First Look at the Pathfinder Playtest

Tuesday, March 6, 2018

Welcome to the next evolution of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game!

Just shy of 10 years ago, on March 18th, 2008, we asked you to take a bold step with us and download the Alpha Playtest PDF for Pathfinder First Edition. Over the past decade, we've learned a lot about the game and the people who play it. We've talked with you on forums, we've gamed with you at conventions, and we've watched you play online and in person at countless venues. We went from updating mechanics to inventing new ones, adding a breadth of options to the game and making the system truly our own. We've made mistakes, and we've had huge triumphs. Now it is time to take all of that knowledge and make the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game even better.

By now, you've probably read all about the upcoming launch of the Playtest version of the game set to release on August 2nd, 2018 (but just in case you haven't, click here). In the weeks and months leading up to that release, we are going give you an in-depth look at this game, previewing all 12 of the classes and examining many of the most fundamental changes to the game. Of course, that is a long time to wait to get a complete picture, so I wanted to take this opportunity to give you insight into the game, how it works, and why we made the changes that we made. We will be covering these in much more detail later, but we thought it might be useful to give a general overview right now.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

New, but the Same

Our first goal was to make Pathfinder Second Edition feel just like the game you know and love. That means that as a player, you need to be able to make the choices that allow you to build the character you want to play. Similarly, as a Game Master, you need to have the tools and the support to tell the story you want to tell. The rules that make up the game have to fundamentally still fill the same role they did before, even if some of the mechanics behind them are different.

Building a Character

It's worth taking a moment to talk about how characters are built, because we spent a lot of time making this process smoother and more intuitive. You start by selecting your ancestry (which used to be called race), figuring out where you came from and what sorts of basic statistics you have. Next you decide on your background, representing how you were raised and what you did before taking up the life of an adventurer. Finally, you select your class, the profession you have dedicated yourself to as an intrepid explorer. Each one of these choices is very important, modifying your starting ability scores, giving you starting proficiencies and class skills, and opening up entire feat chains tailored to your character.

After making the big choices that define your character, you have a variety of smaller choices to make, including assigning skill proficiencies, picking an ancestry feat, buying gear, and deciding on the options presented by your class. Finally, after deciding on all of your choices, the only thing left to do is figure out all of your bonuses, which are now determined by one unified system of proficiency, based on your character's level.

As you go on grand adventures with your character, you will gain experience and eventually level up. Pathfinder characters have exciting and important choices to make every time they gain a level, from selecting new class feats to adding new spells to their repertoires.

Playing the Game

We've made a number of changes to the way the game is played, to clean up the overall flow of play and to add some interesting choices in every part of the story. First up, we have broken play up into three distinct components. Encounter mode is what happens when you are in a fight, measuring time in seconds, each one of which can mean life or death. Exploration mode is measured in minutes and hours, representing travel and investigation, finding traps, decoding ancient runes, or even mingling at the queen's coronation ball. Of all the modes of play, exploration is the most flexible, allowing for easy storytelling and a quick moving narrative. Finally, the downtime mode happens when your characters are back in town, or relative safety, allowing them to retrain abilities, practice a trade, lead an organization, craft items, or recuperate from wounds. Downtime is measured in days, generally allowing time to flow by in an instant.

Most of the game happens in exploration or encounter mode, with the two types of play flowing easily from one to the other. In fact, exploration mode can have a big impact on how combat begins, determining what you roll for your initiative. In a group of four exploring a dungeon, two characters might have their weapons ready, keeping an eye out for danger. Another might be skulking ahead, keeping to the shadows, while the fourth is looking for magic. If combat begins, the first two begin with their weapons drawn, ready for a fight, and they roll Perception for their initiative. The skulking character rolls Stealth for initiative, giving them a chance to hide before the fight even begins. The final adventurer rolls Perception for initiative, but also gains some insight as to whether or not there is magic in the room.

After initiative is sorted out and it's your turn to act, you get to take three actions on your turn, in any combination. Gone are different types of actions, which can slow down play and add confusion at the table. Instead, most things, like moving, attacking, or drawing a weapon, take just one action, meaning that you can attack more than once in a single turn! Each attack after the first takes a penalty, but you still have a chance to score a hit. In Pathfinder Second Edition, most spells take two actions to cast, but there are some that take only one. Magic missile, for example, can be cast using from one to three actions, giving you an additional missile for each action you spend on casting it!

Between turns, each character also has one reaction they can take to interrupt other actions. The fighter, for example, has the ability to take an attack of opportunity if a foe tries to move past or its defenses are down. Many classes and monsters have different things they can do with their reactions, making each combat a little bit less predictable and a lot more exciting. Cast a fire spell near a red dragon, for example, and you might just find it takes control of your magic, roasting you and your friends instead of the intended target!

Monsters and Treasure

The changes to the game are happening on both sides of the GM screen. Monsters, traps, and magic items have all gotten significant revisions.

First off, monsters are a lot easier to design. We've moved away from strict monster construction formulas based off type and Hit Dice. Instead, we start by deciding on the creature's rough level and role in the game, then select statistics that make it a balanced and appropriate part of the game. Two 7th-level creatures might have different statistics, allowing them to play differently at the table, despite both being appropriate challenges for characters of that level.

This also makes it easier for us to present monsters, giving us more space to include special abilities and actions that really make a monster unique. Take the fearsome tyrannosaurus, for example; if this terrifying dinosaur gets you in its jaws, it can take an action to fling you up to 20 feet through the air, dealing tremendous damage to you in the process!

Hazards are now a more important part of the game, from rangers creating snares to traps that you have to actively fight against if you want to survive. Poisons, curses, and diseases are a far more serious problem to deal with, having varied effects that can cause serious penalties, or even death.

Of all of the systems that Game Masters interact with, magic items are one of the most important, so we spent extra time ensuring that they are interesting and fun. First and foremost, we have taken significant steps to allow characters to carry the items they want, instead of the items that they feel they must have to succeed. Good armor and a powerful weapon are still critical to the game, but you no longer have to carry a host of other smaller trinkets to boost up your saving throws or ability scores. Instead, you find and make the magic items that grant you cool new things to do during play, giving you the edge against all of the monsters intent on making you into their next meal.

We can't wait until you find your first +1 longsword to see what it can do!

What's Next?

There are a lot of things we are excited to show off, so many in fact that we have to pace ourselves. First off, if you want to hear the game in action right now, we've recorded a special podcast with the folks from the Glass Cannon Network, converting the original Pathfinder First Edition Module, Crypt of the Everflame, to the new edition. Head on over to their site and listen to the first part of this adventure now!

Stop by tomorrow for the first blog taking an in-depth look at Pathfinder Second Edition, starting off with the new system for taking actions, then visit us again on Friday for an exploration of the Glass Cannon game, exploring some of its spoilers in detail!

We Need You!

All of us at Paizo want to take a moment to thank you, the fans, players, and game masters that have made this exciting journey a possibility. It's been a wild ride for the past decade, and speaking personally, I could not be more excited for where we are heading. But, as I am sure you've heard a number of times already, we cannot make this game without you, without your feedback and passion for the game. Thank you for coming with us on this adventure, thank you for contributing to our community, and thank you for playing Pathfinder.

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest
701 to 750 of 1,608 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I hate 5e with a burning passion. If 2e feels like it at all, I would be out.

Our groups love for Pathfinder continued before and after a love affair with 5e that ended in a bad break up.

One of my complaints with Starfinder is 5e like elements such as short rest, weak casters (more like a low amount of slots resulting in too many rounds of pew pew. I don't play a caster for consistent damage), NPCs having different math, always a chance of skill failure, ect.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

BRB, trying to work the big name employee departures and the cancellation of the NPC Codex into a PF2e-based conspiracy theory.

Liberty's Edge

16 people marked this as a favorite.

I’ve been reading through all these posts (I’m in an airport and have *plenty* of time to kill).

Here’s my take for what its’ worth ....

As others have said, game systems evolve and new editions come out. It’s just a fact. They have to or they fade away and are replaced by other systems. I respect (and even understand) the desire some folks have that Pathfinder remain the same and never move on to a second edition, but the reality is that a second edition was inevitable.

Will the new edition have some similarities to Starfinder? Probably? Will it show some influences from 5E? Of course! Let’s face it, unlike 4E, 5E has been a massive success and Paizo would frankly be fools if they ignored that and didn’t learn from what 5E did right.

Here’s the thing (at least for me) ... it simply seems far too early to decide to abandon Paizo simply because a second edition has been announced. This is a good company made up of great, talented, creative people who are clearly passionate about delivering a fantastic new version of the game. Let’s at least give them a chance and see what the new version looks like.

It seems to me we should have some faith and maybe even cheer them on, offer plenty of constructive feedback during the playtest and then reserve passing judgement until we actually see the final product. If it’s great, then we all win. If it’s not great, then folks have every right to vote with their dollars.

I guess I’m just saying let’s give Paizo a fair shake and and wait for the final game before we pass judgement. Haven’t they at least earned that? I certainly think so, anyway ...

Silver Crusade

14 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

5E took scores of "grognards" away from Pathfinder. Turns out, for many Pathfinder was just a band-aid and when The Real Deal made a big comeback, they flocked back.

Paizo's choices are, as I see it, see Pathfinder dwindle further and whittle down, or try to challenge WotC head on.

WotC has the insane brand recognition with D&D being what Kleenex is for tissues, Hasbro's deep pockets AND beholders, Llolth and Drizzt. That's some cojones to take that on. Again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Casters aren’t weak in Starfinder though. Or 5e for that matter.

Looks interesting overall. I hope they make sure not to gut customization in the name of accessibility like that wizards game, some of the phrasing used in the blog has me a little worried about that. For the moment I’m optimistic though. Could be neat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So Excited! And looking at the previews, the unchained look of the rules, I cannot wait!:D:D:D


Derry L. Zimeye wrote:
I wonder if there'll be a time gap between 1e and 2e in canon?

Per the FAQ (which I don't know how to find right now with the new boards) Pathfinder 2.0 will kick off in 4219, so there will be no time jump.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Keith McVay wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Keith McVay wrote:
Its to sell people a whole new set of books they already own.
That would defeat the purpose of a new edition, which is to be different enough to be worth the expenditure and development time and money.

So, they don't want people to buy a whole new set of: Core Rulebook, Bestiaries, Advanced Guides, etc? If you say so, man.

We disagree that those books will be the same as what is already owned.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

This looks really cool. I'm glad I get to see this in development early on. Seems like the game is already built. I would love to see the rules for myself. Just from this post it sounds like Pathfinder is going down the road so many other games have in making the game a lot more rules lite and faster to play. I might be wrong but we will see! Can't wait for a test play of the rules to be published.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

As of right now, given that its going to be a while before we actually know how most mechanics work when compared to 1e/other games, my primary concern is the way archetypes are going to be handled. My biggest issue with Starfinder is the focus on universal archetypes and no support for class-specific archetypes, which was a major turn off for me, as the primary draw of archetypes were being able to take a class and specialize it even further, whereas in Starfinder, because the archetypes are universal it just seems like a staple-on feature as opposed to a branching out of class ideas.


Gorbacz wrote:

5E took scores of "grognards" away from Pathfinder. Turns out, for many Pathfinder was just a band-aid and when The Real Deal made a big comeback, they flocked back.

Paizo's choices are, as I see it, see Pathfinder dwindle further and whittle down, or try to challenge WotC head on.

WotC has the insane brand recognition with D&D being what Kleenex is for tissues, Hasbro's deep pockets AND beholders, Llolth and Drizzt. That's some cojones to take that on. Again.

agreed as starfinder was a nail in the coffin so we need few more via pathfinder 2.0 then maybe we may bury the dead finally. and as far as i know 5e survives of play tests and occasional plane shift MTG life support books as wizards didn't publish any big books beside equipment and core rulebook while starfinder and pathfinder get lot of support to their content


Chemlak wrote:
MadScientistWorking wrote:
Actually, it was probably easier to go from 3.5E to 4E than it is from 3.5E to Pathfinder because 4E was fundamentally more streamlined from the sense that the vast majority of a statblock is just words for the sake of words.
It is impossible to convert a 3.5E PHB only dual-wielding Fighter into a 4E PHB only dual-wielding Fighter. So, in that one case, at least, the conversion to PF was a lot easier.

I mean it was. Its just that for some inane reason people didn't like the solution which was why the hell does anyone care about the name. Like if a dual wielding fighter was the core gimmick of the class then I'd understand but it isn't. It isn't even the gimmick of Valeros anymore.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've only started actually playing Pathfinder mere months ago, after starting playing RPGS about a year and a half ago with 5E. I really wouldn't have minded if this announcement came about a year later so I could still be enjoying the game as it is played today, but things are like that sometimes.

Some of the stuff I'm seeing sounds good, some of the stuff I'm seeing sounds... less good. The new action economy sounds like you can do a lot of fun stuff with it, but getting rid of skill ranks feels like a shame. I'm very neutral about the background discussion, because if it's anything like 5E, it'll be very easy to create new ones based on what you want with the character.

The biggest loss between 1E and 2E is the availability of content, which is a large part of what got me into PF1E in the first place. Of course, that's very much a temporary problem, and the solution is simple: play PF1E until 2E's had a year or two to expand to a broader class base, ruleset and AP collection.

I'm not sure I'll be participating in the playtest, but color me optimistic. I guess it helps that I have no strong attachments to the 3.5 ruleset that brought so many people to PF in the first place.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Great, now I can finally stop buying pathfinder books and make the leap to Dungeons and Dragons 5E 100%.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I’m quite excited to see what they bring to the table. The podcast was great. Many of the changes are quite flavorful and love the concepts presented. What concepts? Having to use a shield actively and it uses an action. Do you want to use it to attack with or to use as a shield. Oh, and you can use it reactively to reduce the damage you just had happen. That seems a raise in complexity in this area. Too many people are jumping to conclusions with almost 0 information.

Also love that CMB/CMD is gone. Now you can use your skills to attack with. So much more flavorful in my mind that your skills are more useful in combat. They used a skill to grapple with!! Perception is the default for use in initiative. HP at level 1 are higher and are a combo of class, race, and hit dice.

I think people thinking streamlined and simplistic are the same thing. Just because some things are streamline, doesn’t mean they have added complexity elsewhere, but hopefully with clear rules that can’t be confused. I can see they have added some things that are more complex(Initiative, Reactions, Shields).

Keep the previews coming. Excited to see where this goes.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This makes me very nervous. I prefer Pathfinder 1e to anything Hazcash and Wizards of the Spliff have produced and disliked Starfinder, even though I did buy the first book.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Having read the FAQ, the blog post, and listened to the recording of the playtest with the Glass Cannon podcast I'm not worried. Pathfinder 2, seems to be a update in game terminology, a refinement of rules, and incorporating rules modules developed over the years. I've recognized a few features from Unchained, Starfinder, and other Pathfinder hardcovers with more refinement. The changes made sound like it hasn't diminished player choice at all.


How exactly is using your skills to attack work?

Happy to see CMB/CMD is gone.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

After rereading the blog and FAQ as well as the 719 (as of this reading) posts I can say I am not sad or angry about this decision. More .. resigned.

Sort of like when you hear that Marvel is making Captain America a Nazi or comic book companies are rebooting every other month or there is yet another remake of a movie or series and so on.

The sort of feeling where you go ".. huh. Well. It *could* be good, I guess." I'm definitely in the wait and see camp. Several of the ideas I hear being put forward I am not interested in, and others sound at least a little interesting.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
knightnday wrote:

After rereading the blog and FAQ as well as the 719 (as of this reading) posts I can say I am not sad or angry about this decision. More .. resigned.

Sort of like when you hear that Marvel is making Captain America a Nazi or comic book companies are rebooting every other month or there is yet another remake of a movie or series and so on.

The sort of feeling where you go ".. huh. Well. It *could* be good, I guess." I'm definitely in the wait and see camp. Several of the ideas I hear being put forward I am not interested in, and others sound at least a little interesting.

My major concern is that thus far, every RPG I have enjoyed, when they announced a new edition, died horribly shortly thereafter (looking at you, Dark Heresy).

Dark Archive

Derry L. Zimeye wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

I would imagine that Goblin player characters are the result of a whole generation of adventurers wiping out whole tribes of adult goblins and taking their babies to the local orphanage to be raised by humans. These orphans, when they grow up, are about as socially accepted as half-orcs.

Should no explanation be given, this is what I'm going with for sure!

I wonder if there'll be a time gap between 1e and 2e in canon?

No time gap. They have stated specifically that the year will still coincide with real world year and nothing catastrophic will occur between editions either. So the first year of 2e will take place in 4719.


Baron Iveagh wrote:
knightnday wrote:

After rereading the blog and FAQ as well as the 719 (as of this reading) posts I can say I am not sad or angry about this decision. More .. resigned.

Sort of like when you hear that Marvel is making Captain America a Nazi or comic book companies are rebooting every other month or there is yet another remake of a movie or series and so on.

The sort of feeling where you go ".. huh. Well. It *could* be good, I guess." I'm definitely in the wait and see camp. Several of the ideas I hear being put forward I am not interested in, and others sound at least a little interesting.

My major concern is that thus far, every RPG I have enjoyed, when they announced a new edition, died horribly shortly thereafter (looking at you, Dark Heresy).

It depends. AD&D did well for me when it moved through a few of its editions. HERO games/Champions was good up until about 5th and then I had to drop it. Shadowrun .. grrr. Rules changes are one thing, but when you start drastically altering the whole world information is when I tend to check out.

I'm hoping Paizo will find a way to keep the things I like and that any changes I don't can be easily minimized.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DaveMage wrote:
TheRavyn wrote:
Kudos to Paizo for the upcoming new edition. Can't wait to see it! Imo, PF1E had reached the "bloated" phase of its life cycle some years back, and its time for a good cleansing! Especially happy to hear the increased presence of Golarion, it's my favorite currently published setting.
Ok - I have to ask - what's your favorite not-currently-published setting? :)

That would be Judges' Guild's "Wilderlands of High Fantasy". Love those maps :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd love to hear from Paizo staff, in brief (I understand you're very busy, so a simple "yes, do-able!" suffices) about whether PF2E on day 1 supports/will support character concepts such as...

Bard specializing in helping others defeat Evil creatures such as demons/devils: The Argent Dramaturge PRC from PF1E is a fine example of this; they're not very 'badass' on their own, but they can do very... 'high culture' things like literally sing at evil to hinder it and help other people overcome it. Doable?

Magus equivalent: Do-able from first level? You've mentioned some equivalent ideas, but I'm unclear on the details. I'm not talking about a lot of multiclassing; I mean 'from the start on the character's first session' they can go out and hit things with a sword or with a blast spell like Magic Missile. Is that what you've accomplished in internal playtests?

Holy-themed blaster Sorcerer: Mark touched on this briefly, but I just want to be sure... we're talking about someone with obviously Good-themed magic, as an arcane style caster, ideally a spontaneous caster (e.g. this is 'part of who they are' rather than something studied), who can do magical long-range damage. Ideally with a way to do it non-lethally so they have their option of killing foes or not. Do-able as a day 1 thing?

If these sort of things are supported, I'll enthusiastically support the game. Already set aside money for the playtest set, but I want to be sure the ideas I spent a lot of time refining to ensure they fit the game mechanics, what I want to play, and match up with Golarion lore can basically carry over. They need not be 1:1 copies in terms of play mechanics, but I want the general style to still be there. I've spent many, many hours across many months fine-tuning these character ideas and don't want them to go to waste in the new edition.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My recent (relatively) experiences with 7th Sea 2nd Edition have made me very wary. It was another game with a crunchy and slightly broken 1st edition, that moved to a "streamlined" 2nd edition. And it was terrible.

But reading more of the developers' responses and listening to some of the podcast has made me more optimistic. We have barely any information to go on yet, so there's a lot of wild speculation going on right now. People love this game fiercely (I'm one of them!) and change is scary. Only time will tell how the mechanics actually work.

Furthermore, Paizo is inviting the community's feedback with the playtest, and that's fantastic! We will have the chance to make the game better, to change mechanics that we don't like, and get a feel for how the rules will work before we have to buy anything. Paizo is a company that shows respect for their customers and fans, and produces good products, so I'm willing to see how this goes.

Now, with everyone drawing comparisons to Starfinder, I should probably start reading up on that...


Doggan wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I want to take a moment and talk a bit about the a concern I am seeing here with some frequency, and that is that characters will be streamlined and not customizable. I get that we are using some terms that may lead you to think we are going with a similar approach to some other games, but that is simply not the case.

Characters in the new edition have MORE options in most cases than they did in the previous edition. You can still make the scholarly mage who is the master of arcane secrets and occult lore, just as easily as you can make a character that goes against type, like a fighter who is skilled in botany. The way that the proficiency system works gives you plenty of choices when it comes to skills, allowing you to make the character you want to make.

I think you're understating some of the customization options that folks are looking for. A fighter skilled in botany isn't against type. That's just a profession skill. Against type would be something like a muscle wizard who plays as front line (and is so fun).

The customization fear comes from what was given to us as players. Take any base class, and with traits, feats, and archetypes you could turn them into just about anything else. Some of Pathfinder's charm was glut of choice.

Yes Muscle Wizards! One of my favourite concepts. :)

I've mastered the art of the unconventional pc. :)

At any rate I'm not thrilled about a new edition. :(

For me it's the now ton of useless books and not the change. Well if the change is good. Some stuff sounds good other stuff I don't know. Goblin pc's...good. :)

I don't really know what I'll be doing at this point. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I remain suspicious of anything that sounds like low-magic gear and the removal of the potential of +1 swords as treasure (seriously these are wonders for dealing with loot-driven players), the promise of conversion rules keeps me from grabbing my pitchfork and rioting.

Just please, for the love of all things sane and non-convoluted, no more Stamina Point nonsense that Starfinder has. Trying to teach new players that they effectively have 2 HP pools is like herding cats.

Oh, and keep alternate race features and traits in core. Yes, I know that this is kinda becoming Ancestries, but I like there to be variations among dwarves and elves and such.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have a single request for this game.

Remove the rules that says you can only draw a weapon as part of a move if you have 1 bab. It is a rule that applies to 2/3s of classes for a single level than ever comes up agian. It is not actually a big deal but it adds a needless complication to low levels and adds nothing to the fun or immersion of the game. It has been a naging example of dated design for me.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I for one can't wait to see the new edition.


My, my! I hope Paizo doesn't get rid of their message boards right now because it's been nearly 24 hours and this board is abuzz.

I've been talking with my people and we are definitely going to support Pathfinder 2nd Edition in the future. As I said, I have mixed feelings. It seems that Paizo has learned a lot from 5e and wants to produce something to take on D&D 5e.

But I have a lot invested in the game as of now, and I feel less excited than I did about D&D 3e coming out. I was there when I received my Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set. I was there when I got Eberron and a lot of support books for D&D 3.5. I am still here now and I have conservative feelings.


  • The game needs to evolve in the current market. D&D 5e has showed them that their is need to change to stay relevant.
  • I feel that I will have to change my wikis to support the new edition and that's mainly monsters and race (uh, Ancestries) information.
  • My people are excited about the change coming on to Pathfinder. And we will be supporting 2nd Edition.
  • I'm not excited, I feel confused. I recently bought the Healer's Handbook, and now this was announced.
  • I'm glad that they aren't changing Starfinder.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?
OHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASE...!

Oh dear Lord, why?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Vingorg wrote:
Gip wrote:
Captain Killjoy wrote:
TAKE HEART, GIP!
O CAPTAIN! MY CAPTAIN!

We are not only going to be able to still burn things, there are going to be a lot more of us able to do so!!!!

We are finally accepted along side the halflings and the gnomes! WE HAVE ARRIVED!!!!

HUZZAH!!!!

*sets nearby refuse piles on fire BECAUSE HE CAN*

You know, if we gobs ate all the halflings (or all the gnomes, 1d4 ⇒ 4 of us are not picky), there'd be room for kobolds to step up onto the core races medal podium too.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

10 years is a good run.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarondor wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?
OHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASE...!
Oh dear Lord, why?

Well, Necromancy is the school of magic for both death AND life, so having cure spells being necromancy (instead of a healing subschool of conjuration) isn't that farfetched


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Change is good.

"Progress is impossible without change,
and those who cannot change their minds
cannot change anything."
—George Bernard Shaw


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:

Change is good.

"Progress is impossible without change,
and those who cannot change their minds
cannot change anything."
—George Bernard Shaw

As I said, I'm confused by my feelings right now. Confusion, anxiety, all the signs that my mind is changing but wants to stay the same.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kain Gallant wrote:

I feel though that Dex-based character get more benefit out of that one stat instead of Str-based. DEXters get benefit to AC, Reflex saves, a lot of skills. STRers only get 2 skills and carrying capacity (and I think only a minority keep stringet checks on encumbrence). So anything that encroaches on the Str benefit of dealing melee damage should be critically examined.

But I could be wrong about that. My group typically veers towards Dex-based PCs for reasons mentioned above, so my view could be pretty skewed.

Much as DEX is an option for hit & damage, I'd like to see STR become an option for mitigating/soaking harm. Perhaps STR-focused builds could use their physical brawn to bat/knock away/deflect some of their opponents damage? Or use the STR to help fortify their Fort and some Will saves? Or expend a STR-bonus modified pool point to reroll down some of an opponents damage or some failed saves?

---

I'd also like to see clarified Stealth rules and tactics, as well as clarifications of what qualifies as "interacting with an illusion."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
1d4 Goblin Babies wrote:
Vingorg wrote:

We are not only going to be able to still burn things, there are going to be a lot more of us able to do so!!!!

We are finally accepted along side the halflings and the gnomes! WE HAVE ARRIVED!!!!

HUZZAH!!!!

*sets nearby refuse piles on fire BECAUSE HE CAN*

You know, if we gobs ate all the halflings (or all the gnomes, 1d4 of us are not picky), there'd be room for kobolds to step up onto the core races medal podium too.

...

And then we could EAT THEM TOO!

CAPITAL IDEA!


"Greed is good!"
- Gordon Gekko


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
DM Alistair wrote:
"It doesn't feel like D&D!" What is D&D? Original was literally "dungeon crawl and try to rob monsters of loot," Basic much the same. But the game evolved and began to be more narrative-focused as the years went on because more people joined in and became invested in the game.

This is an untruth I never get tired of shooting down. Sure, there were a lot of dungeon crawls, but I played in plenty of intense role-playing sessions with world-spanning political intrigue and small character moments in OD&D. We were not just banging rocks together and had in fact read actual literature and knew how it worked.

DM Alistair wrote:
Saying 4e (or 5e in some people's cases) isn't D&D just makes no sense because 3e certainly does NOT feel like Original or Basic or Advanced D&D! And I remember the massive RAGE people had at it because of that!

I don't. Every D&D gamer I knew loved 3e when it came out. Most of us had grown tired of 2e and many had moved on to other systems. I recall no edition wars when 3e debuted.

Also, 4e never felt like D&D to me. 5e does, but I like Pathfinder (and Paizo) better.

DM Alistair wrote:
Change is not bad! I certainly wish more people had given 4e an actual chance because it was good! And 5e is just crushing it sales wise and play wise (look at the number of games people are looking for it/running it on Roll20 or in numerous gamefinder forums across the net)!

Nothing untrue about what you're saying here. But many (I suspect nearly all) Pathfinder players -are- Pathfinder players because they enjoy the less-streamlined and more complex rules. Those who don't are 5e players for the most part. I don't care if Pathfinder is the biggest. I just want it to be the game I like to play.

DM Alistair wrote:
Pathfinder needs to innovate or it will die.

Agreed! I'm looking forward to it!

DM Alistair wrote:
Like others have said, the massive rules bloat can make making a character daunting and the massive power discrepancy between spellcasters and martials is just ridiculous!

Hard disagree! It's a myth in my view.


I am still hoping for a mesmerist convert and a rework of shaman/medium yet the backgrounds and more reworks seem really interesting


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Friendly Rogue wrote:
Tarondor wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?
OHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASE...!
Oh dear Lord, why?
Well, Necromancy is the school of magic for both death AND life, so having cure spells being necromancy (instead of a healing subschool of conjuration) isn't that farfetched

No, it's not far-fetched, just unnecessary.

I -could- wear lederhosen to work today, but it doesn't mean I should.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anthony Adam wrote:

Freelancing reaction (I might be the only one like this right now, I might not...)

Looks at pile of 1.0 work he was working on...

Announcement made

Looks at pile of 1.0 work he was close to finishing...

Looks at pile of 2.0 conversion work to be redone...

Thinks about how big the 1.0 core book was, and realises he has to read 2.0 again when it comes out...

And then new Bestiary rules to follow...

Thinks of nice kind Paizocon Paizo staff and what they just did to his workload...

Thinks "You (insert favourite rude word here in capitals)!"
(add as many exclamations as you feel appropriate :P)

... and sets to work, starting with re-planning everything! >.<

Nope. Definitely not the only one. I'm either going to have to get things done at a super quick pace, meaning a possible inferior project, or holding off until 2e comes out and seeing if what I have planned will even work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tarondor wrote:
Friendly Rogue wrote:
Tarondor wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?
OHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASE...!
Oh dear Lord, why?
Well, Necromancy is the school of magic for both death AND life, so having cure spells being necromancy (instead of a healing subschool of conjuration) isn't that farfetched

No, it's not far-fetched, just unnecessary.

I -could- wear lederhosen to work today, but it doesn't mean I should.

depends on your profession. Are you the mayor of Munich at a beerfest?


I think moving cure spells would be an improvement, just because conjuration and transmutation are so much better than other schools.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
I see a lot of people considering whether Pathfinder Second Edition is an evolution of Starfinder. It isn't. Starfinder and Pathfinder Second Edition are both evolutions of Pathfinder First Edition. And both were being worked on at the same time, so each also informed the other. I would say they're siblings.

That's basically the worst news that could be hoped for.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm genuinely confused how all the "No new editions ever no matter what" people were not weeded out by 3.5 coming 3 years after 3rd edition. Are we just selecting for people who already convinced themselves "no, 3.5 was fine" since this is a Pathfinder board?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarondor wrote:
Friendly Rogue wrote:
Tarondor wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?
OHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASEOHPLEASE...!
Oh dear Lord, why?
Well, Necromancy is the school of magic for both death AND life, so having cure spells being necromancy (instead of a healing subschool of conjuration) isn't that farfetched

No, it's not far-fetched, just unnecessary.

I -could- wear lederhosen to work today, but it doesn't mean I should.

I don't know, I've seen some people pull off lederhosen in my day.

In all seriousness, though, I don't think a change is unnecessary per-se. In my opinion, changing the cure spells to necromancy would help reinforce the idea that necromancy is not an inherently bad school of magic and has practical uses for those not in the business of overthrowing kingdoms with armies of the dead (IE, a necromancer wizard who works as a mortician, using magic to perform autopsies).

It doesn't need to happen, of course, but an argument could be made for changing it, especially since (at least in my opinion) the Conjuration school is somewhat cluttered with subschools of magic.

701 to 750 of 1,608 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: First Look at the Pathfinder Playtest All Messageboards