PF2, only 4 spell lists!?


Prerelease Discussion

51 to 65 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

While every class definitely needs something special and unique, I think that having access to a common set of spells can be a good thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Anyway -- Where are you guys getting the idea that there will only ever be four spell lists, ever? I do not recall seeing anyone from Paizo suggest anything of this sort.


David knott 242 wrote:

Anyway -- Where are you guys getting the idea that there will only ever be four spell lists, ever? I do not recall seeing anyone from Paizo suggest anything of this sort.

I don’t know the original source, but yesterday’s Know Direction on Twitch brought it up.


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
QuidEst wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

Anyway -- Where are you guys getting the idea that there will only ever be four spell lists, ever? I do not recall seeing anyone from Paizo suggest anything of this sort.

I don’t know the original source, but yesterday’s Know Direction on Twitch brought it up.

I heard that Twitch broadcast. Jason said very little about the four spell lists other than they were "interesting". We still do not know enough about them to conclude that Paizo won't add more spell lists in future books.


David knott 242 wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

Anyway -- Where are you guys getting the idea that there will only ever be four spell lists, ever? I do not recall seeing anyone from Paizo suggest anything of this sort.

I don’t know the original source, but yesterday’s Know Direction on Twitch brought it up.

I heard that Twitch broadcast. Jason said very little about the four spell lists other than they were "interesting". We still do not know enough about them to conclude that Paizo won't add more spell lists in future books.

Oh, I misread what you said, my apologies.

Yeah, there’s no way it’s going to be just four lists ever.


David knott 242 wrote:

Anyway -- Where are you guys getting the idea that there will only ever be four spell lists, ever? I do not recall seeing anyone from Paizo suggest anything of this sort.

From the Playtest announcement page

EDIT: I misread too, but only having four spell list will be easier for designers

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd be shocked if they never added another spell list (I expect Psychic at least), but having only 4 in the corebook rather than the 6 there were in the PF1 corebook does speak to paring down the number of lists as compared to PF1.


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Let us recall what happened in the Advanced Class Guide playtest. There, the goal was to add ten new classes without adding any new spell lists. Here is the final score:

Arcanist: Used sorcerer/wizard list. Success.

Bloodrager: Originally used magus list, but ended up getting its own spell list. Failure.

Brawler: Non-spellcaster.

Hunter: Used alchemist formula list. Success.

Investigator: Used composite of druid and ranger spell lists. Success.

Shaman: Playtest tried cleric and druid spell lists in turn before settling on a new spell list. Failure.

Skald: Used bard spell list. Success.

Slayer: Non-spellcaster.

Swashbuckler: Non-spellcaster.

Warpriest: Used cleric spell list. Success.

So in that case, the playtest resulted in the addition of two new spell lists when none were originally intended.

It remains to be seen how well any plans to have classes that used to have separate spell lists share common spell lists works out in the new playtest.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think your Hunter and Investigator entries are swapped?


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Yes, you are right. Unfortunately it is too late for me to edit that post.


David knott 242 wrote:
Yes, you ate right.

I wonder which spell lists will have access to Create Food and Water...


Heh... Witch spells...


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

I was able to edit the typo in my most recent post....


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Naw man, you're alright. Everyone gets typos some of the tim.


Davor wrote:
I hope Paladins and Rangers don't get spells at all. Just take all the things spells normally do and make them class features. They're rarely powerful enough to be worth the limited cost, and when they are they're so powerful they may as well just be core features or eliminated altogether.

I disagree. Just a bit of magic with my rangers has been a great benefit, when used right. People constantly cry that fighters, without any innate magic, can't deal with even basic obstacles and supernatural tricks, such as walls, water hazards, invisibility, etc. With the right spells, my rangers can usually get past these kind of things, and I'd really hate to lose that, in exchange for some lame ass feature like a constant know direction effect.

Resist Energy, Air Bubble, Keep Watch, Speak with Animals, and Glide have each gotten me past obstacles in the past, and you get them all at only level 4. Their later utility and buff spells have been really useful to me and I'd hate to see them go, at least not in exchange for some crappy cantrip or skill focus.

51 to 65 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / PF2, only 4 spell lists!? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion