Leveling Up!

Monday, March 12, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Feats Feats Feats!

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

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

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

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

The Best of Your Ability

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

Second Chances

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

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

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

Leveling in the Playtest

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

Logan Bonner
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest
451 to 500 of 579 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Unlock your races potential with ancestry.com guide to ancestry traits...


I'm curous about how mutliclassing works, too. It's possible, that it really just boils down to "use the table of the class you're leveling in". I the entry for the next class level states that you get some kind of feat, you get that kind of feat, be it ancestry, class or general feat. Same with spellcasting.

The only thing I have no idea is how 2 proficiencies for the same thing add up.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...

Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Related: can we get Battle Sporks in PF2? And have them be mechanically viable?

And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Dαedαlus wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Related: can we get Battle Sporks in PF2? And have them be mechanically viable?

And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*

While sadly Sporks haven't been confirmed, Battle Forks are indeed confirmed.


Dαedαlus wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Related: can we get Battle Sporks in PF2? And have them be mechanically viable?

And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*

Battle Sporks would probably be a gnome weapon.


Doktor Weasel wrote:
Dαedαlus wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Related: can we get Battle Sporks in PF2? And have them be mechanically viable?

And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*

Battle Sporks would probably be a gnome weapon.

Double damage against noodle soup elementals.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

+1 for the spork
because it will hurt more


A Battle Fork is likely going to be a Halfling racial weapon. Or at the very least the racial weapon will double as a fork.

We just have to convince them to change it to Spork.


bookrat wrote:

A Battle Fork is likely going to be a Halfling racial weapon. Or at the very least the racial weapon will double as a fork.

We just have to convince them to change it to Spork.

double the damage et voìla, Spork


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Hey now, I'll have you know that the Steve-Bane Spork Stumbler feat is perfectly viable and is an unprecedented asset in my mid-afternoon gladiator game, I just need to make sure I get my special socks smuggled in


Dαedαlus wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
Here's hoping the feats have the 5e level of power to them and not the piddly little stepping stones that it felt like 90% of the PF1e feats were...
Yeah, I'd like to avoid all the feats that are like "Add +1 to CMB rolls to trip guys named Steve, while using a Battle Spork, if your socks match, on Tuesdays after 11:32am but before 5:48pm." Which does seem to be the vast majority. I'd prefer to get a tenth of the feat options if each one was useful instead of that kind of nonsense.

Related: can we get Battle Sporks in PF2? And have them be mechanically viable?

And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*

Gnomes are the answer to both these questions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
Dαedαlus wrote:


And what kind of monster wears socks that don't match?
*hides feet from view*
Gnomes are the answer to both these questions.

We need a "randomize socks" spell just in case.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I think people who are calling the new experience system too complicated are missing something important.

If I am understanding correctly, if your GM is using 1000 exp as the point you level up, and your level 1 cleric just got more experience that takes them to 1025 experience, they do not become a level 2 cleric with 1025 experience, they become a level 2 cleric with 25 experience. And when they hit 1000 again, they level up again.

This is why you can choose to have some levels go faster or slower than others; you only track experience for the current level, not all the past experience.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Redelia wrote:

I think people who are calling the new experience system too complicated are missing something important.

If I am understanding correctly, if your GM is using 1000 exp as the point you level up, and your level 1 cleric just got more experience that takes them to 1025 experience, they do not become a level 2 cleric with 1025 experience, they become a level 2 cleric with 25 experience. And when they hit 1000 again, they level up again.

This is why you can choose to have some levels go faster or slower than others; you only track experience for the current level, not all the past experience.

It's still more complicated than the current system of adding all the XP of the session and dividing it through party members. that's an easy step that takes a couple of seconds. you don't have to think about CR relations to the APL at all. If I have 10 encounters that session, every encounter with a different relation to the APL that takes a lot more time to figure out at the end of the session when you reward the XP


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Phantasmist wrote:
Is it just me or is naming everything feats confusing anybody else?

It's a feats-ure.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Quote:
It's still more complicated than the current system of adding all the XP of the session and dividing it through party members. that's an easy step that takes a couple of seconds. you don't have to think about CR relations to the APL at all. If I have 10 encounters that session, every encounter with a different relation to the APL that takes a lot more time to figure out at the end of the session when you reward the XP

You can figure out the XP reward when you put the encounter in...

It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.


KingOfAnything wrote:


It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.

It's easier in the current


Mark Seifter wrote:
Kain Gallant wrote:
Can any provide with some examples where a group would benefit from having a very flexible XP chart while still being a better option than story-based leveling?
Sure thing: Imagine a product that was basically a mega Kingmaker-style hex map full of cool secrets to find, enemies to fight, allies to make, resources to acquire, and more. Basically a giant sandbox. Suppose the sandbox had a few high level threats (the slumbering red wyrm under the mountain, etc) but was mostly in the mid-level range except for some lower level stuff around where the PCs start off, and the product even advises the GM what XP rate to use to match the content (you could also assume it was a GM homebrewing the sandbox campaign I describe instead). This allows the PCs freedom to explore at their pace in the order they choose while generally being at a good level to do so, while also providing something measurable for the PCs to use to gauge progress, since sandboxes can be much trickier to do story-based milestones than a more linear story game (to give one example of this, imagine you said "When the PCs discover the lich's castle, that's the milestone to hit level 10," and then they somehow stumble into it almost right away).

Good point, I see the usefulness now. I can see how you could use it to slow down the level progress while still retaining some sense of progression in-between levels. I probably didn't think about it this way since my group in my own sandbox game have been pretty predictable so far, hehe.


Hythlodeus wrote:
Redelia wrote:

I think people who are calling the new experience system too complicated are missing something important.

If I am understanding correctly, if your GM is using 1000 exp as the point you level up, and your level 1 cleric just got more experience that takes them to 1025 experience, they do not become a level 2 cleric with 1025 experience, they become a level 2 cleric with 25 experience. And when they hit 1000 again, they level up again.

This is why you can choose to have some levels go faster or slower than others; you only track experience for the current level, not all the past experience.

It's still more complicated than the current system of adding all the XP of the session and dividing it through party members. that's an easy step that takes a couple of seconds. you don't have to think about CR relations to the APL at all. If I have 10 encounters that session, every encounter with a different relation to the APL that takes a lot more time to figure out at the end of the session when you reward the XP

That's my biggest worry at the moment. I hope some clarification on how XP is rewarded comes soon.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Can... can we please have an EXP Bar on the character sheet that we can fill in as we gain EXP?


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:


It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.

It's easier in the current

We don't know anything about how XP is given out, only how much is needed to level and that the 1000 number is adjustable. If its as simple as Base 50, add 10 for every CR above, remove 10 for every CR below then that is numbers that can be done on the fly in your head regardless of the CRs in play and I can memorize immediately as a GM. Funnily enough I have not memorized all the xp values for the various things in Pathfinder, and have to either write them down when planning or look them up.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I'm actually surprised that they are not removing experience entirely from the new edition. Story leveling works so well, and if because you're in a sandbox it doesn't, you can either level up after a few sessions or when everyone seems to be getting bored with their character abilities and want more.

It's not the mathematical complexity of experience I'm objecting to, because I don't find it complex, it's the fact that experience point tracking leads to bad adventure writing. If you know that your players need to be level 4 to fight the next BBG, but they are level 3, if you are using experience, you need to put in 'filler' encounters to get them to the right level. Those filler encounters are almost never fun, or you would have had them already. They don't add to the story in any way. They are only there to satisfy the requirements of the experience table.

Scarab Sages

Redelia wrote:

I'm actually surprised that they are not removing experience entirely from the new edition. Story leveling works so well, and if because you're in a sandbox it doesn't, you can either level up after a few sessions or when everyone seems to be getting bored with their character abilities and want more.

It's not the mathematical complexity of experience I'm objecting to, because I don't find it complex, it's the fact that experience point tracking leads to bad adventure writing. If you know that your players need to be level 4 to fight the next BBG, but they are level 3, if you are using experience, you need to put in 'filler' encounters to get them to the right level. Those filler encounters are almost never fun, or you would have had them already. They don't add to the story in any way. They are only there to satisfy the requirements of the experience table.

I agree with this. I love story-based leveling.


Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:


It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.

It's easier in the current
We don't know anything about how XP is given out, only how much is needed to level and that the 1000 number is adjustable. If its as simple as Base 50, add 10 for every CR above, remove 10 for every CR below then that is numbers that can be done on the fly in your head regardless of the CRs in play and I can memorize immediately as a GM. Funnily enough I have not memorized all the xp values for the various things in Pathfinder, and have to either write them down when planning or look them up.

and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now


The good thing is, that there is a very loose connection between the rules of experience gain and everything else. This means that:

- People who like the new rules are good.
- For Games with story-based level-ups without xp, nothing changes at all
- As long as there is still a CR (which I don't know), everyone is free to use the old system in their home games.


Leyren wrote:


- As long as there is still a CR (which I don't know), everyone is free to use the old system in their home games.

If CR still works the same way, sure


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:


It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.

It's easier in the current
We don't know anything about how XP is given out, only how much is needed to level and that the 1000 number is adjustable. If its as simple as Base 50, add 10 for every CR above, remove 10 for every CR below then that is numbers that can be done on the fly in your head regardless of the CRs in play and I can memorize immediately as a GM. Funnily enough I have not memorized all the xp values for the various things in Pathfinder, and have to either write them down when planning or look them up.
and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now

Why wouldn't the CR just be printed there in that case? Either you are designing encounters yourself, at which point you are probably working out the CRs anyway or you are playing one printed in a book, in which case they will be written out for you. You are adding in steps to aid your argument, but they are steps you either won't have to take or would be doing regardless of new xp numbers or not.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Tallow wrote:
Redelia wrote:

I'm actually surprised that they are not removing experience entirely from the new edition. Story leveling works so well, and if because you're in a sandbox it doesn't, you can either level up after a few sessions or when everyone seems to be getting bored with their character abilities and want more.

It's not the mathematical complexity of experience I'm objecting to, because I don't find it complex, it's the fact that experience point tracking leads to bad adventure writing. If you know that your players need to be level 4 to fight the next BBG, but they are level 3, if you are using experience, you need to put in 'filler' encounters to get them to the right level. Those filler encounters are almost never fun, or you would have had them already. They don't add to the story in any way. They are only there to satisfy the requirements of the experience table.

I agree with this. I love story-based leveling.

I use Story based leveling but I enjoy having the EXP system as a sorta framework to compare my player's progress and adjust accordingly.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.


Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:


It's pretty easy to prefigure for this system.

It's easier in the current
We don't know anything about how XP is given out, only how much is needed to level and that the 1000 number is adjustable. If its as simple as Base 50, add 10 for every CR above, remove 10 for every CR below then that is numbers that can be done on the fly in your head regardless of the CRs in play and I can memorize immediately as a GM. Funnily enough I have not memorized all the xp values for the various things in Pathfinder, and have to either write them down when planning or look them up.
and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now
Why wouldn't the CR just be printed there in that case? Either you are designing encounters yourself, at which point you are probably working out the CRs anyway or you are playing one printed in a book, in which case they will be written out for you. You are adding in steps to aid your argument, but they are steps you either won't have to take or would be doing regardless of new xp numbers or not.

Hah, that's pretty easy to answer: The CR in the books/encounter (the number that's atached to the room theencounter is supposed to be) is supposed to be the CR for a group of 4 players with a certain point buy. Since my group is larger by design and we don't use point buy, theencounters have to be changed to reflect that. Usually by adding monsters, using the Advanced template, maxing hitpoints or combinations thereof. So the printed CR doesn't apply. It'seasier, both in prep and afterwards to take just the changed XP into account (in case of the Advanced template, I use software to apply it to save prep time - this software already gives you the new XP) than figuring out the new CR of the whole encounter (since the new CR number is irrelevant, the new XP number however is not)

So yes, the new XP system adds at least one more step to the prep in that I have to think about how adding or changing something from the prewritten text changes the CR the encounter provides to THEN use that information to figure out the XP.
In short: it is more complicated that way


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Malk_Content wrote:
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.

Alright, they don't know how to count either.

So, who is ready for spellcasting to go to 11!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BretI wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.

Alright, they don't know how to count either.

So, who is ready for spellcasting to go to 11!

Paizo announced 10th level spells. Incidentally, there are still 10 levels of spells; cantrips aren’t going to be 0th level spells anymore.

Scarab Sages

BretI wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.

Alright, they don't know how to count either.

So, who is ready for spellcasting to go to 11!

Contrary to past editions, Orisons/Cantrips are not considered a level of spell. Its an entirely different thing. While they are listed as 0-level spells, they aren't considered a level of spell.


QuidEst wrote:
BretI wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.

Alright, they don't know how to count either.

So, who is ready for spellcasting to go to 11!

Paizo announced 10th level spells. Incidentally, there are still 10 levels of spells; cantrips aren’t going to be 0th level spells anymore.

Honestly this part has been tripping me up the most; I always associate cantrips with the lowest level spells you can cast (and coincidentally can cast whenever you want), so the change in how cantrips are used is definitely tripping me up


TheAlicornSage wrote:

The ability to rule 0 a fix does not change the fact that the problem exists and needs a fix.

That's a great statement. That is actually VERY applicable to today and the redesign of PF2e. If the ability to rule 0 fixed everything that Paizo was trying to fix, there would be no need for PF2e in the sense of rules being redefined or changed.

I'd say if there is a problem, it is better to fix it in the rules than to rely that a GM is going to be able to rule 0 it easily during play.

That's probably one of the reasons for the playtest.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:


Snip for sanity.

Well different group size is easily covered by how it is already covered by adding or subtracting the considered APL based on whether you have more or less than standard. This is a calculation you are presumably doing anyway and only have to do when you add or remove a player from your group.

If you are using software anyway, why wouldn't new software designed for PF2.0 not include the CR of the whole encounter?


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Friendly Rogue wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
BretI wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
BretI wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:
I get the feeling the spells will be a lvl 1 feature that get better with your levels. If there's now 10 levels of spells, it would mean you could have a simple rule of "You can cast spells of level up to half your level, rounded up", skipping the need of a spell table. Isn't the number of spells you can cast now based on your stat or something? It's weird to have mainly an audio only live game as a source for the rules... You see the results, but not the full rules. Eh.

Um...there already are ten levels of spells in PF1 -- 0 to 9. Cantrips/orisons are still spells.

In Know Direction they mentions 10 spell levels AND cantrips.

Alright, they don't know how to count either.

So, who is ready for spellcasting to go to 11!

Paizo announced 10th level spells. Incidentally, there are still 10 levels of spells; cantrips aren’t going to be 0th level spells anymore.
Honestly this part has been tripping me up the most; I always associate cantrips with the lowest level spells you can cast (and coincidentally can cast whenever you want), so the change in how cantrips are used is definitely tripping me up

Their name warned you that could happen.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Milo v3 wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
You only use one table each time you level up.
That's the first time I've heard that interpretation of Paizo saying "you'll still be referencing only one advancement table". Especially since that interpretation requires more than one advancement table.

I suspect that it means all feats gained will be listed on one single table. Meaning you would not need to use a table like 3-1 Character Advancement and Level-Dependant Bonuses (page 30 in the first edition CRB) in addition to the table for your class, as all of that information will be on each class advancement table (level 2 wizard feat, level 3 general feat, level 4 wizard feat & ability point, etc.). No doubt most of us* have all played long enough that we forget to use table 3-1 as we just know you get a feat every odd level and an ability point every four levels. Multiclassing could make this a bit more complicated though.

* two of my players in their very first game of Pathfinder did forget to add feats and ability points, so that is likely why this change was added, and I think it is a good thing


Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


Snip for sanity.

Well different group size is easily covered by how it is already covered by adding or subtracting the considered APL based on whether you have more or less than standard. This is a calculation you are presumably doing anyway and only have to do when you add or remove a player from your group.

there is less calculation involved in that part from my side as is experience and rule of thumb, at least it was. NOW I actually would have to calculate, because... more complicated


I do think it's worth distinguishing between rules problems (or preferences) that are relatively easy to drop and those that require more effort.

The solution to "I don't like alignment" is to ignore it. The solution to "XP tracking is too much bookkeeping" is to use milestone leveling. Easy!

The solution to "characters' ability to solve problems out of combat is directly proportional to how magicy they are, and everyone in my group wants some balance on this front, but some of them want to play very magicy characters and some of them want to play very nonmagicy characters" is "use SoP/SoM/PoW," which required third party presses with a decade or more or rules mastery and experimentation to come up with completely different subsystems. It's not a great deal of effort now, as long as your table isn't allergic to 3PP, but it is precisely the thing that required somebody's effort to fix.

(A lot of the inevitable "trap" options probably fall into this bucket: as the community collectively learns, people will build guides so that enfranchised players know what the traps are. I don't build my characters for complete optimization, and indeed am very happy to take suboptimal choices for flavor, but I wouldn't dream of making a PF character without a class guide, just because of how easy it is to make a nonfunctional character.)

Or the original Truenamers: cool idea! By RAW, simply doesn't work. Nontrivial to fix.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


Snip for sanity.

Well different group size is easily covered by how it is already covered by adding or subtracting the considered APL based on whether you have more or less than standard. This is a calculation you are presumably doing anyway and only have to do when you add or remove a player from your group.

there is less calculation involved in that part from my side as is experience and rule of thumb, at least it was. NOW I actually would have to calculate, because... more complicated

If you were happy with rule of thumb in PF1 why aren't you happy using rule of thumb in PF2? If you wanted things to be precisely planned, you wouldn't be rule of thumbing it in PF1. Seems like you are measuring the games by different standards.


Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


Snip for sanity.

Well different group size is easily covered by how it is already covered by adding or subtracting the considered APL based on whether you have more or less than standard. This is a calculation you are presumably doing anyway and only have to do when you add or remove a player from your group.

there is less calculation involved in that part from my side as is experience and rule of thumb, at least it was. NOW I actually would have to calculate, because... more complicated
If you were happy with rule of thumb in PF1 why aren't you happy using rule of thumb in PF2? If you wanted things to be precisely planned, you wouldn't be rule of thumbing it in PF1. Seems like you are measuring the games by different standards.

I can rule of thumb it in PF, because I have 18 years of experience in doing so. I can use the same rule of thumb in PF2 (which I'd like to) and THEN would have to sit through calculating the new CR anyway to get to the amount of XP theencounter provides which is one step more per encounter than there was before


Hythlodeus wrote:


and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now

Or you could just look how the fight actually goes, and hand out an appropriate number of XP based on whether it was easy, moderate or hard for the PCs to win in play, and not worry about CR at all.


the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now
Or you could just look how the fight actually goes, and hand out an appropriate number of XP based on whether it was easy, moderate or hard for the PCs to win in play, and not worry about CR at all.

In a game in a discord server I run, a new GM once ignored a creature's CR for an encounter and, were it not for a PC running away, it would've resulted in a TPK.

CR, at least for me, is extremely important for gauging how difficult a potential encounter is for lower level parties and, depending on how difficult I want it to be, whether or not I should give leeway or save the encounter entirely for a later game. I'm not about to throw a CR 22 monster at a party of level 12 PCs unless I either give them a lot of assistance or expect them to get wiped.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:


and still I would have to go through every encounter to look up the CR before I even START counting XP, which is something that isn't necessarily needed now
Or you could just look how the fight actually goes, and hand out an appropriate number of XP based on whether it was easy, moderate or hard for the PCs to win in play, and not worry about CR at all.

That's an imprecise method of doing things, easily prone to mistakes, and requires a GM to be absolutely 100% confidence in their judgement. And by that logic, we might as well just toss out the numbers and go purely storytelling.

What we need is a solid framework by which we can use as a reference, and one that minimizes the amount of work we need to do. We can tweak up or down afterwards.

If we need to perform extra evaluation and calculation in the new system that we didn't need to do beforehand, then I fail to see how that is an improvement.


On the new XP system-

Personally I stopped tracking XP a long time ago, just because it was a lot of bookkeeping for no real gain.

Considering that the new XP system can be easily phrased as "percentage of what you need for a new level" (10 XP = 1%), I might start again. Honestly though I might lop off a zero and make it 100 xp per level. Or three zeros so its 1 XP per level and just hand out fractional XP. It's just a matter of aesthetics since it's all the same.


Me: "Let's see, encounter one today was pretty easy...hmm... *makes notes*, encounter two: Shaman, you dropped below 0 HP and the Wizard had to use a hail mary spell, so, it was challenging, I guess? encounter three, well, you had no troubles with encounter three, right?"
Player One: "What? I lost half my HP!"
Player Two: "The Cleric had to channel two times!"
Player Three: "Which of those encounters was the third one again? The one with the Medusa?"
Me: "Okay, let's call it moderatly challenging then."
Player Two: "We could have died!"
Me: "That's true for all encounters. Death is the usual risk of fighting with pointy weapons."
Player Five: "You just want to give us more XP, even though we earned it!"
Me: "Look, neither of you were in any trouble during that fight. It might have pulled a few resources, but.."
Player One: "I spent most of my Resonance points! I can't even read my scroll of Life Bubble anymore. THIS FIGHT MADE ME FORGET HOW TO READ!!!"
Player Three: "We're still talking about the Medusa fight, right?"
Me: "There wasn't even a Medusa in today's session."
Player One: "I'm basically illiterate at the moment!"
Me: "Okay, F*** it! You level up again... Like every session. 500 XP for the encounters, 200 XP for roleplay, 300 XP to leave my kitchen and not come back until next week!"


You guys are making a lot of assumptions that they didn't already account for the VERY OBVIOUS issue of lots of math being a headache, and come up with a simple system for determining and awarding XP. I'd be extremely surprised and disappointed honestly if they somehow missed that this could be a problem. Just wait for the playtest document.

As for XP being weird for players of different levels... if players are at different levels that is usually a problem that was created by house rules and rule 0 to begin with. The default assumption is usually that every character has the same number of XP and levels up together. If your DM forces a player to start their replacement character for their dead PC at a lower level than the rest of the party, that's a house rule. If your DM is giving out roleplaying XP to some players and not others and creating an imbalance, that's a house rule. In implementing those house rules, the DM should be prepared to also deal with and fix the problems they cause.

That said, just due to Organized Play with drop-in drop-out players, it would be nice to have a simple rule for addressing XP for characters of different levels in the same party. And again, it would be really weird if they somehow missed this. So I wouldn't worry too much about it for now. If the playtest document comes out and it's a mathy mess, THEN you should definitely start complaining.

451 to 500 of 579 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Leveling Up! All Messageboards