| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, something I have seen happen time and time again is that people tend to focus on the things we don't like. This is normal, and human.
The unfortunate side effect is that it can be rather emotionally draining as a creator to only see lists of things that people don't like about the creation you have spent days pouring your energy and soul into.
The purpose of this thread then is to give the designers a place to come when their betteries are drained, and get some positive feedback.
Beyond just that, it helps to know what people are enjoying, and liking, and why they are liking it, so you can give them more of it.
Lets keep this to a positive thread, and tell the designers what we are liking, and if you can explain why you like it that would be great too I am sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. I really like the fact that so far the system just seems streamlined.
All the actions are the same action. There is no more remembering what my 7 different actions are and "Did I do my immediate action last turn? How does that effect my swift this turn again?"
2. The way feats seem to be working now.
I really like that the terms have been grouped and the talk of nice easily searchable lists of the feats is really interesting. I love that feats seem to be focused on options now rather than just bonuses to things you could already do.
3. Ancestry as a whole intrigues me. I love the fact that it introduces a whole lot more variance into the races of Galorion. I also am loving the floating stat bonus we are seeing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I must admit in general i am rather optimistc about Pathfinder 2nd edition. Despite some of the "controversies" i think the system they provide is going to be interesting and not lose that much Depth despite the streamlining.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually happy about almost everything we've seen. Some examples:
1. I also like the streamlined nature of things. 3 Actions, yes, but also the +Level to everything. That just makes leveling so much easier. I'm not 100% sold on its implementation with skills but I'm completely aboard on everything else and hopeful even there.
2. I like the standardization of class structure. This is sorta part of #1 above, but again it will just make leveling things so much easier, especially for new/less mechanics savvy players.
3. I like most of the Class Stuff we've seen so far, though it's tricky to say for sure absent context.
4. I love Skill Feats conceptually and wish to see more of them.
5. Ancestry and how it works seems very solid. I'm particularly pleased by the distinction between Heritage Feats and other Ancestry Feats as that opens up an awesome design space.
And that's just off the top of my head.
I agree with everything mentioned above. On the topic of action economy changes, I’m intrigued on how the game seems more reactive. In 1e, immediate actions are a thing, but not that common, especially at low levels. Based on te 2e material I’ve seen so far, there’s more emphasis on this reactionary type of play.
Also, 2e seems way more accessible to beginners: less terminology relics, streamlined action system etc.
Yeah I'm very happy with everything I've seen so far.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am excited about the new critical system. It feels a lot more dynamic and fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the new action system, the skills proficiencies, the Figther and the customization of the ancestries.
And maybe even Resonance but this one will need a full test to be sure. At least I like the principle.
I am excited about the new critical system. It feels a lot more dynamic and fun.
I actually love the new crit system as well, and the degree of success and failure.
The tidbit about fighters gaining an ability to deal damage on a normal miss is actually incredibly awesome.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Biggest thing for me is the Resonance concept. I've already stolen it.
The inclusion of automatic ancestry feats is also very happy-making,as that's been on my wishlist for nearly fifteen years.
So far, a lot of what I'm reading from PF2 sounds like it's directly addressed at resolving my problems with PF1-- often, remarkably similar to the ways I'm currently attempting to resolve them myself.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Downtime being significant in core sounds nice.
Remember to maintain a balanced diet, and get plenty of exercise.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something else I am really really enjoying so far is the input we are seeing from the designers so far.
It is fantastic to be reading a thread on one of the blogs and see a designer responding to someone's question. It isn't a rules thing or anything like that but it really really makes it seem like the designers are listening, and care about our questions and feedback, so kudos to them!
Honestly pretty much everything seems on point for how I want the gsme to be. Obviously Ill need to see the full playtest to try things out but it seems like theres some real thought put into this that makes me excited. Im really excited for how the action economy will help, as well as the potential for simplified npc/monster creation. Kind of hoping big boss monster.can get ways to alleviate the action disparity of one monster v 4-6 adventurers
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There really hasn't been anything I don't like.
There's a few things I'm cautious about (will feats be too fiddly? How will heritage feats work?), but pretty much everything else I'm liking.
I love the switch to ancestry and the including of culture into it. I also live that you could be more "dwarfy" and that you get more ancestry feats as you level. I never liked the idea that my race feats had to compete with my combat feats, and this fixes that.
I love the addition of the goblin, and I'm hopeful for a good explanation in the change in lore. I'm hopeful for one of the final APs or module to have goblin heroes which will slightly alter the perception of the average townsfolk in a positive manner.
I love the addition of the alchemist and the separation away from traditional magic.
I actually kind of like the resonance system, although I'm a bit cautious that it might be a bit cumbersome. It may need to be simplified a bit, but on the whole I like the concept.
I'm really digging the fighter and rogue classes.
I like the concept of limiting magic, and I can't wait until they reveal that part. It's unlikely they'll go as far as I want them to go (spell paths a la Spheres of Power, and having opposing schools actually be unable to be used), but that's ok. So long as we limit it a bit.
I really love the Four tiered success system. We also try to Homebrew something like that into our games (not exactly a system like this, but something other than binary).
I love the idea of the proficiency system and how you have to get to a certain level to unlock certain aspects of skills.
I'm hopeful for new poison rules (naturally, I'm a toxicologist).
The only things I can think of that would really make me walk away (although I'd likely still buy at least the CRB regardless) is if feats are way too fiddly and have a ton of feats walls like in PF1 (unlikely) and the CM/D gap remains absolutely huge (unlikely). The only other thing I can think of is if the game still requires constant rules look ups during the session; the first few sessions is ok, as we're still learning the rules. But if we're a year into it and still having to look up rules constantly, like we were in PF1 even after 5 years of weekly gaming, then I'd probably slowly abandon it and find something less complex. But I'm hopeful it won't be the case, as they seem to be consolidating lots of rules for easier memorization.
All in all, I like what I see.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Count me among those who liked pretty much everything shown so far!
There are some things that seem a bit strange with the limited information we got so far. But I have faith in Paizo. And I rather focus on being eager to learn more about the system than trying to imagining everything that could go wrong.
Things I like include:
- Action economy. Especially stuff like some spells being more powerful with more actions invested.
- Getting rid of weirdly calculated BAB and base saves.
- The new crit/fumble system. Mostly its implications for save-or-suck spells.
- More streamlined (unified) rules/character development.
- More flexible character development in core (flexible ancestries, background, archetypes, all kinds of feats, etc). Most of these came with the APG in PF1 and it's still the best RPG rules-book I've ever seen.
Other than the upper level skills, resonance and the math being TOO tight(needed to be tighter, but perhaps not QUITE so much) I like most of it.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of things to like:
- Streamlined actions. In PF1, even though I've been playing it for 10 years I still need to look up if closing a door is a move action or a standard action, things like that.
- More cinematic combat, thanks to the 3 actions, and the reduced scope of attacks of opportunity.
- The reaction concept, with the many things it makes possible; for example, the potential for spell dueling.
- The possibility of defense-based tactics, as exemplified by the new shield mechanics.
- The removal of the crit confirmation roll, which I always disliked as it slows the game down and makes results too swingy.
- The >10< mechanic and the 4 degrees of success principle, especially how it alleviates save-or-die situations.
- The skill system, simplified (less skills, no more meaningless ranks, untrained no longer dealt with as an exception) and diversified at the same time (skill feats).
- The potential to do extraordinary things with skills.
- The clean separation of alchemy and magic.
- The possibility of alchemical items on par with magic.
- The simplification of surprise: no more surprise round with special rules to remember.
- The simplification of AC (flat-footed AC is gone).
- The new death mechanics: No more comatose character healed up and fully operational in 1 round. Instant death on a fluke should be more rare now.
- The removal of most or all of the ability boosts and penalties in the midst of combat. This was overly complex and bogged down play.
- The diversification of initiative. Perception is no longer a skill everyone must have. There is now a clean way to adjudicate a surprise attack to someone's face in a social setting.
- Ancestry as a way to diversify race, and spread this diversity beyond level 1.
- The mandatory magic item Christmas tree is finally cut down and thrown away.
Looking forward to:
- Streamlined, usable poisons and diseases.
- A cleaned up combat maneuver system.
- What will happen to magic...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
New rules about save or lose spells seem very promising. Critical success, succes, failure, and critical failure may preserve full interest for these spells, for casters as for targets !
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
New rules about save or lose spells seem very promising. Critical success, succes, failure, and critical failure may preserve full interest for these spells, for casters as for targets !
As someone who yesterday had an encounter with a basilisk, that turned half the party into stone, I agree.
In all honesty, varying degrees of success and failure make the game more dynamic and strategic, while perhaps being less punishing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Reduces the number of combats that are a curb stomp one way if the save is made and a curb stomp the other way if it is failed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still dont plan to use XP but I like how the devs simplified it.
I'm surprised no has brought up the changes in how weapons works. So now the weapon stats matter beyond crit range and threshold.
That's something I find interesting, but I want to see how they work before I say that I like them. I certainly hope that I like them. I like liking things.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m also a fan of most of the changes we’ve seen so far.
—0. The main one that hasn’t been mentioned so far is making Charisma a desirable stat for pretty much everyone, instead of a largely useless stat for 80-90% of PCs. (I’m not sure about some other aspects of the resonance system, but I *love* this feature of it.)
Other highlights for me, in order of excitement:
—1. Revised action economy! (You can now move, attack, move, without having to get 7 feats first! Tweaking things so full attacking is no longer the only thing worth doing for most martials!)
—2. Four degrees of success! (Especially the ways in which this fixes save or suck abilities, and makes levels of competence beyond a certain point still useful.)
—3. Skill feats that are strong enough to make skills an important part of the game! (No, wizard, *you* stand aside — I don’t need your Spider Climb/Knock/Invisibility/Charm Monster/etc spell to do this!)
—4. All classes get interesting choices/class feats! (No more boring choice-less cleric or swashbuckler advancements for me!)
—5. Removing much of the dependence on magic items! (No big 6 to constantly upgrade! Shopping is no longer something any successful adventurer needs to spend a lot of time doing!)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oddly enough, the thing I'm most excited about is the 1000 XP to level up system. At first I thought it was silly, but now I think it'll make encounter design easier and campaign rate more adjustable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like most things I've heard so far.
Prepping for 1st edition Pathfinder, I've already noticed how certain things, like the four degrees of success, could improve the adventure. In other spots, I've noticed how the new skill system would allow more flexibility in planning - it would make it a lot easier to set DCs without accidentally setting them too high for the half the party to succeed on.
It seems very clear to me that the new system will make designing and running adventures much easier. I'm looking forward to the playtest to see if the game also becomes more fun on the player's side of things.
I actually have to say I don't like a LOT of what I've seen.
Of what I do think is interesting and like is...
It's not limited with severe bounded accuracy like 5e is. There is no +6 is the maximum increase you can have type foolishness. There isn't going to be a just graduated High School student having just a 30% chance less to a die roll to succeed at brain surgery like a neurosurgeon who's had 12 years of schooling and 20 years of experience(who would only get a +6 better on their roll). Instead it seems like there is a wide numeric range for levels between 1 and 20. That's a good thing.
I also like the Action Economy of three actions. It's been used and it's nice. It's simpler in some ways, and more straightforward.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually have to say I don't like a LOT of what I've seen.
Of what I do think is interesting and like is...
It's not limited with severe bounded accuracy like 5e is. There is no +6 is the maximum increase you can have type foolishness. There isn't going to be a just graduated High School student having just a 30% chance less to a die roll to succeed at brain surgery like a neurosurgeon who's had 12 years of schooling and 20 years of experience(who would only get a +6 better on their roll). Instead it seems like there is a wide numeric range for levels between 1 and 20. That's a good thing.
I also like the Action Economy of three actions. It's been used and it's nice. It's simpler in some ways, and more straightforward.
I really don't like how you have kept using that same argument over the years to disparage 5e, depsite how many times it's been shut down. It shows you haven't been listening to anything others have said to you at all; you just ignore everyone else and continue to make the same false arguments again and again.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
snip
Let’s not derail the thread saying what we don’t like about other people’s posts.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh man, there's a lot.
First of all, I'm going to get to playtest and provide feedback on a new edition of Pathfinder with my friends! I didn't start playing Pathfinder until 2012, so Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat were part of my "core", and I didn't join any playtests until ACG/Occult Adventures.
Alchemist gets to whip up alchemical items on the fly- and alchemical items are actually interesting and useful. In Pathfinder, I have an alchemical Witch that uses spells to turn one alchemical item into another. It'll be cool to have the class itself get that kind of specialization! Plus, making a poisoner Alchemist seems a lot easier.
Rogue gets a ton of skill stuff. 100% more skill feats? That's the kind of extravagance I like to see!
Skill feats look pretty awesome, what with "animal companion" being an option (even if it turns out to be weaker than a full animal companion). The new skills system will be really nice for characters being relevant.
And archetypes! I don't have to wait for the next book to start mucking about with combinations of stuff. Plus, we have it confirmed that they're not Starfinder's limited "replace only these features ever". Even if we don't get class archetypes right away, it's set up for them, and that just means a bigger starting set of general archetypes.
The new save stuff sounds like it will be more pleasant and less broken to play a save-or-suck character. Crits sound more interesting to me as well, although I play a lot more casters.
Sorcerer is very probably getting spell levels at the same time as Wizard, at long last! I'm unreasonably pumped about this, and I am not being very patient about getting further caster details. In general, it bugged me how they got spells later, paid double for extra spells per day, and were worse with metamagic rods.
Devs collecting feedback on archetypes that people like feels really promising for me! If my (as well as other people's) love of Swarm Monger druid is reflected in the game in some fashion, that improves my game experience on a couple levels.
Ancestries get flexible stats, and I'll be happy to have that ease of fitting an ancestry to the class I want more easily. No waiting for Paizo to release an alternate racial trait that gives Changeling stats that fit a Witch, or what have you.
Okay, so I tried really, really, really hard to think of something I like about PF2, and here's what I've got:
I like that it has been vaguely implied Heal might be a useful skill in some way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The action system mainly, I’ll likely steal that (I’m not a fan of all the different action types - I don’t think it adds anything to the game except complexity).
I’m interested in ancestry (I much prefer systems where race and culture are separated mechanically) but I’m not entirely sure how that’s going to work yet.
EDIT: now that I’ve read the thread, it’s reminded me that I’m impressed at the implementation of crit/fumble/degrees of success. I think that was a really neat, intuitive and easy to remember evolution of the base mechanic.
I love alchemists as a core class. There needed to be an additional Int caster, so it was them or magus.
I'm... cautiously optimistic about the new action economy. My main concern is how it affects things like two weapon fighting/flurry of blows/spell combat/rapid shot/manyshot/etc.
Not much so far...but I like...
-More stat point increases.
-Max/set HP at level up.
-Somewhat like the action system.
I have seen nothing so far that makes me want to try PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thus far, I think the three-action approach looks promising and I like the idea of making Weapon Finesse an attribute of the weapon instead of being a Feat.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A leaner system is very welcome. I hope that some of the most wobbly areas of PF1 rules (e.g. is this ledge 3 or 4 inches wide because the DC depends on that) will be gone, as will the maddening character buidling/leveling or clunky monster statblocks which require you to use 4 books at once to get them right.
I love PF1 and it gave me 10 years of super fun. But it's time to let the past die, and kill it if you have to. /kyloren
I like Perception and Stealth playing the part of Initiative.
I like the more streamlined action economy.
Using extra actions to eek out more "oomph" for spells is nifty.
Not impressed with the Fighter and the Rogue seems virtually unchanged.
A leaner system is very welcome. I hope that some of the most wobbly areas of PF1 rules (e.g. is this ledge 3 or 4 inches wide because the DC depends on that) will be gone, as will the maddening character buidling/leveling or clunky monster statblocks which require you to use 4 books at once to get them right.
I love PF1 and it gave me 10 years of super fun. But it's time to let the past die, and kill it if you have to. /kyloren
Hopefully, I’ll get there by August next year. The thought of learning a same-but-different system makes me feel tired and old atm.
Lets try to stick to the premise of the thread please guys.
To be honest I am impressed at how well this is going with only a few people sticking their heads in to be nothing but contrary.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love that there are enough things so far for everyone to like something else.
I am also learning about a bunch of stuff I missed like weapon finesse being a weapon quality now. THAT'S AWESOME!
Oooh Yes. I love that initiative as a stat is leaving, and is now replaced by something thematic based on what you were doing before the fighting broke out. This is something I was almost doing in my home games already, by allowing things like sense motive to give a bonus to init if you could read that the situation was becoming tense and might become violent at any moment. So I really like this
I actually have to say I don't like a LOT of what I've seen.
Of what I do think is interesting and like is...
It's not limited with severe bounded accuracy like 5e is. There is no +6 is the maximum increase you can have type foolishness. There isn't going to be a just graduated High School student having just a 30% chance less to a die roll to succeed at brain surgery like a neurosurgeon who's had 12 years of schooling and 20 years of experience(who would only get a +6 better on their roll). Instead it seems like there is a wide numeric range for levels between 1 and 20. That's a good thing.
I also like the Action Economy of three actions. It's been used and it's nice. It's simpler in some ways, and more straightforward.
We've been over this over and over again... The HS student couldn't even attempt brain surgery in 5E, but sure whatever you say. It wont be that different in PF2 except there will be actual proficiency gating so people cant make this s@#t up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things I'm really liking:
Oooh Yes. I love that initiative as a stat is leaving, and is now replaced by something thematic based on what you were doing before the fighting broke out. This is something I was almost doing in my home games already, by allowing things like sense motive to give a bonus to init if you could read that the situation was becoming tense and might become violent at any moment. So I really like this
Yeah, I really like that too. Plus the three modes with different timelines. Combat measured in seconds, exploration measured in hours or days, and downtime measured in weeks or months.
Well, a few things come to mind:
1. the 3 action sequence is pretty neat now that it is baked into the system.
2. Shield have more useage.
3. thunderstones deafen and deal damage, before it was rarely useful unless facing spellcasters.
4. Resonance means no more limited charged items.
5. 4 degrees of success with spells
6. alchmist can make things on the fly: which hopefully means crafting alchemy items only takes an hour (s) instead of days like magic crafting did.
I also really like the 3 actions, and that actions are just actions without having to get into nitpicking.
I really like the crit/fail system, especially since they will mitigate the problems I have with something-or-nothing spells. I prefer BIG something-to-mitigated-something spells and this will allow more of a spectrum of effects that I like while still allowing for some big bang or total failure effects that some other players prefer.
I like that in CORE, ancestries and classes will have a lot more modularity and customization--we don't need to wait for splats to tweak how we want our elf rogue to work versus that other dude's elf rogue.
I like what I've seen so far with the fighter preview, and the elf/dwarf preview.
4. Resonance means no more limited charged items.
Wait...
I'm reading this to mean that you don't have to keep track of wands, etc., but instead use resonance as a daily limit - is that correct? As in, instead of having a wand of cure light wounds with 25 charges left, you would instead have a wand of cure light wounds that could be used as long as the user has resonance left/makes the check to use an item?
If that's a correct reading, is that verified anywhere?
Because honestly, resonance becomes a much more appealing mechanic to me if it means that we don't have to keep track of individual charges on wands and staffs anymore.
4. Resonance means no more limited charged items.Wait...
I'm reading this to mean that you don't have to keep track of wands, etc., but instead use resonance as a daily limit - is that correct? As in, instead of having a wand of cure light wounds with 25 charges left, you would instead have a wand of cure light wounds that could be used as long as the user has resonance left/makes the check to use an item?
If that's a correct reading, is that verified anywhere?
Because honestly, resonance becomes a much more appealing mechanic to me if it means that we don't have to keep track of individual charges on wands and staffs anymore.
That's how I've seen it interpreted through many posts and an article I've read on another site.
It all seems interesting to me, though who knows if I'll get to try it, considering I barely had a chance to play PE1 in the last 10 years.
Wow...if true, that means that resonance goes from being something I really didn't like to something I really do like.
|
|
4. Resonance means no more limited charged items.Wait...
I'm reading this to mean that you don't have to keep track of wands, etc., but instead use resonance as a daily limit - is that correct? As in, instead of having a wand of cure light wounds with 25 charges left, you would instead have a wand of cure light wounds that could be used as long as the user has resonance left/makes the check to use an item?
If that's a correct reading, is that verified anywhere?
Because honestly, resonance becomes a much more appealing mechanic to me if it means that we don't have to keep track of individual charges on wands and staffs anymore.
Yes, that's a correct reading. I'd have to do a lot of searching to find where, but eliminating this kind of bookkeeping is one of the reasons they stated for Resonance as a unified mechanic.