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
201 to 250 of 1,608 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

8 people marked this as a favorite.
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 along with skill feats gives you plenty of choices when it comes to skills, allowing you to make the character you want to make.

Beyond skills, every class now has its own list of feats to choose from, making them all pretty different from one another and allowing for a lot of flexibility in how you play. And just wait until you see what Archetypes can do...

Next Monday we will be looking at the way that you level up, and the options that presents. Next Friday (March 16th), we will investigate the proficiency system, and how that impacts your choices during character creation and leveling.

Stay tuned folks... we have a lot of great things to show you

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

I for one will hold you to it. Differentiate yourself from 5th ed and retain the complexity ( 4 spell lists sounds less complex and class based feats sound like dressed up class features) ill check it out. But the wording leaves a lot to be desired for those of us who like a robust game and not some rules-lite abomination.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

LAME!!!!

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
so, any 3rd party publisher out ther who wants to make lots of money by making new high quality content for us 3.x customers? because right now, if the quality is right, I'll switch my loyality to another company in a heartbeat right now
Certainly, I see a thriving business of 3PP support for the not-anymore-supported-by-the-first publisher edition. Just like it happened with 4ed. Oh, wait...
You realize of course that the success of Pathfinder stems to a great part from exactly that? Supporting the 3.x edition after WotC moved on to a worse version?

Paizo didn't support 3.5ed. Paizo *became* 3.5ed.

Of course, somebody is free to do that again with regard to PF 1e ... but at that point, a prospective 3PP will have the choice: support 5E, support PF 2e or gamble on there being enough Hythlodeuses to make a living.

Time will tell.

Paizo Employee Customer Service Manager

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Tinalles wrote:

I reserve judgment until I can see what the new system is like.

Question: can I order a print copy through Paizo and collect it at GenCon? I'm attending this year.

We're still looking into logistics. Previously we've really only opened up Gen Con Pick up for subscribers and the Playtest is not part of a subscription so there are still some questions we need to investigate.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

And i just ordered Advanced Race Guide, like 10 minutes before the announcement -_- To be honest, i dont really know how to feel about this. On one hand i am excited and want to see the changes brought to the game, less headache and broken OP and annoying things, that BOTH 3.5 and PF1 had. Every change and revision is welcomed and bringing new players to the hobby is always a good thing. On the other hand, ehhh...

Edition splitting is a main reason why i ceased buying WotC products. I just hope that Paizo wont go their way and make a backward compatibility a thing. If this doesnt happen, then i cant see me buying anything PF2 related (well, except from maybe Core Rulebook, just for the sake of "ok, lets have something to introduce people to the hobby" and only because it seems to be less slimy than DnD Fifth Edition). I already invested a lot of money into PF1 and i even refused to ever switch into aforementioned slimy game, just because i dont want to start it all over, considering the purchase of rulebooks, suplements, etc.

PF1 done a decent job with backward compatibility, concerning 3.5 (so my Diablo II Rulebooks are still playable today, lol). I hope it will stay the same. Ill wait and see.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

I have a friend who spent like $1200 on D&D 3e rulebooks and they are just sitting on a shelf collecting dust because no one plays that edition any more.

When I decided to get back into role-playing, I didn't want to spend a bunch of money on D&D 5e rulebooks and then can't use them because everyone else is playing 6e now.

One of the reasons I chose Pathfinder over D&D was that Paizo didn't seem to be playing the game of getting customers to spend hundreds of dollars on rulebooks only to turn around and make them obsolete by releasing new editions.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Gorbacz wrote:

Man, this feels just like the TSR BBS when the 2nd of AD&D was announced. ThacO and all.

Except back then, people didn't put up videos of them burning their PDFs because bandwidth was kind of on the low side.

Our main precedent for RPG edition changes is the ones done by Wizards of the Coast, where massive incompatibilities were introduced with each edition change.

I am hoping that the development of the new edition is more in line with the transitions by TSR from the original D&D to AD&D 1E or from AD&D 1E to 2E, which were close to seamless and for the most part did not invalidate prior material for people using the latest rules.

Of course, now I need to take another look at all those differences between Pathfinder and Starfinder that I accepted as simple differences driven by the difference in setting. Now I have a mix of eager anticipation (Yay! System X from Starfinder may now be part of Pathfinder!) and dread (Uh-oh! System Y from Starfinder may now be part of Pathfinder!)

In any case, I will repeat something I said when Pathfinder 2E was merely hypothetical: We will eventually reach a point where compatibility with D&D 3.5 is no longer mandatory -- but not one where compatibility with Pathfinder 1E can be safely discarded. I think that is exactly where we are now.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My biggest concern is the 4e / Pathfinder split cost the community. Is there enough for 1e 2e 5e. I know some folks never leave the old edition but there seems to be a pretty dedicated 1efan base here.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

23 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not posting as a freelancer or a "company man". I haven't posted on the forums much in a long time. That said, I wanted to voice my support for this new edition in the making.

I came from a more narrative background. I think could sort of tell from the type of adventures and encounters that I write. I'm not the sort of player or GM that is going to complain if I have a little less algebra to do in my head while enjoying a game. It would be nice to be a little less dependent on electronic tools to keep track of a lot of elements. I say that not as an abstract comment, but someone who GMs weekly right now. I absolutely use HeroLabs and it's tactical console. It's like a microwave oven for me now, I can't see living without it. That is a very telling statement about a game.

Pathfinder is a decade old now, and it was an extended lifespan for an older system. There are lot of things we've learned about RPGs since that time. I'm ready to try new things and see new ideas.

So, I support Pathfinder 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
so, any 3rd party publisher out ther who wants to make lots of money by making new high quality content for us 3.x customers? because right now, if the quality is right, I'll switch my loyality to another company in a heartbeat right now
Certainly, I see a thriving business of 3PP support for the not-anymore-supported-by-the-first publisher edition. Just like it happened with 4ed. Oh, wait...
You realize of course that the success of Pathfinder stems to a great part from exactly that? Supporting the 3.x edition after WotC moved on to a worse version?

Paizo didn't support 3.5ed. Paizo *became* 3.5ed.

Of course, somebody is free to do that again with regard to PF 1e ... but at that point, a prospective 3PP will have the choice: support 5E, support PF 2e or gamble on there being enough Hythlodeuses to make a living.

Time will tell.

You mean people who like to play a variation of 3.x? I wouldn't worry about that market. There are good reasons to acknowledge their huge numbers

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:
My biggest concern is the 4e / Pathfinder split cost the community. Is there enough for 1e 2e 5e. I know some folks never leave the old edition but there seems to be a pretty dedicated 1efan base here.

You know how those boycotts go.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Just found out that those folks going to GaryCon and lucky enough to be playing in Jason’s game will be playtesting the new Pathfinder 2nd edition rules!!!!!!

As if I wasn’t already super stoked to be going to GaryCon!!


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
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.

The way I read it, Jason is talking about choice/options in terms of fluff, while you're talking about choice/options in terms of crunch. But we'll have to wait and see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:
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.

The way I read it, Jason is talking about choice/options in terms of fluff, while you're talking about choice/options in terms of crunch. But we'll have to wait and see.

Fluff isn't really a concern though. You need 0 mechanics support to fluff something. If I want to say my elf wizard looks like a Salvador Dali painting, nothing is stopping me beyond my DM saying okay.

Dark Archive

Gorbacz wrote:
Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:
My biggest concern is the 4e / Pathfinder split cost the community. Is there enough for 1e 2e 5e. I know some folks never leave the old edition but there seems to be a pretty dedicated 1efan base here.

You know how those boycotts go. [/QUOTE

i must be old....i dont get it....

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:


The way I read it, Jason is talking about choice/options in terms of fluff, while you're talking about choice/options in terms of crunch. But we'll have to wait and see.

This system will give you both. If you want to play the wizard that is good and beating things up, I promise you that there are a number of ways you can build that character.

But.. I really dont want to spoil too much right now folks. Have a little patience. There is a lot here to cover and we are going to be doing blogs two to three times per week, along with recorded play sessions to give you a sense of what the playtest book will contain.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I have been drifting away from Pathfinder recently - most of what I did use was third party material (Spheres, Psionics, New Paths and such). Never used the setting, always used my own.
Spending more time with other hobbies, and been playing a new RPG with a very different feel (Genesys).
I am a little OCD with collecting and such - and 2nd edition makes a great breaking point to stop doing any of that.

I'll likely download the playtest, just because I like reading rules systems, and would like to see the changes... even if I don't plan on playing.

I hope the best for 2nd edition and Paizo, and all the 3PP that I am sure will benefit. But it will be without me. For me, this isn't going out with a bang, but I had drifted away already that this is more a whimper.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Gulthor wrote:

Although I don't expect Paizo to continue to create new content for PF "1", do you plan to continue to sell material for the original version of Pathfinder (particularly Adventure Paths)?

I, like many others, have active disinterest in switching to a new version of the game, but there are still decades left of AP's left for our group to explore, and we'd like to continue supporting your company, even if we don't go down this road with you.

Please see the FAQ, especially the question But I don't want to change editions! I want to play Pathfinder First Edition forever and ever and ever!

Thank you for your response; this is extremely exciting!

Compared to some of your competitors who have had a business model of "burn the old edition to the ground to force everyone to switch to the new edition", this is a tremendous relief - after all, it's the reason many of us switched to Paizo in the first place.

Although I'm not interested in PF2E, your decision to continue to offer your legacy content has further cemented Paizo as my gaming company of choice, very well done!

I assume that the forums will continue to exist in some form? The Adventure Path forums, in particular, are invaluable, especially to GMs (not to mention the wonderful community there).

(This might seem a silly question to ask for those that aren't familiar, but a certain competitor of Paizo is notorious for wiping their forums completely and starting over when switching to a new edition, and I'd hate to see that happen here.)

Lastly - and I'm sorry to be such a bother - with Pathfinder First Edition entering its final year, can we expect to see a release of the Harrowed Medium before it goes to the grave with PF1E?

Please. Release it as a .pdf, for free in a blog post, anything. Don't just let the Harrowed Medium rot in a folder somewhere. Please let us have it.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Pathfinder and Starfinder are both our babies. Pathfinder is just going through puberty, so things might be a little awkward and we need to give it a bit more attention while it balances its hormones, funny feelings, and hair in new places. After it gets done with its growth spurt, it'll just be an older, wiser version of the RPG it used to be.
This metaphor is... really meaningful to me right now. Not a criticism, just... something I'm thinking about.

Okay, thank god I was not the only one who had that reaction.

Dark Archive

lord mhoram i feel kind of in the same boat. part of me is sort of relieved


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? :)

Sovereign Court

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Maybe the harrowed medium will get its proper release in 2e. ^_^

Dark Archive

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Logan Bonner wrote:
Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:
I have but one fear from this... Skill Proficiencies, they're the thing I hate the most about 4e and 5e. Please keep to a skill points system. :(
Hey, Charabdos! I recommend taking a look at the blogs on proficiencies and skills when they come out. Between the way our proficiencies system works and some of your feat options, there are some really interesting and flexible ways to customize skills built into the system. We think they do some of the great things skill ranks do without being quite as cumbersome. That said, our system might not do everything you want! But I encourage you to check it out.

See, when a designer describes the simple system that is skill ranks as "cumbersome", it makes me think that their notion of design and mine could be dangerously far apart to be looking for entertainment out of the same systems design....

Paizo Employee Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
GeraintElberion wrote:
I hope they focus on 'a diverse team of heroes who work together' with lots of niches, rather than 'anything you can do i can do better', which is how a lot of martial/caster debates go.

That's absolutely the goal. We just want to avoid situations where the wizard is massively better than the rogue at bluffing or disguising himself because of one spell due to the scale of the spell's bonus and that sort of thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

While I can understand that bringing slaadi (FINALLY!!!) over from the Other Side of The Great IP Wall can introduce unexpected levels of Chaos into the lives of mortals and immortals alike, I think the need to introduce a whole new set of Rules of the Universe to deal with us is a bit of an overreaction.

...

Wait, you're not doing all this to make room for us slaadi? We're not coming over to Pathfinder? {pouts grumpily}

:) I'm anxious, as I'm not entirely sold on all of the Starfinder rules (I hate SF archetypes), but I'm looking forward to what the playtest reveals.


I think with Pathfinder, 3.0, and this, we are going to see a lot of DM's going to their rule bibles, and figuring out, what works in their games, that doesn't work with established rules. Then they will circle the calendar date when pf2 playtest hits, and they will look at such marvels.

You already gave us the keys to the kingdom. The rules are in the Core, Unchained, the ACG (my most hated hardcover for you), and the Bestiary, along with all of the other books. These give us the means to make our hobbies happen at the table. I'm going to support the third party people who I love, because I truly appreciate what these people do for a living, much like Paizo used to. Now they're a pillar of the industry.

For those scared about options, and the fact you said, there's more options in the base game than now, you have my applause. If your game doesn't deliver, I'm positive, there will be a chunk of people who will use the older, established rules. That's how our corner of the niche industry is. Until then, Probst!


Erik Mona wrote:
Ivan Rûski wrote:
Can I just say that I can't stand that new font for the logo? I realize that is probably just more unnecessary negativity, but it really pales in comparison to the old Pathfinder font.

This logo is specifically for the Pathfinder Playtest.

We have not even started designing the Pathfinder Second Edition logo, yet.

Thank you for the reply, Erik. It just looks too modern to me, if that makes sense.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I'm out on Pathfinder now.

I'm not doing edition changes.

I came to Pathfinder BECAUSE I didn't want to do edition changes.

I'm not rebuying the same books- I'm not spending money for a "Ultimate Combat" that gives me back Gunslinger two years from now.

I'm definitely not buying Player companions that slowly give me back SOME of the options from the current player companions a few at a time over 5 or 6 years, hoping for a few new ideas sprinkled in.

It's a shame- I really like this game, and I was just geting into PFS.

I would have continued to buy 4 hardcovers a year and every player companion and two more subscriptions. . . because they added to, not subtracted from what I'd already invested.

Thanks for telling me that the money I spent on this game was not appreciated, Paizo.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
Maybe the harrowed medium will get its proper release in 2e. ^_^

But I am wondering how long after the release of Pathfinder 2.0 we will have enough information to play any sort of Medium, let alone the Harrowed version.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:
lord mhoram i feel kind of in the same boat. part of me is sort of relieved

You know - I think this is the heart of the way I feel about this.

I've been a completest with regard to Pathfinder, but this will indeed be a good time to break with that.

I, like lord mhoram, will also likely pick up the 2nd ed core rules once it's out, but maybe the key to enjoying 2nd edition at this point is to not be a completest (knowing I will never ever be able to use everything before Pathfinder 3E anyway).

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Gulthor wrote:

I assume that the forums will continue to exist in some form? The Adventure Path forums, in particular, are invaluable, especially to GMs (not to mention the wonderful community there).

(This might seem a silly question to ask for those that aren't familiar, but a certain competitor of Paizo is notorious for wiping their forums completely and starting over when switching to a new edition, and I'd hate to see that happen here.)

No worries there—you can still access and post in the Dragon magazine forum, and we haven't published that for more than a decade.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you for the extremely detailed and informative FAQ. Truly representative of the exquisite customer service that Paizo represents. It let me quickly ascertain that I will not be joining the revolution.
I look forward to the final year of 3.5/PF content.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

my social anxiety butt needs to make friends to playtest with


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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 along with skill feats gives you plenty of choices when it comes to skills, allowing you to make the character you want to make.

Beyond skills, every class now has its own list of feats to choose from, making them all pretty different from one another and allowing for a lot of flexibility in how you play. And just wait until you see what Archetypes can do...

Next Monday we will be looking at the way that you level up, and the options that presents. Next Friday (March 16th), we will investigate the proficiency system, and how that impacts your choices during character creation and leveling.

Stay tuned folks... we have a lot of great things to show you

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

I really hope this is true. One of the biggest mistakes we've seen in the last few years in Pathfinder was the pernicious myth that, unless every new class/archetype/feat/spell was made significantly mechanically weaker than older examples in the Core Rulebook or other old books, it would magically make "lift the power curve." That kind of thinking implies a fanatical focus on preventing any new class or ability the chance to be interesting, on the off-chance that it might somehow break the game.

I'm seriously worried that the talk about simplifying magic items and spells implies building a highly-standardized formula for every possible class ability and piece of gear to ensure nothing is ever out of place, as is already too much the case in Starfinder. Take some risks with that power curve for once!

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am so excited by this announcement. I haven't been on the Pathfinder bandwagon in many years, because I burned out hard on all the niggling issues I had with Pathfinder that just added up over time.

Starfinder was a breath of fresh air, and got me momentarily back into the hobby to try it out, but I just wanted to return to Golarion.

Now this, this has my full attention.

Plus I see that Jim Groves is on-board, and anywhere with more his adventures is a good place to be.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't know how to feel about this. I really hope this new system is more 3.5 than 4e. Especially when the whole purpose of the game was originally to be a legacy edition. Enemies and PCs using different rulesets, bounded ability scores, limited actions... I've warmed up to these things in Starfinder, but I take solace in the fact I have Pathfinder to go back to should I grow tired of them.

There are definitely things that Pathfinder needs to fix I just hope my favorite aspects aren't lost in the process.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The MOST important question for me...

Will Tengu be a Core Ancestry?

Scarab Sages

6 people marked this as a favorite.

First of all...my jaw kind of dropped at this. It's actually happening. I'm game. Let's see where this heads....

Rosgakori wrote:
Quote:
You still pick a race, even though it is now called your ancestry.
This sounds interesting. Especially taking account of the discussion around the term "race" in RPG's.

Are we sure it's the right move? I understand where the sentiment comes from, but given that the concept of "race" as an artificial and divisive concept within the human species is something we want to at long last abandon in the Land of the Living, might that be precisely why it would be a better move to stubbornly maintain the RPG definition as a way to help edge out and obsoletize unwanted definitions? I thought it was very smart for Pathfinder to talk about "ethnicities" as much as it did, and as a term parallel to and distinct from "race".

Failing that, why replace it with "ancestry"? It's cumbersome to say, and feels a bit vague and too broad. Why not "species", which has already been used in stuff like Terry Pratchett's novels? Granted, that might be too stiff, wouldn't be as good for planetouched/dhampirs/mutations/half-breeds (then again, I've never been big on the idea of Half-Elves and Half-Orcs to begin with).

Bruunwald wrote:

Secondly... Regarding the Golarion-Infused bit.

Please NO.

NO NO NO NO NO.

Campaign settings are for... well, for campaign setting books. They are not for rulebooks. Rulebooks should be vanilla.

The big, horrible bad weakness of Starfinder is that it is infused with lore that probably 50% of GMs - at least anybody with any kind of creative streak - must REMOVE to get any kind of home game going.

You WILL lose me, and I think a lot of other customers, if we have to wade through any more Golarion in our Core books than the names of gods.

I love Paizo, but infusing Golarion into the rules is bound to result in the sort of tedium that just kills a game. Bad, bad idea.

Seconded. Having seen the problems that the drive toward setting-agnosticism can lead to (not inevitably or necessarily, mind you, just because of certain mistaken mindsets), I supported Pathfinder's decision to "marry" the Golarion setting for a while...but I've changed my mind. It's much too limiting in all directions, and the fact that Horror Adventures "canonized" the notion that undead and the magic that made them were fundamentally Evil was a bridge much too far for me.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Just don't have the Runelords unleashing a spellplague on Golarion and we're fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okay, I think I calmed down a little

How backwards compatible will this be? How much work will I have to invest in a 2nd ed. AP to make it work in the real system?

Also, while we're a it, I guess that means no PF HCs for Second Darkness, which pisses me off again


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Have a little patience.

You... know you're talking to gamers, right? That's like saying "put down the Doritos" or giving a bunch of four year-olds sugar and then asking them to take a nap! :-)

Dark Archive Vendor - Fantasiapelit Tampere

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Hythlodeus wrote:


Also, while we're a it, I guess that means no PF HCs for Second Darkness, which pisses me off again

Or, it comes out with PF 2.0 rules.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

My greatest concern is how long will it take for things to feel "NEW" and not "Reinvented" or "Revisited".

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I am interested in seeing the new system but my biggest thing, and it is what killed starfinder for me, is if there is 2-weapon fighting. It is by far my favorite martial fighting style. That might be weird to some but I have always liked it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Yeesssssssss…

Class feats: no more hunting through a million things to find stuff that I can use on this character.

Ancestry feats: gives me hope that kitsune will get similar feat chains when they're introduced. (Not expecting them as a core race, of course.) Also, wow, the race-to-ancestry swap is very welcome, even if I'm going to take a while to get used to it!

Archetypes: please not universal archetypes please not universal archetypes please not universal archetypes… (Sorry, but class-specific tweaks are what I like about archetypes.) Anyway, glad we've got archetypes, and whatever the version is, I'll do my best to give it a fair shot! Very cool that we're getting this in the first book, too.

Initiative: sounds really cool! I might just hand new players one option to start, but it's nice to have a simple, meaningful transition from exploring to combat.

Golarian: is a big reason my friends like Pathfinder, despite mechanics they have difficulty working with. Streamlined mechanics being introduced will let us play without reservation!

Honestly, the only thing I don't care for is goblins as a core ancestry. I don't do so great with that kind of character in my games, and this takes away the easy excuse… Still, that's just selfish personal bias, and I have a friend who will be delighted by this, so I can hardly fault the game! (Especially since there are plenty people who feel the same way about some of the ancestries I play.)


I'm just interested to see what the class designs are and how this new iconic goblin alchemist compares to Damiel.


Rosgakori wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


Also, while we're a it, I guess that means no PF HCs for Second Darkness, which pisses me off again
Or, it comes out with PF 2.0 rules.

In that case, I will live happily with my 3.5 version and they won't see additional money from me

Paizo Employee Organized Play Manager

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Swiftbrook wrote:

Rats! I'm an old fart and don't really want to start over. I have a good selection of books, maps and supplements. However, I really only get to play through PFS so for me it's switch or stop playing.

Is there a timeline for publication? Is PFS 2.0 come August?

August 2019 is version 2 launch, but per the FAQ -

Q: Can I still play Pathfinder Society version 1?
Yes. If you somehow have not yet finished all 250+ First Edition scenarios, we’re not taking them away. Players will be able to purchase, play, and report classic scenarios with their first edition characters indefinitely. Even though we will stop creating new First Edition scenarios after July 2019, we expect to see them offered at conventions and enjoyed by Pathfinders for years to come.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Rosgakori wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


Also, while we're a it, I guess that means no PF HCs for Second Darkness, which pisses me off again
Or, it comes out with PF 2.0 rules.

Honestly, I'm actually more hopeful of getting Second Darkness redone with a new edition.

201 to 250 of 1,608 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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