Paizo Blog: A First Look at Pathfinder Second Edition


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.

So it begins...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Ninjahuzzah!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Shouldn't this blog be in the Pathfinder Second Edition forum?


15 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Kobolds are confusing, they are as cuddly and cute as they are menacing and feral.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A little more sparse than I would have liked. However, I'm glad they have started and know the ball will get rolling.


oh yes i really want a occult race peharps a kind of Mind Flayer specialised in telepathic power. Perhaps wizard of the coast can join pathfinder to make her product made of this second edition and Illithid becoming a player race.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

PF2 has a weird set up where everything has been interesting and promising, making me more interested than I thought I could be about a D20 system again, EXCEPT the official web releases.

It is like the staff have been walking around with choice slices of sashimi and wonderful morsels of flavor, but so far the only thing to take home in a package are 7-11 California rolls.

The meal is coming though.... Sooner than I'll even realize once it is here.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

this post is what I was afraid of: any previews being pitched to the (much broader) audience of folks who didn't follow the playtest. Might have to resign myself to not learning anything new until August 1st

I mean, it makes sense. I certainly understand how that might be the right decision from the big-picture marketing perspective. But still! Something for those of us who have followed closely would be nice


2 people marked this as a favorite.
demiurge108 wrote:
oh yes i really want a occult race peharps a kind of Mind Flayer specialised in telepathic power. Perhaps wizard of the coast can join pathfinder to make her product made of this second edition and Illithid becoming a player race.

I don't think WOTC will ever let Paizo touch their special monsters. That said Munavri already fit this and aren't evil.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Biztak wrote:
Kobolds are confusing, they are as cuddly and cute as they are menacing and feral.

The kobolds here are less gobliny than the ones in some of the other art. Still not sure I'm a huge fan of the redesign though.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I really like how you folks (Piazo) are stressing storytelling, and being able to tell the same sort of stories as you did in PF1.

The abilities gained during character creation feel organic and stresses that the PCs are unique and interesting characters, not just sheets of paper filled with abilities.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Odd, Date at top says Thursday, June 24th 2019 ...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So what do we think the three characters shown are my guesses are.

× A cleric or liberator of Calistra
× A druid or sorcerer or some other manner of other spellcaster (lots of classes can cover that paticular character concept)
× Monk

Liberty's Edge

I would hope that a future blog will address those players who may be reluctant to try the new edition. I have at least one or two in my local PFS group.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Biztak wrote:
Kobolds are confusing, they are as cuddly and cute as they are menacing and feral.

No kobolds here, just halfling lizard folk.

Kobolds are properly little rat-dog terrors.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I was hoping for a lot more details, and while I might appreciate them down the line, the number of monsters in the Bestiary is not super exciting after we have already seen quite a number of stat blocks with the relevant art.

It is pretty certain that I will read the books from cover to cover when they are released, but I am not sure who is the target audience for this blog. People that have followed the playtest know all of those things and those that have stopped following, likely don't care until they can get the book or read some reviews.

That said I like the kobold redesign and the picture with the elf looks extremely promising.


That first image is great though; hope its nice and big in the CRB or Bestiary. I'm finally onboard with Seoni's cape

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Please tell me the level caps for the proficencies are lower than the playtest.

I have liked some of the things I have heard thus far for PF2, I just hope some of the points of contention have been tweaked or changes for the better. Non-Lethal damage, better understanding of what Hero Points are and how to earn/reward them, Resonance....

Here is hoping.


Huh. August 1st?
I thought it was scheduled after my birthday not before..

neat.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:

Please tell me the level caps for the proficencies are lower than the playtest.

I have liked some of the things I have heard thus far for PF2, I just hope some of the points of contention have been tweaked or changes for the better. Non-Lethal damage, better understanding of what Hero Points are and how to earn/reward them, Resonance....

Here is hoping.

I can see from your post here that you stopped following Pathfinder 2nd edition news a long, long time ago. Resonance hasn't been a thing since... last year 2018 at least.

Most the things that didn't work out well were changed. Which was the purpose of the playtest.
Check the game out. It already sounds amazing.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like it. Little light on the details, but they'll come, I'm sure.

thaX wrote:
Please tell me the level caps for the proficencies are lower than the playtest.

Well, for Skills, it's 1st for Trained and sounds like it's still 2nd or 3rd (depending on whether you're a Rogue) for Expert, 7th for Master, and 15th for Legend. But, of course, that's for Skills.

Other stuff varies quite a lot (all characters are Experts in at least one Save at 1st, and Fighters are Experts with weapons as well).

thaX wrote:

I have liked some of the things I have heard thus far for PF2, I just hope some of the points of contention have been tweaked or changes for the better. Non-Lethal damage, better understanding of what Hero Points are and how to earn/reward them, Resonance....

Here is hoping.

Resonance is gone entirely. Non-lethal damage, and how Hero Points are awarded we have no info on.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
People that have followed the playtest know all of those things and those that have stopped following, likely don't care until they can get the book or read some reviews.

Well, I for one will be using these blog posts to share with my friends that didn't have the chance and/or effort to participate in the playtest or follow the updates closely. Through these blog posts, I can hype up my current PF1 table about the wonders of PF2, and also enlighten another table I lead, which thus far has only played 5E, but are itching for that extra oomph in character customization and dynamic combat.

Grand Lodge

15 people marked this as a favorite.

Whole lot of words to basically say nothing...anyone interested in PF2 knows what an RPG is...and this blog basically describes what an RPG is if you were describing it to someone who just landed on Earth and had never heard of RPGs before.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bruno Romero wrote:

Well, I for one will be using these blog posts to share with my friends that didn't have the chance and/or effort to participate in the playtest or follow the updates closely. Through these blog posts, I can hype up my current PF1 table about the wonders of PF2, and also enlighten another table I lead, which thus far has only played 5E, but are itching for that extra oomph in character customization and dynamic combat.

As a note for the hyping. Reddit (P2E reddit not the normal reddit) has had several book preview sort of things you could also look at.

Those have been more my hype train


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I liked it. Good introduction to the game for newcomers. It would be nice to see Pathfinder 2 as a means to get new players to try the game, and I totally understand why Paizo would kick off the preview series with something aimed to the general crowd.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Resonance is gone entirely. Non-lethal damage, and how Hero Points are awarded we have no info on.

Nonlethal actually came up in Oblivion Oath, and sounded the same as the playtest, to wit: "identical, unless it's the hit that puts you below 0".


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I like it. Little light on the details, but they'll come, I'm sure.

Well... It's not bad I guess but it clearly seems to be focused on someone totally new to the game and I'm not sure how many of them find a blog on a game site before they know what it is: This seems like the sort of thing you'd use for an interview for another website, magazine, ect. I think anyone that actually found there way here already knew everything in it. Hopefully future blogs have more meat on their bones that the current forum user can sink their teeth into.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
If you are untrained, you get no bonus at all, but you can still add a modifier from a relevant ability score to represent your raw talent. If you are trained, you add your level plus 2, along with any other relevant modifiers. If you are an expert, you add 4 instead. Masters add 6, and characters with legendary proficiency add 8.

OK, promising. Untrained doesn't give a negative, but you don't get to add your level - I think that works, on balance. And having Expert/Master/Legendary as 4/6/8 is much better than the playtest's 2/3/4. Glad they adopted that change.

My other issue with proficiency in the playtest was the way it seemed fixed (apart from skills) - there was no way to improve proficiency with weapons or armour, beyond waiting for the right level - and that was only in certain classes.

I'd like to think that my Rogue (say) could invest enough in weapon training to be as good with their knife as any Fighter; or that my Fighter could invest enough in armour training to be as proficient as any Paladin.

On the other hand, maybe Paizo deliberately wants to keep the distinctions between the classes: you want to be Legendary with weapons, play a fighter; you want to be Legendary with armour, play a paladin. I don't like that (too prescriptive for me), but I can see the rationale.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slyme wrote:
Whole lot of words to basically say nothing...anyone interested in PF2 knows what an RPG is...and this blog basically describes what an RPG is if you were describing it to someone who just landed on Earth and had never heard of RPGs before.

I thought I was the only one who was thinking this lol.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Plushie squad, ATTACK!!!

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Wandering Wastrel wrote:
; you want to be Legendary with armour, play a paladin. I don't like that (too prescriptive for me), but I can see the rationale.

I really really despised that, and hope it got loosened. Feels completely out of left field to me.

Liberty's Edge

15 people marked this as a favorite.
Wandering Wastrel wrote:
My other issue with proficiency in the playtest was the way it seemed fixed (apart from skills) - there was no way to improve proficiency with weapons or armour, beyond waiting for the right level - and that was only in certain classes.

It's still Class based, but it's been 'loosened up' a little inasmuch as more Classes get more Proficiency bumps at lower levels to make up for items not granting as large a bonus any more. Even Wizards eventually hit Expert in their weapons in the final game, and Fighters get Expert in all three Saves by 3rd level (they start with Fort and Ref, and get Will, plus some anti-fear stuff, from a Bravery feature at 3rd).

Similar things are shown throughout those examples of character progression we've seen, and I'd be shocked if Rogues don't hit Master in weapons and Expert in light armor, as well as Expert in Fortitude, Legendary in Reflex, and Master in Will (just as one unconfirmed example).

Wandering Wastrel wrote:
I'd like to think that my Rogue (say) could invest enough in weapon training to be as good with their knife as any Fighter; or that my Fighter could invest enough in armour training to be as proficient as any Paladin.

This you cannot do. What you have to bear in mind is that different Proficiency progressions like this are the equivalent of different BABs or Save Progressions in PF1. Just throwing Full BAB on a Class not designed for it (or, more accurately, designed to have bonuses to compensate for not having it) results in those Classes that have it built in being super devalued, and is generally not a good thing.

The same is true in PF2. Rogues are designed with huge advantages over Fighters that the Fighter compensates for by having his own huge advantages over Rogues...one of the most important of which is higher Proficiency in weapons.

Wandering Wastrel wrote:
On the other hand, maybe Paizo deliberately wants to keep the distinctions between the classes: you want to be Legendary with weapons, play a fighter; you want to be Legendary with armour, play a paladin. I don't like that (too prescriptive for me), but I can see the rationale.

This is definitely part of it, but not the most important part. The important part is that allowing anyone who wanted to get Legendary in weapons to get it would result in literally everyone who uses a weapon having it (or being vastly and flatly mechanically inferior to those who do have it). It'd be like saying, in PF1, 'Oh, anyone who wants can have Full BAB'. Suddenly everyone would have it and the game would become more boring. Classes would certainly also become more homogeneous, but that's almost secondary to it becoming a Feat Tax everyone had to pay or be left miles behind and nobody ever playing a Fighter again (since being the best at fighting is their whole schtick).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@DMW - that's a reasonable counterpoint, although I do think that if done properly it would avoid being a 'feat tax' and would be more of a character choice, i.e. "do I as a Rogue spend valuable feats becoming better with my dagger or do I focus on doing Rogue stuff better."

In my view, having that as an option makes the game better (but I do realise this is subjective).

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Wandering Wastrel wrote:

@DMW - that's a reasonable counterpoint, although I do think that if done properly it would avoid being a 'feat tax' and would be more of a character choice, i.e. "do I as a Rogue spend valuable feats becoming better with my dagger or do I focus on doing Rogue stuff better."

In my view, having that as an option makes the game better (but I do realise this is subjective).

This is true with smaller bonuses or in games that are less combat focused. But so much of Pathfinder is combat-related, and the +2 from a Proficiency boost is so huge in PF2 (especially given how crits work) that it becomes a must-have.

To be clear, a +2 adds more than 1/3 again in DPR vs. many on level foes, from 100% to something like 138% damage vs. a foe you need an 11 on the die to hit (the bonus is smaller as regards to some foes...but remains very significant in pretty much all cases).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

<Attack> Proficiency is a top tier feature in PF2, I think they will avoid it being a class feat and instead be a class feature mostly. Multiclass feats will probably get you limited slower access to it, but through specific feats instead. The design intention seems to be feats give you options in combat, not increasing numeric bonuses. This is good as it means a GM could if they wished, hand out a feat as a reward and the game won't break through escalation of numbers.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
HidaOWin wrote:
<Attack> Proficiency is a top tier feature in PF2, I think they will avoid it being a class feat and instead be a class feature mostly. Multiclass feats will probably get you limited slower access to it, but through specific feats instead. The design intention seems to be feats give you options in combat, not increasing numeric bonuses. This is good as it means a GM could if they wished, hand out a feat as a reward and the game won't break through escalation of numbers.

Multiclass Feats seem to cap at Expert, actually. What they do is let you hit Expert in things your Class might not provide (ie: I doubt rogues get Expert in Heavy Armor, but you can do so by getting the right Champion Multiclass Feat)

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Wandering Wastrel wrote:

@DMW - that's a reasonable counterpoint, although I do think that if done properly it would avoid being a 'feat tax' and would be more of a character choice, i.e. "do I as a Rogue spend valuable feats becoming better with my dagger or do I focus on doing Rogue stuff better."

In my view, having that as an option makes the game better (but I do realise this is subjective).

I think that's an interesting approach, but it would lead to the game not being Class-based, but Feat-based. I can see someone making an adaption of this system to have maybe 3 or 4 class-frames, and making the whole proficiency system based on a few Feat-trees. But would that still be Pathfinder?

Regarding the Blog Post: for us forum reading fans, watching the twitch games and other things (Glass Canon, Know direction), this blog was rather thin and light.
It wasn't much of a "First look at Pathfinder Second Edition", aside from the detail about the Proficiency system (that many on here knew rather well as of now), and the three action system (again, pretty common knowledge at this point).

I think the next previews will be more interesting for us.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

It makes sense, if you got Master through multiclassing easily you'd likely have nearly the same attack as a Fighter as a Wizard with the Fighter Multiclass for the majority of the campaign.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Wandering Wastrel wrote:

@DMW - that's a reasonable counterpoint, although I do think that if done properly it would avoid being a 'feat tax' and would be more of a character choice, i.e. "do I as a Rogue spend valuable feats becoming better with my dagger or do I focus on doing Rogue stuff better."

In my view, having that as an option makes the game better (but I do realise this is subjective).

I dont think anyones suggested it yet, but the concept your looking for works if you actually start as Fighter and then multiclass into Rogue. You'll end up with a Fighters proficencies, but youll also get bonus skills and access to Rogue feats. Its pretty easy with how stat gen works to start 14str/18dex even as a fighter and you can focus on either Free Hand dueling or Two Weapon Fighting styles for more Rogueish flavor


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm not sure why people get hung up on Champs being the "best" heavy armour users. The only difference between PF1 and 2 in this regard is that the answer to "who has the best AC" is obvious in PF2 as opposed to the less obvious chain of feats and archetypes that optimizers can pull to get the outfield answer of Summoner.

So long as you can opt to invest in heavy armour and it not be a terrible idea I don't have a problem. I mean if any one can get to expert then the most you'll be behind the "best" is 4 AC which is a damn sight smaller (even considering the relative weighting of the maths) than the differences achievable in pf1.

Liberty's Edge

The first preview for Pathfinder 1E simply told us what was in the book and shared a personal favorite from one of the creators. What a long time ago it seems from the marketing speak of today. But at least Jason is still around.

Pathfinder 1E Preview 1.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Malk_Content wrote:
I'm not sure why people get hung up on Champs being the "best" heavy armour users.

Because it’s not their theme, no more than saying Clerics were the masters of Medium armor or Rogues were the masters of Light Armor.

It was proficiencies they had access to, but it wasn’t what the class was built or themed around.

How many class feats does the Champion have for heavy armor, when those could be spent on actual Champion thematic feats? What about those of us who don’t want to use Heavy Armor?

Aside from my Vindictive Bastard none of my Paladins in 3rd and Pathfinder wore Heavy Armor.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Charlie D. wrote:

The first preview for Pathfinder 1E simply told us what was in the book and shared a personal favorite from one of the creators. What a long time ago it seems from the marketing speak of today. But at least Jason is still around.

Pathfinder 1E Preview 1.

uh, it’s going over the races. Which the 2e blogs has kinda already done.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
Biztak wrote:
Kobolds are confusing, they are as cuddly and cute as they are menacing and feral.
The kobolds here are less gobliny than the ones in some of the other art. Still not sure I'm a huge fan of the redesign though.

Not a fan of the supposed redesign of the kobolds, either. Look too much like sharks/goblins.

Silver Crusade

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

..!

SHARK GOBLIN PLUSHIES!!!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I love Setiawan Lie (you mispelled his name guys!) - look at those friggin' kobolds! They're both cute and threatening! Also Seoni looks really heroic, and I love how Sajan's backfist sends the kobold flying. The giant shriezyx is damn scary, too!

I'm not a fan of the style used for the 3 characters below, but the tattooed Varisian fortune-teller looks like such a cool lady!

Good intro, I like the manifesto and guess it was kinda obligatory to start off light, here's hoping we'll get something more juicy in the following weeks!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malckuss76 wrote:
A little more sparse than I would have liked. However, I'm glad they have started and know the ball will get rolling.

It's a lot more sparse that I would have liked.

I'm almost desperate for spoilers.

I start threads thinking someone must have heard something I didn't.

No such luck. :(


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
I'm not sure why people get hung up on Champs being the "best" heavy armour users.

Because it’s not their theme, no more than saying Clerics were the masters of Medium armor or Rogues were the masters of Light Armor.

It was proficiencies they had access to, but it wasn’t what the class was built or themed around.

How many class feats does the Champion have for heavy armor, when those could be spent on actual Champion thematic feats? What about those of us who don’t want to use Heavy Armor?

Aside from my Vindictive Bastard none of my Paladins in 3rd and Pathfinder wore Heavy Armor.

Well Mark did say that classes with Heavy armor like Fighters and Champions wouldnt skimp on lighter armor proficencies.

here

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am super fired up to start GMing Second Edition. So looking forward to Gen Con and running some PFS Second Edition in the Sag!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
lakobie wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
I'm not sure why people get hung up on Champs being the "best" heavy armour users.

Because it’s not their theme, no more than saying Clerics were the masters of Medium armor or Rogues were the masters of Light Armor.

It was proficiencies they had access to, but it wasn’t what the class was built or themed around.

How many class feats does the Champion have for heavy armor, when those could be spent on actual Champion thematic feats? What about those of us who don’t want to use Heavy Armor?

Aside from my Vindictive Bastard none of my Paladins in 3rd and Pathfinder wore Heavy Armor.

Well Mark did say that classes with Heavy armor like Fighters and Champions wouldnt skimp on lighter armor proficencies.

here

Well that's encouraging, thankies for pointing this out to me ^w^

1 to 50 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: A First Look at Pathfinder Second Edition All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.