Played the playtest at UK Games Expo - What I'm unclear about, and what I'm ambivalent about


Prerelease Discussion


A followup to my last thread, where I discussed what I liked about the playtest. A fortnight ago, I was able to play the PF2 playtest and was able to ask Jason a few questions about the system.

This is the second of three posts (so that the subjects don't cause too much noise).

What I'm ambivalent about

The idea of using "whatever skill you're using that is 'appropriate'" to determine your initiative is fine. I don't really have any preference about it. But then again, I'm not a player who tries to max out my initiative. At the end of the day, it comes around to "how good is a player at fast-talking the GM". And the difference between probable skill modifiers probably isn't enough to worry about. (I was able to claim that because Merisiel was up in the trees, acrobatics would be as good as stealth - it was a moot point because her modifiers are the same).

It doesn't look like Traits are a thing anymore. With the number of "feats" that players are choosing from at first-level, I don't think that this is an issue.

What I'm unclear about

The character sheet had something like "Items at ready". I was unclear what this meant - it didn't seem to make the time to use the item any faster. This made throwing daggers rather punitive (action to draw dagger, action to throw).

We didn't get to see crossbows (or bombs, or firearms) in action. My table avoided the goblin like the plague. It's disappointing that Tengu isn't making core.

Valeros now uses a shield. I was interested how this interacted with two-weapon fighting. It might not really be a thing.

One thing that I wanted to try was using combat manovures - it seems that for a rogue, it might be a good strategy to use your first action to attempt a trip attack, then follow it up with sneak attacks. But I don't know whether I'd be taking the penalies on the first attack.

The combat did seem rather swingy, but this is probably an artifact of first-level play. I'm hoping that at higher levels it will be more consistent. In every edition of D&D I've played, including Pathfinder, 4e and 5e, it seems to be the case.

Some of the math on the character sheet was unclear. It seems that there is no AC breakdown, nor is there skill bonus breakdown. I tried to reverse-engineer Merisial's Athletics modifier of +0, and concluded that she Probably has a -1 armour-check penalty, but this isn't clear. It does make working out modifiers for Other Skills difficult. In addition, it's not clear whether it is a fixed attribute associated with each skill or not.

(If anyone can clear this up without breaking an NDA, it will be appreciated).

Hopefully I'll have my third post, What I'm Concerned About, in the next forty hours or so.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I don't remember seeing "Items at Ready" on the sheets at either of the playtests I played in, but maybe I didn't look closely enough. In the House of Ekmundi playtest scenario, none of our characters made use of consumables/limited ammo type weapons so it didn't turn up.

In the two-hour demo, our GM seemed a less knowledgeable on the rules. And I'm pretty sure he got that stuff wrong on characters who were switching weapons/throwing bombs. However rule of fun, might have also played a part and just wanting to keep things moving rather than looking up rules all the time.

My impression on combat maneuvers is yes its just another type of strike, so it would generate the penalty on a later strike that round with a damage dealing weapon, or if you re-attempt the same combat maneuver.

I've loved the idea of the "whatever action you're taking out of combat/in exploration mode determines your initiative" however in the two playtest I've played, its always been perception for everyone and it hasn't seemed to matter. I'm really looking forward to seeing those rules in detail and/or hearing from the devs as to what percent of the time they expect non-perception to be used.

Liberty's Edge

I've been keeping a close watch on the info we have and can answer some of your questions:

Mekkis wrote:

The character sheet had something like "Items at ready". I was unclear what this meant - it didn't seem to make the time to use the item any faster. This made throwing daggers rather punitive (action to draw dagger, action to throw).

We didn't get to see crossbows (or bombs, or firearms) in action. My table avoided the goblin like the plague. It's disappointing that Tengu isn't making core.

No clue on these, sorry.

Mekkis wrote:
Valeros now uses a shield. I was interested how this interacted with two-weapon fighting. It might not really be a thing.

TWF with a shield is totally a thing. A Shield Boss or Shield Spikes are a weapon and can be used as such at no penalty. Valeros isn't set up to do it much as a 1st level character is all.

Mekkis wrote:
One thing that I wanted to try was using combat manovures - it seems that for a rogue, it might be a good strategy to use your first action to attempt a trip attack, then follow it up with sneak attacks. But I don't know whether I'd be taking the penalies on the first attack.

You would. Maneuvers are considered a type of attack, so your strike at someone you'd just tripped would be at -5 (-4 if your weapon was Agile)...though their AC being at -2 due to being flat-footed helps make up for that in part.

Mekkis wrote:
The combat did seem rather swingy, but this is probably an artifact of first-level play. I'm hoping that at higher levels it will be more consistent. In every edition of D&D I've played, including Pathfinder, 4e and 5e, it seems to be the case.

Yeah, this seems likely.

Mekkis wrote:
Some of the math on the character sheet was unclear. It seems that there is no AC breakdown, nor is there skill bonus breakdown. I tried to reverse-engineer Merisial's Athletics modifier of +0, and concluded that she Probably has a -1 armour-check penalty, but this isn't clear. It does make working out modifiers for Other Skills difficult. In addition, it's not clear whether it is a fixed attribute associated with each skill or not.

This is intentional. The playtest sheets are not the final sheets (which we've seen and include breakdowns like you'd expect).

As for how the math works:

AC is 10 + Dex Mod (or max Dex Mod if wearing heavier armor) + Armor + Magic + Proficiency Mod + Level.

Skills are in fact tied to specific stats (we even know which, it's in the Skill Blog). Their math is almost identical to AC, actually. It's as follows:

Ability Mod + Proficiency Mod + Level + Item Bonuses - Armor Check Penalty.

If I knew Merisiel's Str I could probably figure out why she had +0 Athletics (one obvious explanation if she has Str 12 is that she has it Untrained, which would be 1 Level + 1 Str -2 Untrained Proficiency).


I played the Delve at PaizoCon and noticed the "items at ready" on Merisiel's sheet as well. Logan Bonner was my DM and I pestered him with questions trying to figure out what difference the designation made. No I couldn't draw these weapons for free, or draw these weapons for free while moving, etc. It was odd and I gave up trying to figure out what it meant, but certain items were clearly designated that way on everyone's sheet.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Yolande d'Bar wrote:
I played the Delve at PaizoCon and noticed the "items at ready" on Merisiel's sheet as well. Logan Bonner was my DM and I pestered him with questions trying to figure out what difference the designation made. No I couldn't draw these weapons for free, or draw these weapons for free while moving, etc. It was odd and I gave up trying to figure out what it meant, but certain items were clearly designated that way on everyone's sheet.

Did you try drawing an item that wasn't ready? Does that cost 2 actions or something?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Yolande d'Bar wrote:
I played the Delve at PaizoCon and noticed the "items at ready" on Merisiel's sheet as well. Logan Bonner was my DM and I pestered him with questions trying to figure out what difference the designation made. No I couldn't draw these weapons for free, or draw these weapons for free while moving, etc. It was odd and I gave up trying to figure out what it meant, but certain items were clearly designated that way on everyone's sheet.
Did you try drawing an item that wasn't ready? Does that cost 2 actions or something?

That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Like, a designation between readily accessible items in a sheath / bandolier / pocket, vs items stored in your backpack that have to be dug out.


You mention you didn't get to "see firearms in action". Are firearms going to be in the playtest? I was under the impression that they weren't (though I'd personally be happy to have them in the core rules).


Brew Bird wrote:
You mention you didn't get to "see firearms in action". Are firearms going to be in the playtest? I was under the impression that they weren't (though I'd personally be happy to have them in the core rules).

Firearms aren't going to be in the Core Rulebook.

Check out this Know Direction interview with Eric Mona and Logan Bonner

Everything You Want to Know about Pathfinder 2.0 Playtest


There are three types of item descriptions that I remember. "Items stowed" is the ones in your backpack, that'd you would have to fish around to grab. I do believe you need to use an "Manipulate" action to grab it as per the Gearing Up blog. "Items on Hand" are the sheathed weapons. My guess is that they are a different "Interact" action?... One that doesn't provoke Reactions as readily. (Remember that certain conditions prevent you from using interact actions, such as being grappled) Then there are the "items drawn". Pretty self explanatory. I remember the three from the Delves at Paizocon, but the encounter didn't give many opportunities to explore them. (nor was it designed to)
Mekkis, if you want to see the Gob in action, check out the Glass Cannon Podcast of Crypt of the Everflame.
https://glasscannonpodcast.com

Oh and DMW, Athletics wouldn't have been listed on the sheet if she wasn't trained at it. I'm pretty sure she had 10 str.


Oh and I have a question Mekkis, could you play Lini the Druid at the Expo. Or how about anyone else other than Cleric, Fighter, Alchemist, Paladin, Rogue, or Wizard?


I feel like some things are best playtested once a lot of people have a really firm grasp on the system, and firearms are on of them.

Since firearms are supposed to be a terrifying, but rare, emerging technology on Golarion, putting it in that context is going to require first nailing down how things like armor class and damage work, which are still potentially changeable at this point.


Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Oh and I have a question Mekkis, could you play Lini the Druid at the Expo. Or how about anyone else other than Cleric, Fighter, Alchemist, Paladin, Rogue, or Wizard?

The only six classes were the ones you mentioned.

Liberty's Edge

Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Oh and DMW, Athletics wouldn't have been listed on the sheet if she wasn't trained at it. I'm pretty sure she had 10 str.

In that case (Str 10, Trained, +0 final Modifier), I'm pretty sure the only explanation for a +0 bonus is an armor check penalty, yeah.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Played the playtest at UK Games Expo - What I'm unclear about, and what I'm ambivalent about All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion