could just have a rule that says "You can only boost an ability once every 5 levels".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, every 5 levels you are advancing a tier of power. 1-5 is natural, 6-10 is supernatural, 11-15 is superhero, 16-20 is demi-god.

Heck, it covers the entire range of Middle Earth characters up to and including the valar.


WatersLethe wrote:
Shadrayl of the Mountain wrote:
Add me to the list of people who are not fans of Starfinder ability increases. It's not so much what you get, as when you get it that bothers me. I'd rather have more distributed chunks. I'm also not a fan of the diminishing returns thing.

I was okay with Starfinder stat increases, but now that you mention it getting a heap of stat points every 5 levels is bizarre. If all the stat boosts were spread out evenly you wouldn't see a weird spike in PC capabilities.

Of course it'd be more difficult to make sure someone isn't applying multiple increases from each set to the same ability, but you could just have a rule that says "You can only boost an ability once every 5 levels".

That requires keeping track of when you boosted your ability score across five levels. I can see it as a common enough house rule, but unlikely to be the default way to handle things.


rooneg wrote:
quillblade wrote:
One of my big questions, however, is actually not about the mechanics of Pathfinder 2, but about Golarion. Will Paizo be incorporating one or more world-shaking events into 2E's Golarion / Inner Sea Region, thus prompting new scenarios and adventures? Will it go through the same dramatic edition-makeovers that the Forgotten Realms campaign setting did every single new edition? I am uncertain how I feel about this prospect right now.
They have said that there will be no world shaking event. The timeline will advance ~10 years (1 year of game time for each year of real world time since the original game came out) and the outcome of some adventure paths will be incorporated into the timeline, but no TSR style Time of Troubles or WotC style Spellplague with the associated enormous time jump.

The Return of the Runelords is not considered world shaking?

201 to 250 of 579 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Paizo Blog: Leveling Up! All Messageboards