Ancestry and Class Surveys

Monday, September 17, 2018

Creating a playtest process for a game as complicated as Pathfinder has been a challenge unto itself. While we knew that we needed robust play data from all of you, which took the form of Doomsday Dawn, we also wanted to grab wider-ranging feedback based on not only your experience at the table, but also your time spent reading the book, building characters, and dreaming up new adventures.

So, today we're launching the first of our Game Feedback Surveys, starting with the Ancestry and Backgrounds Survey and the truly massive Class Survey. But before you go rushing off to take these surveys, there are a few things you should know.

First off, you should note that you can take each of these surveys only once, though you can choose to leave a survey and come back to complete it later (until we close the surveys at the end of the playtest). This might be useful for the Class Survey in particular, which is quite lengthy and could be difficult to finish in one sitting, and which is also divided into sections for each class.

Second, you don't have to answer every question in these surveys. The Class Survey asks you if you want to give feedback on a class before displaying those questions, allowing you to skip classes entirely if you find that you don't have any feedback on their theme or mechanics. You can also skip questions that you find aren't relevant to your experience (although we've tried to provide response options for you to clarify this as well).

Finally, while you don't have to answer every question, it's still important that you go all the way to the end of the survey, as there are several important questions that come later on.

So, if you think you're ready, go on over and take these surveys using the following links! We're looking forward to hearing what you think!

Ancestry & Backgrounds Survey | Classes Survey

If you have more open ended comments or feedback, you can take these surveys to give us more detailed commentary on the rules.

Open Response Ancestry and Background Survey | Open Response Class Survey

Tune back in here in the coming weeks as we add even more surveys to the mix, which will ask about your view on various game mechanics and monster design!

A Note on Playtests

Just to recap some of what we talked about on the Paizo Twitch stream on Friday, I wanted to take a moment to talk about the playtest as a process. Some of you have begun to notice that the Doomsday Dawn adventure feels a bit different that the adventures you're used to seeing. This is intentional—each part of Doomsday Dawn is specifically designed to stress test one or more facets of the game. This means you might see encounters with the same theme repeated multiple times at various challenge levels, or that every encounter in one part of the adventure might share a common element. It might also mean that some of the fights are beyond challenging.

Making the best version of Pathfinder that we can means finding where the current system breaks. In some cases, we need you to do that, so that we can figure out where the line actually is. But it's equally important to the data collection process that playtesters not know what those goals actually are until the test is over, since to do so any other way would bias the results.

The design team offers our sincerest thanks to everyone for helping us with this rigorous process. We promise to pay for resurrections and therapy for your poor PCs when this is all over.

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

Join the Pathfinder Playtest designers every Friday throughout the playtest on our Twitch Channel to hear all about the process and chat directly with the team.

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest
1 to 50 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

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

I have read the 1.2 Update and remain totally opposed to the existing dying rules. It baffles me how the DC of the foe causing a PC to go to Dying 1 has anything to do with how the PC recovers from that condition. While the foe may have delivered the damage, it was the damage itself that caused the PC to go to Dying 1. Example: PC has been in combat with several foes and has 6HP remaining. A foe hits him for 7 damage. Why should it matter for recovery purposes whether the foe was a DC 20 monster delivering a claw attack or a DC 15 goblin rogue who stabbed him for the damage?
I would suggest the following recovery rule: Base DC = 10; add the amount of damage beyond reducing the PC to 0. Thus, in the above case, the DC would be 10 + 1. If you want the difficulty to be higher, raise the base DC to 15.
This solution recognizes that recovery from dying requires exceptional effort FROM THE PC.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If we are submitting Class feedback, would it not be prudent to wait until we can assess the remaining Multiclass Archetypes?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Although a bit rough at times, it has been fun to Playtest. My players certainly seem to be enjoying it and like playing characters of different levels in a short span of time.

Thanks to the Paizo staff for making the effort of listening to our feedback during this time! I do feel that you guys are making an honest effort to incorporate it into your vision of the game and being transparent while you are at it.

I look forward to the evolution of the rules as time goes on.


23 people marked this as a favorite.

This race survey feels terrible.

'Dwarf: How satisfied were you with this ancestry's basic statistics?'
'Hit Points
Speed
Ability boosts
Ability flaw
Languages
Darkvision'

Where is the option for 'this is like water being wet, I experience no satisfaction, but am not asking you to change it'?

I want to express my utter apathy for some of these things, and I don't feel I am given that option. My main complaint, on races, is that they are bland and samey, mechanically.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

Continued dissatisfaction with the survey itself:

'Several dwarf features from 1st edition are now acquired through ancestry feats instead of being gained automatically. This includes their bonuses against giants, goblins, and orcs; a bonus to saves against poison; a bonus to appraise some items; bonuses to resist being pushed or tripped; weapon familiarity; and stonecunning. What do you think of this change?'

'I like this change.

I like that these features aren't mandatory, but I think spending a feat for them is too high a cost.

I prefer all dwarves gain these features.'

Where is 'a mix of 2 and 3, depending on which of that list you're talking about'? How many people have the same opinion on all of those... 6 features?


25 people marked this as a favorite.

Its a real shame the surveys don't have an option for "I am a GM but helped/had a player who played this race/class" and "I am a GM and did not have a player who played this race/class" as right now as a GM it feels like my thoughts will be lesser due to not having played the specifics even if I've seen them in action and gone on deep explorations of the mechanics/themes with players who needed help.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

In the Class survey on the Alchemist section, Perfect Medicine is not listed as an option in the question "Select the level 16–20 feat you think is the most powerful."


11 people marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:
Its a real shame the surveys don't have an option for "I am a GM but helped/had a player who played this race/class" and "I am a GM and did not have a player who played this race/class" as right now as a GM it feels like my thoughts will be lesser due to not having played the specifics even if I've seen them in action and gone on deep explorations of the mechanics/themes with players who needed help.

Agree completely with this as a fellow GM.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Wandering Wastrel wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Its a real shame the surveys don't have an option for "I am a GM but helped/had a player who played this race/class" and "I am a GM and did not have a player who played this race/class" as right now as a GM it feels like my thoughts will be lesser due to not having played the specifics even if I've seen them in action and gone on deep explorations of the mechanics/themes with players who needed help.
Agree completely with this as a fellow GM.

Yup for all these questions it looks like I've not actually played ANY of the playtest, but I have.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Survey wrote:
43. Goblins' ability scores changed from from 1st edition. In that edition, they had a bonus to Dexterity and penalties to Strength and Charisma. In the Playtest, they have boosts to Dexterity and Charisma with a flaw in Strength. What do you think of this change?

Um... goblins have a flaw in wisdom in the playtest, not strength.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

So in the ancestry survey it asks "what class did you choose". I have three characters who are dwarves, should I just pick one to talk about?


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

Also, a lot of questions didn't have the answer I wanted.

For example, asking what I thought about racial features, the desired answer I wanted to give was:

"Some of these features should be given to the Ancestry automatically, but some should be optional. For instance, any racial feature tied to genetics should be granted to the race for free, but any that could be described as 'racial stereotypes' should be optional."

I'd like a system where the "stereotypes" are just a pile of traits that a character can pick from at level 1. (Who says your Elf wasn't raised by Dwarves?)

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So in the ancestry survey it asks "what class did you choose". I have three characters who are dwarves, should I just pick one to talk about?

Mine's even worse because I played a half-elf, half-orc, and a regular human. If I answer for both of those, it'll be a whole bunch of different checkboxes that should be mutually exclusive.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The ancestry survey had questions about which races we wanted later, so why did the survey about classes not have questions about which classes we wanted later?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thflame wrote:

Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I only went partway through the ancestry survey, because I don't have as much information as I will once I finish playing all the characters. But the bit about the ancestry feats was also disappointing in that it lacked the option to comment on the way they're spread out over levels. Is this something that is brought up later in the survey, or just an oversight? Because that's one of my biggest problems with ancestries as they exist now.

So yeah, I think I have to agree with several of the other posters in saying the survey seems flawed. Which is highly problematic. A flawed survey gives flawed results.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

16 people marked this as a favorite.

The background survey misses an important thing: whether having only 1 feat choice is ok for a background.

For me, it is not. As of now, by choosing a thematic background I typically end up with a totally crap feat (such as Assurance) that I can't replace. Other backgrounds have good stuff. As a result, I typically choose backgrounds for mechanical reason, so the very idea of "background" actually gets dumped into numbers.

Backgrounds are bad ways to force ppl pick useless feats such as Assurance or Forager. Players at least need to have some choice on that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
dnoisette wrote:
thflame wrote:

Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
dnoisette wrote:
thflame wrote:

Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.

I disagree. ANYTHING should be an appropriate option for a PC. (Maybe with level adjustment.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Another question, not on the survey:

What do you think of Sorcerer's limited spontaneous heightening?

Answer: It shouldn't be limited, or else the wizard should have to learn every spell he wants for every level individually.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, survey on the backgrounds could use a part about what other stuff can be added to backgrounds: extra languages, access or proficiency with uncommon/exotic stuff, Adopted Heritage options etc.etc.

The adoption stuff SHOULD be a background thing, available at 1st level only - not a general feat that you can't get until lvl 3 minimum. What is it, you advance to 3rd level (or 11th elvel, for that matter) in an adventuring class - and suddenly elves adopt you? These mechanics are so much anti-rp.


Looking forward to doing the class survey when I get a chance to play more of the classes, but I agree with some of the people saying the ancestries survey's a bit flawed. I don't think it's as bad as the other people say it is, but I did have moments where I felt I lacked the nuance to express places where (such as when evaluating ancestry feats as a whole) there might be a couple interesting options and the rest not all that interesting, or the like, but I can't really say anything to the effect of "This feat and that feat are interesting, but If I were playing upwards of level 9, it stops being that interesting" or "While individual feats can be interesting, the fact that not enough of them are as interesting, it makes the interestingness of the feats as a whole lower as I feel like I'm not choosing from a list of equally valid options"


Pathfinder Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
thflame wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
dnoisette wrote:
thflame wrote:

Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.

I disagree. ANYTHING should be an appropriate option for a PC. (Maybe with level adjustment.)

Not anything -- being a full deity (at the high end) or a creature with an intelligence score less than 3 or even non-existent (at the low end) probably would not be appropriate. Towards the middle, deep one hybrids are a "player" race with a crippling weakness that would make them unsuitable for nearly all campaigns.

But drow? Why not?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I strongly feel like both races and classes should have one mechanic or characteristic that helps define them. It should ties all their characteristics together and helps set them apart from others. I don't feel that with the current playtest.

There's also the issue with disparity. All of the classes have the same progression of abilities. However, many of the classes don't receive anything in exchange for not having spellcasting or proficiencies that other classes do. For example, martials have roughly the same number of proficiencies and abilities as most of the spellcasting classes. Wizards and sorcerers get almost nothing in exchange for the armor/weapon proficiencies, skills, and other perks that clerics, bards, and druids have.

The paladin also loses a lot of narrative moments when their iconic smite evil ability is replaced with a situational reaction that has a significant antipattern in its gameplay.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

As I stated over and over. My first impression on Ancestry gave me IMMENSE hope for what they could've been.

I was thinking that I would be able to pick feats that would enhance my character culturally and allowing the possibility of making characters raised by other ancestries just by making some choices, while having my biological features remaining the same as 1e or maybe even having them re-balanced to be more interesting and stronger (in the cases of the races that needed the boost).

Instead, we've got watered down versions of interesting races before and the ones less appealing just got even worse. Also, I love playing humans but Natural Ambition and General Training are way too insane compared to anything else in the game and it will only get better over time with new feats. So I suggest you guys start thinking of new solutions to this because in PF1e Humans were already too strong because of this. I would go as far as to say that is more reasonable to give 3 Free ability boosts and get rid of these two feats and change the necessary things from there.

Just to leave my thoughts here since the surveys didn't have the option.

Please, please. Reserve Heritage feat for hugely impactful things in the ancestry, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs is a very good direction but it makes no sense that you need to wait until level 5 to get your first half-elf feat, that's straight up taxing. Since I'm on this point already, give us at least 3 feats from the start and cut back the feats later down the line and if they absolutely must exist, then create new feats that enhance the ones you already got or things that give you plenty of new options, you know... Things that show your progress over time.

Ancestry can be the best part of the system, but they need a complete overhaul on implementation and evaluation of what they can and should do. Adding more depth to the biology and history of these new ancestries can give a lot of room for heritage and cultural feats.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When judging power and how interesting things are in comparison to each other can we get the option to set multiple answers to the same level, to mean "those things excite me to the same level" or "they are equally bland"?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thflame wrote:
I disagree. ANYTHING should be an appropriate option for a PC. (Maybe with level adjustment.)

I'm of the opinion that any ancestry which can literally only be a single alignment is inappropriate. Like Pathfinder canonically has more non-CE Succubi than non-CE Drow.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I also wish they could understand, regarding feats, that in order to be a powerful option, it needs to be something that can be guaranteed to be used in EVERY combat, or near so, everything else that is too situational should just be tacked on additions to a powerful option, like say, two situational abilities (like a bonus vs one enemy type) and a powerful one.

Also, if you gain a stance, in order to be meaningful, you need to get two different ones at the same time, so you have tactical depth.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Glancing through the Ancestry Survey, won't submit until I'm farther into the playtest.

  • No Kitsune for future races we might like to see? They could be particularly interesting with higher-level ancestry feats allowing them to grow more tails & get related magic/abilities. [One of the first things I thought about when I heard that all races were getting Ancestry feats was how particular high-level racial feats like Aasimar/Sylph flying would be represented.]
  • Also no elemental planetouched races? (Ifrit, Oread, Sylph, Undine). While they'd probably work best as a heritage feat taken by any race, so would Aasimar/Tieflings, and those got on the list.
  • Very intrigued to see some of the completely new options on the list of future races we'd like to see. Here's hoping the new system is flexible enough to handle more oddball races like pixie/sprite (especially if that means diminutive sized sprites..)
  • I am very happy to see some of the more controversial topics appearing as questions here (like should goblins be in core). Will be intriguing to hear how those turn out.


  • 1 person marked this as a favorite.

    These are very long surveys. I'm curious about your drop out rate, how many folks start but don't complete them.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    David knott 242 wrote:
    thflame wrote:
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    dnoisette wrote:
    thflame wrote:

    Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

    This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

    Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

    Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.

    I disagree. ANYTHING should be an appropriate option for a PC. (Maybe with level adjustment.)

    Not anything -- being a full deity (at the high end) or a creature with an intelligence score less than 3 or even non-existent (at the low end) probably would not be appropriate. Towards the middle, deep one hybrids are a "player" race with a crippling weakness that would make them unsuitable for nearly all campaigns.

    But drow? Why not?

    Well, because Drow isn't a race. There's not going to be a Race of Drow, because Drow is a Heritage. Unless Heritage feats get ripped from the game in their entirety (which I don't want to see, because I'm excited to see what Human Heritage feats for the different ethnicities like Ulfen and Varisian look like) then when you want to play a Drow, you'll take the Drow Heritage feat on an Elf.

    Paizo Employee Designer

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    LuniasM wrote:
    In the Class survey on the Alchemist section, Perfect Medicine is not listed as an option in the question "Select the level 16–20 feat you think is the most powerful."

    Thanks for catching this. Fixed now!


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

    Went through some of the class surveys and I'm a bit disappointed. There were no options to say things like "All of the feats on this tier are boring"

    There also wasn't an opportunity to comment on the Paladin's new role as a babysitter.


    10 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber

    I'm really scratching my head on how this survey is set up. For example, the survey asks what you think the best feat from 1-6 is for a class. But this fails to capture:
    - Which class feats seemed underpowered or overpowered or difficult to understand, and why.
    - What levels seemed to have obvious or unsatisfying options.
    - That the level 6 feats are going to mostly be better than the level 1 feats.

    It feels frustrating that I went through the entirety of the alchemist portion of the survey and I left no meaningful feedback. Nothing about how, for example:
    - Being limited by resonance was more stressful than being limited by spells, because resonance was tied to my emergency survivability.
    - I felt pigeonholed into bombs, because my combat contribution was otherwise negligible.
    - Mutagens come in too late and have awkward and clumsy mechanics until high levels.
    - Etc etc.

    Not to mention questions like: "Which feat from 1-6 is the most powerful?" never shows the full picture. For example, for Alchemist, is Precise Bombs the most powerful 1-6 feat? Every bombing alchemist needs it to avoid incurring the wrath of their party. But every bombing alchemist that picks Precise Bombs also needs Quick Bomber in order to have a chance of dealing reasonable damage, and Debilitating Bombs to supplement their damage with debuffs. Which of these is the most powerful? No idea.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    When I finished survey about alchemist and tried to move to next class, the survey repeatedly sent me back to the initial page. I'll try again tomorrow.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.
    Logan Bonner wrote:
    LuniasM wrote:
    In the Class survey on the Alchemist section, Perfect Medicine is not listed as an option in the question "Select the level 16–20 feat you think is the most powerful."
    Thanks for catching this. Fixed now!

    Likewise, the new 20th level feat for Bards added in eratta, Virtuoso's Brilliance, is not listed in the similar question for Bards.

    As it gives access to the 10th level Occult spells, it absolutely would have been my choice for most powerful 20th level Bard feat.


    6 people marked this as a favorite.
    Remy P Gilbeau wrote:
    David knott 242 wrote:
    thflame wrote:
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    dnoisette wrote:
    thflame wrote:

    Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

    This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

    Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

    Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.

    I disagree. ANYTHING should be an appropriate option for a PC. (Maybe with level adjustment.)

    Not anything -- being a full deity (at the high end) or a creature with an intelligence score less than 3 or even non-existent (at the low end) probably would not be appropriate. Towards the middle, deep one hybrids are a "player" race with a crippling weakness that would make them unsuitable for nearly all campaigns.

    But drow? Why not?

    Well, because Drow isn't a race. There's not going to be a Race of Drow, because Drow is a Heritage. Unless Heritage feats get ripped from the game in their entirety (which I don't want to see, because I'm excited to see what Human Heritage feats for the different ethnicities like Ulfen and Varisian look like) then when you want to play a Drow, you'll take the Drow Heritage feat on an Elf.

    Heritage Feats are bad.

    Here! Let's tax you a feat just to play the race you want to play!


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
    Cyrad wrote:

    Wizards and sorcerers get almost nothing in exchange for the armor/weapon proficiencies, skills, and other perks that clerics, bards, and druids have.

    I'm pretty much of the opinion that fighter dedication is a 2nd level feat tax for these classes. The unarmored and unarmed wizard of PF1 is just a bad idea in this edition. One feat to fix the glaring problems with your class? Yes please!


    Class Survey is broken - cannot progress past Monk


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I agree with others that having to pick the "most powerful" feat within a set level range is not straightforward nor does it seem particularly helpful. In some cases, feats can be strong for build A but weak for build B. Also, generally speaking, yeah the highest-level feats are going to be the strongest.

    The lack of even a general "how satisfied are you with the power of the class feats presented in the playtest" and "how satisfied are you with the diversity available in the class feats presented in the playtest" for each class is disappointing, as those are my two biggest issues with 2nd edition.

    Liberty's Edge

    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    dnoisette wrote:
    thflame wrote:

    Why weren't Drow an option for a future race? That would have been my number one pick, as my favorite character is a drow.

    This, I kept looking for Drow and couldn't even believe it wasn't available when I could not even remember what some of the races on offer actually were.

    Isn't the Golarion canon that Drow are inherently evil in that they have been tainted by Rovagug and in case they somehow get over being evil and are cleansed of the aforementioned taint, they cease to be Drow?

    Doesn't really seem appropriate for a PC option.

    That may be, but plenty of folks play Pathfinder but don’t use Golarion as thier campaign setting, so that should not be relevant. Plus, the Pathfinder rule set is not the same as the Golarion setting, so Golarion-specific rules really should not be baked into the core Pathfinder rules in any case

    Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

    25 people marked this as a favorite.

    Hey there folks,

    We want to thanks folks for going through these lengthy surveys here so quickly. It also appears that some of you are having issue with the surveys not asking questions about topics that you want to weigh in on....

    Well, I have some good news.

    We actually do have some open response surveys for the ancestries, backgrounds, and classes, allowing you to tell us a bit about your experiences and opinions in a free form manner. Writing survey questions to cover all of the bases is an incredibly challenging task, but these allow to cover any bases we might have missed.

    Sorry they were not up at launch here today. There were a few crossed wires on our side... I will post an update with links when they are live.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Marc Radle wrote:
    That may be, but plenty of folks play Pathfinder but don’t use Golarion as thier campaign setting, so that should not be relevant. Plus, the Pathfinder rule set is not the same as the Golarion setting, so Golarion-specific rules really should not be baked into the core Pathfinder rules in any case

    I believe one of the major changes for Pathfinder 2nd edition is that the core rules are no longer setting neutral. So things like "Clerics of philosophies" are right out. If you want to run a game in a setting which is not the default one, you will need to change some things.

    But since the bestiary will almost surely have rules for building all sorts of nasty things using PC rules (for major antagonists who happen to be a specific type of thing), it'll be easy to lift those for PC rules without giving explicit PC support.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    After fighting with the surveys for quite some time to get in there, I finally managed to get it to collect my data: do NOT include alchemist, absolutely positively 500x do not include goblin, and I do not like backgrounds. Backgrounds should be story, not mechanical. Never combine them. (If I wanted that funless pull-by-the-ear I'd consider D&D 5e...)


    7 people marked this as a favorite.
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    Marc Radle wrote:
    That may be, but plenty of folks play Pathfinder but don’t use Golarion as thier campaign setting, so that should not be relevant. Plus, the Pathfinder rule set is not the same as the Golarion setting, so Golarion-specific rules really should not be baked into the core Pathfinder rules in any case

    I believe one of the major changes for Pathfinder 2nd edition is that the core rules are no longer setting neutral. So things like "Clerics of philosophies" are right out. If you want to run a game in a setting which is not the default one, you will need to change some things.

    But since the bestiary will almost surely have rules for building all sorts of nasty things using PC rules (for major antagonists who happen to be a specific type of thing), it'll be easy to lift those for PC rules without giving explicit PC support.

    If Golarion Lore is a requirement for this system, then that's something that needs to change.

    I'm fine with using your lore to give examples and design your APs, but it should not be automatically assumed that you are using Golarion lore when you play PF2.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    The class survey resets to the first page after a few classes. You can go through the class pages again and your options have been noted, but when you get to the last page you already filled out, all your stuff is gone and it is a dice roll if the second time around it will take or you will get booted back again to the first page. I suffered through this from the Monk to the Ranger, but now I'm getting tired of going through dozens of pages only to get thrown back to the first one. Could this please get fixed ASAP?

    Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    magnuskn wrote:
    The class survey resets to the first page after a few classes. You can go through the class pages again and your options have been noted, but when you get to the last page you already filled out, all your stuff is gone and it is a dice roll if the second time around it will take or you will get booted back again to the first page. I suffered through this from the Monk to the Ranger, but now I'm getting tired of going through dozens of pages only to get thrown back to the first one. Could this please get fixed ASAP?

    That is very odd. We will look into the survey logic to see if there is a problem floating in there... otherwise we will have to kick this up to surveymonkey to fix. Can you tell us specifically where this happened and what occurred?


    It happened to me after Monk

    1 to 50 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Ancestry and Class Surveys All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.