NyarIathotep's page

5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Personally, I love the character creation. All of the options are amazing. However, I do hope that there will be options in the future for speeding the process up, such as by including pregenerated characters in the core book (such as in Pugmire) or by including quick build suggestions (such as in 5e). For new players, it would be great to know what gear each class should spend their 150 silver on, or what level 1 feats are the simplest to play with, because as much as the character creation makes sense and provides lots of fun options - it takes time and a lot of reading.


On page 176, the armour lists "Full Plate (Level 2)". Does anyone know what the level 2 refers to? No other item seems to have anything similar. Is there going to be a better, level 1 version of full plate? Because that would be nice, considering how level 2 full plate seems to be in every way worse than the cheaper half-plate, given how easy it is to get a dex bonus of 14 with the new attribute system.


Page 283, in "Expert Wizard Spellcasting", the text reads "At 8th level, add two level 6 spells to your spellbook, and you gain a level 6 spell slot that you can use to prepare a level 6 spell from your spellbook." while the prerequisite for the feat is 12th level. As much as I would love to be casting 6th level spells as early as level 12 because of something I retroactively got at level 8, this should probably be corrected.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I immediately noticed the similarity between class feats and 4e powers, and my gut reaction was to hate it, because I had hated how 4e had executed powers. However, as I read through the feats themselves, I found that pathfinder seems to have executed the feats much better than 4e had executed powers. First of all, it keeps the same general intent of allowing each class to have a variety of playstyles from the getgo - whether you're a fighter, barbarian, wizard, or druid, you're sure to have several interesting options as early as level one, and I think that's a good thing even if it makes character creation a little longer. Furthermore, unlike 4e, different combinations of powers are actually completely valid, and it's completely reasonable to double back and get lower-level powers that you missed the first time around, whereas 4e powers were grouped into arbitrary "talent trees" that really only amounted to each class having two or three possible archetypes, with mixing and matching being a surefire way of making a useless character. Because each feat is designed to be interesting and stand on its own, it's a lot more possible to customize characters.

Of course, character customization was also possible in Pathfinder 1 through the use of archetypes and multiclassing, but I think that PF2 executes it better, because you no longer need to worry about cross-referencing what archetypes are mutually exclusive because of what replaces what ability. Modularity is built right into the core classes, making it a lot easier for a casual player to customize a character.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I loved the idea of multiple tiers of proficiency when I read about it on the blog, but reading the actual book, it's actually very underwhelming when compared to the the fact that every level, all of your rolls go up by one, no matter whether it's something you ought to be good at or not.

Let's say we have a level 7 rogue who has reached Master level of proficiency in deception, and has a charisma of 20. She's a darn good liar, with a proficiency bonus of her level (7) +2 (Master) +5 (charisma) for a total of +14.

Now let's say we have a level 20 dwarven wizard with a charisma of 8, who is untrained in deception. Her proficiency bonus alone, despite being untrained, is 18, because being untrained still lets you add your entire level -2 to your skill check, and even with the lowest possible charisma in the game, this dwarf is still a better liar than the above rogue.

This also makes the age-old dilemma of 1000 orcs vs one high level fighter even sillier, especially considering that you add your "proficiency" to your AC now, which effectively translates to adding your level to your AC. Even in Pathfinder 1, the fighter would win, but now the fighter's going to win without getting hit at all even if she's only wearing padded armour. Heck, now a high level bard with no spells prepared and wielding a sharpened stick could wade through that many orcs, just because her level gives her such a high bonus to _everything_.

Anywho, for folks who are also finding this getting on their nerves, the fix that I'm planning on running at my home table is just to remove the factor of level from proficiency bonuses, and to increase the difference between levels of proficiency to 2 per shift instead of 1. (Untrained: -2. Trained, 0, Expert, +2, Master, +4, Legendary, +6). I think that the built-in restrictions between what level you can become a master or legend should be enough to ensure that a level 7 character is still going to be better at the things that she's good at than a level 1 character is.