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
1,201 to 1,250 of 1,608 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>

9 people marked this as a favorite.
pixierose wrote:
Something that nobody has mentioned that is actually pretty important to me.. Please make it easy to do non-lethal damage, please don't penalize players for trying to do the right/heroic thing. At the very least let it be doable with weapons, I know it may sound silly with magic...but if merciful is a thing then just let it be something anyways.

YES PLEASE!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
edduardco wrote:

Yes is finally happening, ten years definitely make a great millstone.

And 10th level spells, I really hope that magic is not too tuned down, I really like that high level casters feel like playing a demigod, so hopping that doesn't change :)

If high level martial characters feel like demigods as well, then I have no problem with that


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
pixierose wrote:
Something that nobody has mentioned that is actually pretty important to me.. Please make it easy to do non-lethal damage, please don't penalize players for trying to do the right/heroic thing. At the very least let it be doable with weapons, I know it may sound silly with magic...but if merciful is a thing then just let it be something anyways.
YES PLEASE!

Or just make Golden Legion's Stayed Blade a free ability or a trait or something.


Or carry a sap as a secondary weapon.

Sovereign Court

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Per the four spells lists they mentioned, I have a feeling they might be something like divine/arcane/nature/alchemical with the different classes just only taking spells from that list up to a certain level (ie paladins only taking up to lvl 4 spells from the divine list). That might mean some loss of uniqueness of lists, but would make it much easier for adding new classes so that spells added later don't need a thousand and one exceptions to tell you which casters can now use that spell.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

That would be... very disappointing. "Man, I really like how everyone uses different magic. I mean, I sing and cast magic missile, you read a book and cast magic missile, you were born able to cast magic missile..."


Purplefixer wrote:
Samy wrote:
Cerushad wrote:
And now I'm leaving for the next haven wherein 3.5 can Thrive.
Yeah I've been googling third party adventure paths a lot today...sadly I found out pretty much all of them have significantly less inspiring art than Pathfinder...

Lost a post to maintenance, but long story short, as a barrier to entry in pubbing a 60 page book I was looking at around $1500 in art assets. That's a very significant investment for something that is unlikely to recoup those costs. A single Iconic Portrait runs ~$200.

In order to get my book even partially illustrated I went into profit-sharing with my artist.

Some of the OSR art can beat Paizo for covers (comparing core book to core book), interior art not so much.

6th and 7th printing Castles and Crusades PHB beat Pazio for art (comparing core book to core book).

WotC can beat them perhaps FFG and Kobold Press.


Blancmange Scout from Skyron wrote:
Ikos wrote:
Paizo, the new ruleset you’ve proposed (you know, the one nobody’s actually seen more than a side glance of and has yet to be finalized) has ruined my life. My trust in you is void and I shall never game again! Someone please help me to my fainting couch!
There's a line for the fainting couch. We shall instead give you... The Comfy Chair! {cue ominous music}

Meanwhile, I'll go for one of the walking sofas they have in Taldor.


Ellias Aubec wrote:
Per the four spells lists they mentioned, I have a feeling they might be something like divine/arcane/nature/alchemical with the different classes just only taking spells from that list up to a certain level (ie paladins only taking up to lvl 4 spells from the divine list). That might mean some loss of uniqueness of lists, but would make it much easier for adding new classes so that spells added later don't need a thousand and one exceptions to tell you which casters can now use that spell.

I've got mixed feelings there. I think it's something that I'll get used to. For core classes, that's chill with me, but I'd be a little sad if that sort of restriction means no Witch-type class.

I wonder if partial casters will have some sort of filter (Bard only gets Illusion and Enchantment, or Bard doesn't get Evocation) or focus (Bard gets a bonus spell known of each level, taken from Illusion or Enchantment, or Bard treats Evocation spells as one level higher). Another possibility is that Bard just gets Illusion/Enchantment class feats to focus on those, while Wizard or Sorcerer gets class feats for all schools; a Bard simply doesn't specialize well in evocation.

Hmm. We'll see!


Suggestions:
·Make Called Shots core: a penalized attack inflicts a Condition. This makes combats even faster.
·Scale down other martials so picking a Fighter is viable. Or give Fighters "Path of War" as a class feature like Archetypes.
·Provide examples of skill/combat rules in footnotes.
·Drop the "Xmas Tree": maybe 5 item slots and downtime for item mastery.

I can cross my fingers, right?


Also:
·Make Multi-classing optional, with downtime cost.
·Keep Feats diverse.
·Incorporated Background skills into Skills.
·Armor as damage reduction with a base "to hit" of 11
·Make Grab, Parry, Trip, Disarm and Dodge easy PLUS useful
·Make Called Shots core: a penalized attack that adds a condition
·Scale down other martials to make playing a Fighter viable --- also give Rogues exclusive access to most skills


Making Spheres of Power the base arcane system would be innovative, as an optional set.


Optional rules for buying magic items with fixed cost (no speculation).


Sword of Cuddling wrote:
Making Spheres of Power the base arcane system would be innovative, as an optional set.

if my gut feeling divination is correct you might be shocked how much spheres might be already added to 2E.


thejeff wrote:


Well, having specific things you can only do once per turn isn't really another action type, since you don't have to remember which things are which action types, you only have to remember "I'll Lay on Hands, then I'll Lay on Hands again, wait no I can't cause Lay on Hands says only once per round."

Again, you are assuming you can't cast 3 LoH per round. Which might not be true (it is not true now, as you can cast one as,swift and another one as Standard). LoH might be balanced around the idea of being casted with multiple actions, just like the cleric channeled healing can be casted with 1 action (touch range), 2 actions (range) and 3 actions (area).

Even if ypu have to remember how LoH interact with itself, that's still half the things to remember compared to having to remember how LoH interact with itself, plus how it interact with Smite Evil. Add a combat style, the quickdraw springed sheaths, and inmediate action spell, and you will see how fast it scales.

Spells by default need 2 actions. So you will be able to cast 1 «normal» spell plus 1 «swift» spell, just like now.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
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!

What a cool idea...but why on earth is this a monster-specific ability? Shouldn't this be a natural result of the grapple rules available to anything strong enough?

Please do not go with an exception-based design, where so much of the game is an exception to the regular rules. That way lies (the bad parts of) D&D 4e. Make interesting stuff a part of the regular rules, and then have class and monster abilities simply add more options. Instead of the Tyrannosaurus being uniquely able to toss someone it has grappled, give it an action wherein they throttle their captured prey back and forth in its jaws and then throw them, causing additional damage and possibly inflicting a crippled condition or something.

Attacks of opportunity being Fighter-only is just as concerning, for the same reason. Do not make the regular rules barren and frustrating, requiring class and monster abilities to be interesting. Make the core rules that are available to every creature interesting and reasonable on their own, and then add in class and monster abilities that are truly unique to the skills or physiology of the class or monster, respectively. So everyone has the option of an attack of opportunity, but a Fighter's has a chance of stopping the target's movement entirely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ellias Aubec wrote:
Per the four spells lists they mentioned, I have a feeling they might be something like divine/arcane/nature/alchemical with the different classes just only taking spells from that list up to a certain level (ie paladins only taking up to lvl 4 spells from the divine list). That might mean some loss of uniqueness of lists, but would make it much easier for adding new classes so that spells added later don't need a thousand and one exceptions to tell you which casters can now use that spell.

So....Bard casts Fireball and Lightning Bolt

Heavy Metal Bard


http://archives.erfworld.com/Book%201/123


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark, I kinda think you guys REALLY need to answer this skill thing because that and ‘will there still be significant melee bonus difference between martial and say, a, wizard' seem to be the two main themes I see rocketing around.


RDM42 wrote:
Mark, I kinda think you guys REALLY need to answer this skill thing because that and ‘will there still be significant melee bonus difference between martial and say, a, wizard' seem to be the two main themes I see rocketing around.

I think they more or less agree with you on that- IIRC, the next blog is on skills.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Greylurker wrote:
Ellias Aubec wrote:
Per the four spells lists they mentioned, I have a feeling they might be something like divine/arcane/nature/alchemical with the different classes just only taking spells from that list up to a certain level (ie paladins only taking up to lvl 4 spells from the divine list). That might mean some loss of uniqueness of lists, but would make it much easier for adding new classes so that spells added later don't need a thousand and one exceptions to tell you which casters can now use that spell.

So....Bard casts Fireball and Lightning Bolt

Heavy Metal Bard

I much prefer Pathfinder's current Bard spell list. Most Bardic feel to it than any previous edition. Absolutely love it. Now it appears the Bard won't have it's own spell list. That seems backward because the Bard did not have it's own until 3.0, IIRC.


uuuuuuh!! uuuuuh!!!! uuuuuuuhhhh!!!!! uuuuuuhhh!!!!!

It's too late to ask for us gobs as a basic playable race???? WE WANT TO BE FRIENDS, WE REALLY DOOO!!!!

spanish hype now abroad the hypie train

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Graelsis wrote:
It's too late to ask for us gobs as a basic playable race???? WE WANT TO BE FRIENDS, WE REALLY DOOO!!!!

Well good news, then. Your kind got the promotion to become a playable COre race, of all things. :)


WormysQueue wrote:
Graelsis wrote:
It's too late to ask for us gobs as a basic playable race???? WE WANT TO BE FRIENDS, WE REALLY DOOO!!!!
Well good news, then. Your kind got the promotion to become a playable COre race, of all things. :)

Apparently, they're even taking Damiel's job.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
1of1 wrote:
WormysQueue wrote:
Graelsis wrote:
It's too late to ask for us gobs as a basic playable race???? WE WANT TO BE FRIENDS, WE REALLY DOOO!!!!
Well good news, then. Your kind got the promotion to become a playable COre race, of all things. :)
Apparently, they're even taking Damiel's job.

Wow, boo on that. I've kind of gotten attached to the iconics.


WormysQueue wrote:
Graelsis wrote:
It's too late to ask for us gobs as a basic playable race???? WE WANT TO BE FRIENDS, WE REALLY DOOO!!!!
Well good news, then. Your kind got the promotion to become a playable COre race, of all things. :)

ok, sir, you have just get a new ribbon. It's called "goblin hype maker".

I love you. Now we are bestys.


Biztak wrote:
edduardco wrote:

Yes is finally happening, ten years definitely make a great millstone.

And 10th level spells, I really hope that magic is not too tuned down, I really like that high level casters feel like playing a demigod, so hopping that doesn't change :)

If high level martial characters feel like demigods as well, then I have no problem with that

That is how it always should have been.


Graelsis wrote:
It's called "goblin hype maker".

What can I say? I'm good at what I'm doing.

Quote:
I love you. Now we are bestys.

Thank you.


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

Gonna weigh in here as a Pathfinder Subscriber, to well.. a lot of Pathfinder Material.

Yes when I read the news, I found myself in something of a panic. I've invested well over several hundred to maybe several thousand dollars into Pathfinder Books, Pathfinder PDFs, Pathfinder Pawns, Pathfinder Cards, all of it. Not to toot my own horn, but I'm a Paizo fan through and through.

I started RPG's later in life with 4e. Hated it, it felt like a board game, not a roleplaying game. Friends introduced me to Pathfinder, and I couldn't get enough. Other friends tried to get me to play 5th Edition with them. I was bored to tears after the variety I found in Pathfinder... 5th edition just felt hollow and empty, and I was horrified when I felt like there were limited viable kinds of characters I could make with the classes I chose. No two bards I've made for Pathfinder were anything alike. But I couldn't make more than two bards for 5e without them feeling the exact same.

I've come into my own as a GM, and now run three current campaigns, (and finished two others, we play every single week) which all take place in Golarion, and all share the same timeline, with different parties crossing each other's paths and the plots interwoven between all three campaigns that it's all rather confusing to newcomers at the table, but my table is so enthusiastic about the game, that we immediately try and immerse the new players. Again, not trying to brag, just trying to explain my investment.

After an evening to breath deep, I'm not frightened of Pathfinder 2.0. But I will list the things that will make or break the new system for me.

1) I play a 1PP game. My Golarion has little to no Homebrew whatsoever, I use all my hundreds of Campaign Setting books to boost my creativity by creating a pad I can launch my ideas off of. I'm so very happy to hear that Golarion isn't going to have some sort of "TIME OF TROUBLES" or other shakeup that completely invalidates former lore. I can handle Varisia being updated to reflect all the Adventure Paths that have taken place on it, no problem, my own Varisia simply has two 17th level adventuring parties vying for control after one defeated Karzoug, and the other Ileosa.

So this means, Backwards Compatibility in regards to classes and characters is of the utmost importance to me. Because I don't expect 2nd Edition to
contain the Vigilante or even a fraction of the spells that have become so iconic to many of my beloved former and current PCs and NPCs. At least, i don't believe I'll see those classes rebuilt in 2nd Edition for quite some time.

This is only an issue for me, because if I love the playtest and 2nd Edition, I'm not going to restart my campaigns from the ground up, I'm simply going to port them over. But with a fraction of the options available, they'll have giant holes called, "INSERT PSYCHIC CHARACTER HERE WHEN AVAILABLE." I bought all the books I could get my hands on for 1st Edition because I don't have the time to build my own rules and classes.. and if I have to do that in order to play, it will frustrate me to no end, and saving my money and just playing 1st Edition will be my preference.

*-*-*-*

2) Simplifying the Monsters. I understand that it's hard to remember all the neat abilities of the oodles and oodles of monsters Pathfinder has now with 6 bestiaries. Lord knows I forget them now and then, and some monsters I put on the table in front of my players die before they can even begin to show off their unique abilities...

But I will be extremely disappointed if the only difference between a Kobold and a Goblin in 2nd Edition is their weapon of choice. If all monsters of the same CR have the same statline, and same general HP, and the same saves...Yes, I'm talking about Starfinder's approach to enemies. I'm not a fan at all.

Some of my most beloved encounters I've created for my players involved taking something as basic as a troll, and adding templates and class levels to him to turn him into a monstrosity whose powers took the PCs completely by surprise when they expected a big dumb troll.

But if Trolls can't be Wizards because the monster rules and the class rules go together like Oil and Water, I'll seriously consider dropping 2nd Edition.

*-*-*-*

Those are really my only two fears. Otherwise I don't feel 2nd Edition invalidates all the fun 1st edition gave me, so long as I can smoothly continue with it, and not feel like I'm starting all over.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Regarding the Actual Playtest time frame.

I do PbP only, so will there be enough time to do the playtest in that format? Even at 2 posts per day, 5 days per week, that is less time "playing" then a single 3 hour session.

-- david


Goblin Hype Maker wrote:
Graelsis wrote:
It's called "goblin hype maker".

What can I say? I'm good at what I'm doing.

Quote:
I love you. Now we are bestys.
Thank you.

You put that as an alias!! dude, you really made my day


Aasimar and Tiefling as core races? might be nice.

Rolled Block, Dodge and Parry? could work well with armor as DR.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nezzmith wrote:
But I will be extremely disappointed if the only difference between a Kobold and a Goblin in 2nd Edition is their weapon of choice. If all monsters of the same CR have the same statline, and same general HP, and the same saves...Yes, I'm talking about Starfinder's approach to enemies. I'm not a fan at all

I'm not going to address the full wall of text, but this line picked my interest.

What makes you think it works that way in Starfinder? It's the other way around. As NPC do not have to follow the same rules for PCs, two NPC could be, say, fighters, with one being able to ignore cover and the other being able to knock people down on hits.

I went to the book, and compared the first three creatures with the same CR. The CR7 Aeon Specialist, CR7 Anacite Laborer and CR7 Barathus Angel.

The specialist has 22/23 AC, and 9-9-10 saves. He has the equivalent of sneak attack, and debilitating attacks, with great stealth and invisibility cloak.

The laborer has 19/20 AC, +4/+4/+8 saves, and an ability to reconfigure himself with different skills (longer sensors, reach, burrow, energy resistance...)

The angel has 21/22 AC, +8/+6/+10 saves, Spell resistance, a bunch of resistances and inmunites, fly 100, buffing aura, and spell like abilities such as firewall.

the next monster is also CR7, an apari, and it's a bug that "steals" ability (str, dex, etc) and distribute it itself, plus generates minor aparis. Blood Brother is the next CR7, which has stronger FOR and REF but weaker WILL, and has an ability to grab people and swallow them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Nezzmith wrote:
But I will be extremely disappointed if the only difference between a Kobold and a Goblin in 2nd Edition is their weapon of choice. If all monsters of the same CR have the same statline, and same general HP, and the same saves...Yes, I'm talking about Starfinder's approach to enemies. I'm not a fan at all

I'm not going to address the full wall of text, but this line picked my interest.

What makes you think it works that way in Starfinder? It's the other way around. As NPC do not have to follow the same rules for PCs, two NPC could be, say, fighters, with one being able to ignore cover and the other being able to knock people down on hits.

I went to the book, and compared the first three creatures with the same CR. The CR7 Aeon Specialist, CR7 Anacite Laborer and CR7 Barathus Angel.

The specialist has 22/23 AC, and 9-9-10 saves. He has the equivalent of sneak attack, and debilitating attacks, with great stealth and invisibility cloak.

The laborer has 19/20 AC, +4/+4/+8 saves, and an ability to reconfigure himself with different skills (longer sensors, reach, burrow, energy resistance...)

The angel has 21/22 AC, +8/+6/+10 saves, Spell resistance, a bunch of resistances and inmunites, fly 100, buffing aura, and spell like abilities such as firewall.

the next monster is also CR7, an apari, and it's a bug that "steals" ability (str, dex, etc) and distribute it itself, plus generates minor aparis. Blood Brother is the next CR7, which has stronger FOR and REF but weaker WILL, and has an ability to grab people and swallow them.

Hitting them with truth! Its funny to see just how many misconceptions there are out there about Starfinder. Its also sad to see so many of them being used to judge a game, who's rules we have not even seen yet.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Graelsis wrote:
You put that as an alias!! dude, you really made my day

No one shall say that I don't care about my children.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:

With kineticists I think the best thing when, hopefully not if, they return would be to do fewer elements or give them their own book. Page count hurt a lot of the Occult classes and that's a shame because I'm not afraid to say it was some of, if not THE, best work Paizo has ever done. I love that book to bits, it's the only physical book I own.

Expanding on that, giving classes the page count they need to shine would be really nice to see in this edition.

Yeah, given the number of LOK/ATLA fans (and of other universes which delve into elemental manipulation powers, like the Codex Alera) a major expansion on the Kineticist as a more rounded class would be a very good proposition for somewhen down the line of 2ndEd.

I want to play the Avatar, dammit. :D


3 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:

Yeah, given the number of LOK/ATLA fans (and of other universes which delve into elemental manipulation powers, like the Codex Alera) a major expansion on the Kineticist as a more rounded class would be a very good proposition for somewhen down the line of 2ndEd.

I want to play the Avatar, dammit. :D

I feel like there's real potential if they were to wholesale reshape the Kineticist or Kineticist analogue into the "Alternative to Vancian casting" class. Put it in Ultimate Magic 2.0 (or whatever they would call it) and make the mechanic something that doesn't just apply to that class and like 2 archetypes of other classes.

Shadow Lodge

I hope not. That would really just... that's super bland and lazy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Yeah, given the number of LOK/ATLA fans (and of other universes which delve into elemental manipulation powers, like the Codex Alera) a major expansion on the Kineticist as a more rounded class would be a very good proposition for somewhen down the line of 2ndEd.

I want to play the Avatar, dammit. :D

I feel like there's real potential if they were to wholesale reshape the Kineticist or Kineticist analogue into the "Alternative to Vancian casting" class. Put it in Ultimate Magic 2.0 (or whatever they would call it) and make the mechanic something that doesn't just apply to that class and like 2 archetypes of other classes.

In the Know Direction podcast, Erik Mona said that they want the foundation of the game to be fairly solid before getting the Gunslinger, Kineticist, and Summoner in particular right for the system. So I'm hopeful!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:

I'm not going to address the full wall of text, but this line picked my interest.

What makes you think it works that way in Starfinder? It's the other way around. As NPC do not have to follow the same rules for PCs, two NPC could be, say, fighters, with one being able to ignore cover and the other being able to knock people down on hits.

Apologies, I'll retract my statement on Starfinder since I might have been too clouded by ignorance of the system. I've only played it once as a player, as I bought it for a friend to GM for us.

It wasn't that all the enemies were bland in their powers, but they were predictable in difficulty because I wore armor, and they had the illusion of it. It's hard to explain, but for some reason, what I had to roll to succeed never felt like it changed no matter how menacingly armored and tough the GM described the creature to me.

While I can tell you that at level 1 in pathfinder, a shirtless goblin is an incredibly different fight from a goblin wearing a halfling's fullplate he stole.

So I guess my criticism came from a lack of experience of the system, I'll admit fault, but I still would rather that monsters can grow and develop as PCs do.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Actually, if they adopted the magic system from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved, I'd be all over 2e. It also has 10th level spells, and a single spell list.

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
QuidEst wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Mark, I kinda think you guys REALLY need to answer this skill thing because that and ‘will there still be significant melee bonus difference between martial and say, a, wizard' seem to be the two main themes I see rocketing around.
I think they more or less agree with you on that- IIRC, the next blog is on skills.

Here is a related math puzzle to tide the time!

The most fun way to do this puzzle is to first guess what the answers will be from your gut and then solve the puzzle with math and post both to see how close you were.

Suppose you are a wizard who wanted to be a muscle wizard. You managed to keep apace with the fighter's Strength, bought magic swords at the same pace, and generally narrowed the difference between you and the fighter down to mostly the proficiency. Let's say that difference between you two was that the fighter had +3 more to hit than you did. Doesn't seem like much. Now you're fighting a monster that you hit on a 10, and the fighter hits on a 7 (since he had +3 more than you). On that attack, how much better on average, in terms of expected damage, do you think the fighter is going to do, expressed as a percentage (for instance, you might say "15% more damage").


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Mark, I kinda think you guys REALLY need to answer this skill thing because that and ‘will there still be significant melee bonus difference between martial and say, a, wizard' seem to be the two main themes I see rocketing around.
I think they more or less agree with you on that- IIRC, the next blog is on skills.

Here is a related math puzzle to tide the time!

The most fun way to do this puzzle is to first guess what the answers will be from your gut and then solve the puzzle with math and post both to see how close you were.

Suppose you are a wizard who wanted to be a muscle wizard. You managed to keep apace with the fighter's Strength, bought magic swords at the same pace, and generally narrowed the difference between you and the fighter down to mostly the proficiency. Let's say that difference between you two was that the fighter had +3 more to hit than you did. Doesn't seem like much. Now you're fighting a monster that you hit on a 10, and the fighter hits on a 7 (since he had +3 more than you). On that attack, how much better on average, in terms of expected damage, do you think the fighter is going to do, expressed as a percentage (for instance, you might say "15% more damage").

My instinct says 30%, either before or after crits...

EDIT: Dang. For just one attack, 27% more or so without crits, 50% more with crits. I can see why the new crit method is being used. You’ll need to be careful with attack buffs, then.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's about 27% more.

Assume DPH (Damage Per Hit) is 10. Wizard hits 55% of the time, or 5.5 DPA (Damage Per Attack). The fighter hits 70% of the time, or 7 DPA. 7 is about 27% more than 5.5.

Edit: Good instincts, QuidEst. I mathed it.

Also Edit: cleaned up language.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:

Here is a related math puzzle to tide the time!

The most fun way to do this puzzle is to first guess what the answers will be from your gut and then solve the puzzle with math and post both to see how close you were.

Suppose you are a wizard who wanted to be a muscle wizard. You managed to keep apace with the fighter's Strength, bought magic swords at the same pace, and generally narrowed the difference between you and the fighter down to mostly the proficiency. Let's say that difference between you two was that the fighter had +3 more to hit than you did. Doesn't seem like much. Now you're fighting a monster that you hit on a 10, and the fighter hits on a 7 (since he had +3 more than you). On that attack, how much better on average, in terms of expected damage, do you think the fighter is going to do, expressed as a percentage (for instance, you might say "15% more damage").

The guess is a 15% difference in damage, which seems to be mathed differently as above.

So, for a Fighter with access to 0 spells this is pretty bad since Robehat Wibbleslinger is doing almost as well as him at fighting on top of 10th level wibbleslinging.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Chemlak, you are correct for hits but didn't factor in crits, and that wound up being close to QuidEst's instinct. Add in crits for some added fun!

EDIT: QuidEst wins at math. 50% more; it's shocking! I didn't expect it. So I think that helps answer the question I originally replied to.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Gut says around 30%.

Fighter hits 70% of the time and crits 20%(17-20).

Mwizard hits 55% of the time and crits 5% (20).

All else being equal,the average damage difference is 33%((55+5)/(70+20))


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey, I'm not far enough through the info to even know how crits work! I'm working at a handicap, here... ;)


Mark Seifter wrote:
Chemlak, you are correct for hits but didn't factor in crits, and that wound up being close to QuidEst's instinct. Add in crits for some added fun!

Crits got it to 50%, which sounds pretty reasonable for what probably works out to be more Warrior than Fighter.

1,201 to 1,250 of 1,608 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 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