What do you like about Pathfinder?


Prerelease Discussion

51 to 53 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

For me it's definitely the amount of character ideas that you can make; like Helvellyn I don't like how deep you have to dig to get some ideas working, but you CAN do it and this matters to me.

The system has let me create a holy-themed arcane blaster with angel wings and strong diplomatic skills, plus a bit of healing and buffing, who can win fights with non-lethal damage if desired... and it's all lore-supported too!

It also lets me make an agile and intelligent scimitar fighter who (wait, don't tune me out just yet, I promise this has a plot twist) can mix melee and magic well... but in return for trading off a bit of firepower, this character can also do diplomacy and stage acting while accompanied by a cute yet useful familiar.

Heck, it even supports 'singing at evil to hinder it and help allies do better' thanks to the Argent Dramaturge (love the art for that class, by the way).

All very flashy, colorful, expressive ideas. I'm delighted I was able to make them! Hopefully PF2E will support porting them over mostly intact.


Dαedαlus wrote:

With the announcement of 2e, and everybody talking about what they do and don't want to make it into the new edition, I figured it would be best to have a discussion about the most important thing of all:

Why do you play Pathfinder?

Why not 5e? Why not 3.0? Why not Star Wars d20, or Shadowrun, or Midgard, or any of the other RPGs out there? What is it that 2.0 really needs to keep in order for it to still feel like Pathfinder, and to maintain what it is you love about the system?

Personally, I love the complexity and the depth. I love looking for the best way to get an extra +1 to attack, how to maximize my ability scores, and looking for just the right options to make my character just the way I want it. Not *almost* the way I want it. *Exactly* the way I want it. It's the technical side of the game that I love about PF.

What about you all? What sorts of things keep you playing?

I play Pathfinder - I also play 5e!

Pathfinder scratches the complexity itch for making highly detailed characters. There's a part of me that loves simplified, dynamic combat rules, but also loves tweaking every feat, skill point, and trait. I love in PF building a character who knows a lot about the skills of an adventuring life, but also has a couple of skill points in Profession (Baker), and Profession (Midwife), and Craft (Brewing), because my character was all of those things before they became an adventurer. That's very hard to accomplish in 5e with the basic rules, because you get one background.

Conversely, I dislike the plodding feeling I get in PF combat - I get one action, and one move, and sometimes not even that if the action is too complex. It's one thing that I like about the Playtest rules.

I do worry a bit about the new skill system for that reason, if it turns out it's not possible to be very nuanced with skill choice, it will be a bit of a disappointment. I do like what I'm seeing about:
1) the action economy
2) spell scaling revisions
3) the feat / class feat breakdown (I was a big fan of the concept in d20 Modern and in the PF Rogue/Alchemist classes)
4) the magic item and equipment revisions (not necessarily resonance, but the changes to make them feel more unique)

I do worry about:
A) the new proficiency changes
B) Resonance

So far, it's been positive. As long as there are classes, races/ancestry, and people endlessly fighting about optimization, it'll feel like PF to me. :)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
ENHenry wrote:

I do worry a bit about the new skill system for that reason, if it turns out it's not possible to be very nuanced with skill choice, it will be a bit of a disappointment. I do like what I'm seeing about:

1) the action economy
2) spell scaling revisions
3) the feat / class feat breakdown (I was a big fan of the concept in d20 Modern and in the PF Rogue/Alchemist classes)
4) the magic item and equipment revisions (not necessarily resonance, but the changes to make them feel more unique)

I do worry about:
A) the new proficiency changes
B) Resonance

So far, it's been positive. As long as there are classes, races/ancestry, and people endlessly fighting about optimization, it'll feel like PF to me. :)

I’m in complete agreement here.

I like Pathfinder for its flexibility, it’s APs and it’s excellent parent company, Paizo.

51 to 53 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / What do you like about Pathfinder? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion