
Folkish Elm |

One thing I’m noticing as I try out these rules by building a few characters is that the free ability choices which the ancestries have make me more inclined to choose less standard ancestry/class combinations than in PF 1.
For example, I love that I can now easily have a dwarf wizard starting with int 18 and a host of other reasonably high ability scores. In PF1 I’d always feel this was too sub optimal to enjoy (which is probably more to do with my perceptions than the system).
But now my image of a craggy bearded, grey haired grumpy dwarf with a crow on his shoulder and a rune encrusted staff can enter the game.
Incidentally my planned ability scores are below if anyone has any thoughts (using scholar background) Tempted to put strength down to 10 and boost wisdom to 14 but not sure yet.
STR 12
DEX 14
CON 14
INT 18
WIS 12
CHA 8

master_marshmallow |

I agree and like how the classes give bonuses to a primary stat. I think they should function just like backgrounds, and have a choice between two predetermined, and a free choice. Gives plenty of freedom to have good stats like an optimized build, or slightly more distributed, but still playable stats for more diverse builds.
Paladins not getting cha baffles me.

![]() |

I agree and like how the classes give bonuses to a primary stat. I think they should function just like backgrounds, and have a choice between two predetermined, and a free choice. Gives plenty of freedom to have good stats like an optimized build, or slightly more distributed, but still playable stats for more diverse builds.
Paladins not getting cha baffles me.
I must agree on paladins, not being able to choose Str or Cha feels too restrictive.

chocobot |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I’m noticing as I try out these rules by building a few characters is that the free ability choices which the ancestries have make me more inclined to choose less standard ancestry/class combinations than in PF 1.
For example, I love that I can now easily have a dwarf wizard starting with int 18 and a host of other reasonably high ability scores. In PF1 I’d always feel this was too sub optimal to enjoy (which is probably more to do with my perceptions than the system).
But now my image of a craggy bearded, grey haired grumpy dwarf with a crow on his shoulder and a rune encrusted staff can enter the game.
Incidentally my planned ability scores are below if anyone has any thoughts (using scholar background) Tempted to put strength down to 10 and boost wisdom to 14 but not sure yet.
STR 12
DEX 14
CON 14
INT 18
WIS 12
CHA 8
I played a dwarf wizard in PF1. He was my first PF character actually, but not a rookie mistake. I played 3.x a lot and knew what I was doing. He was still a wizard. That is to say, not really having a problem on the optimization side, even if the int was 2 lower than a human.

Folkish Elm |

I agree and like how the classes give bonuses to a primary stat. I think they should function just like backgrounds, and have a choice between two predetermined, and a free choice. Gives plenty of freedom to have good stats like an optimized build, or slightly more distributed, but still playable stats for more diverse builds.
Paladins not getting cha baffles me.
I haven’t tried building a Paladin yet but I can see that you might want a higher starting CHA than STR for some builds. It is certainly interesting that the class boost, coming last of 4 types of boost, determines which ability you could start with an 18 in and I imagine the design intent is to give a clear signal to new players which ability they should focus on. Would adding CHA as an option confuse new players? I’m not sure...
Awesome, that's the idea of the way the free boosts work. Each character's ancestry is a little different, even among dwarves. Dwarves from a family focused on crafts (an Int-based skill) might well pass on an Int boost that is great for wizards and alchemists!
Good stuff! I’m glad to see the design intent is showing through in practice. Is it worth widening the list of recommended classes in the ancestry box outs to include more possibilities to inspire new players? I’m picturing my dwarf as the son an aging dwarven record keeper for a king, surrounded by dusty books and keeping careful note of past outrages and victories in leather tomes of runic script. :)
I played a dwarf wizard in PF1. He was my first PF character actually, but not a rookie mistake. I played 3.x a lot and knew what I was doing. He was still a wizard. That is to say, not really having a problem on the optimization side, even if the int was 2 lower than a human.
Good to hear - I wondered if it was just my perception. My wife and I are also trying out a PF2 build for a Halfling barbarian so it is very encouraging that being 2 lower in a key stat isn’t so much of a problem. No small weapons in PF2 also helps encourage this too (unless I’ve missed rules for this?!).
Out of interest what was your Dwarf wizard called? I’m always interested in people’s character names.