Just finished reading the Core, and I have mixed feelings just about classes. (I love the rest of the game); I have still to play the game though.
I love classes being so flexible, I love class feats, and I love to see that many previous general feats now are available only for some classes (cleave, opportunity attack, feint feats, some metamagic feats and so on). I love how multiclassing works.
I'm ok also with casters been nerfed (or other "normalisation"), my group don't care very much about builds, efficiency and power playing, we look mostly to roleplay and to collaborate to solve situations leaving a role for each player.
Still I have the sensation that we are losing something (in relation to PF1) in every single class progression, not only in nerfed classes. If I wanted to make a characters with the same features as in PF1 (not speaking of power, just of features) I wouldn't be able to do so in this edition.
Yes, I can choose and I love it. But I feel more the choice as a loss than a gain.
I would like to have a characters with more features, without caring of efficiency, power and so on.
That could be done allowing players to take more class feats, or creating class feats that are a mixed of others (so one could have more weaker features instead of few but stronger)
Then, maybe, it's just my impression. I hope so, because the rest of the game is great!
Yes, I know. :)
Still I'm comparing my first experiences in both games.
I think part of feats features have been turned into class feats, without increasing the "one every two levels" system. So now it seems you have to choose between a "pf1 class feature" and a "pf1 feat feature". With some exceptions as pf1 skill/race feats being "covered" by pf2 skill/ancestry feats
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Consider my 7th level fighter in P1. It has 8 feats, but all but two are just +1 to x, be it saves or AC or hit, etc. As are all of my class features. So at 7th level, I have the equivalent of 2 second edition feats. I also have much fewer skills trained (not to mention perception no being a class skill).
When you take all that into account P2 has much more going for it than P1.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it helps to focus less on how many features are written on your sheet and more on what your character can actually do in narrative. I've converted a lot of characters at this point and then watched them actually played. There really aren't a lot of examples of characters who don't make huge gains in versatility compared to their PF1 versions.
PF2 has so thoroughly cut down on feat taxes compared to PF1, thanks to a combination of the math enhancers being built in and basic competency no longer being gated behind massive feat chains. For example, any PF2 character comes equipped with every single "improved combat maneuver" feat as well as improved unarmed strike.
Or consider archery: you needed 2 feats to cut down massive penalties most times you tired into melee, and even more to eliminate them. Now all that is baked in. An Archer ranger in PF1 was incredibly powerful, *if* they adhered to the one true bow path until at least level 10. Now, a ranger needs a single first level feat to be a great Archer and everything else just adds more options.
Skill feats are a factor too. Our cavalier went from a guy who charges things real hard to a guy who still does that but also can kip up, acts as a the field medic, and crafts the party's magical gear. And his class feats got him the ability to use his shield to block hits for his mount and allies as well.
That being said, many of us feel like you don't get enough class feats by default. Luckily, the devs have made it clear that you can hand out extra class feats without breaking the game math, in a way you couldn't really do in PF1. I've been giving my players a class feat every level and it works fine.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That being said, many of us feel like you don't get enough class feats by default. Luckily, the devs have made it clear that you can hand out extra class feats without breaking the game math, in a way you couldn't really do in PF1. I've been giving my players a class feat every level and it works fine.
This is a real benefit in the new edition
In Pf1 you always had to worry if a characters math would become too good if you handed out a feat, while others tax themselves to death without achieving a lot
In Pf2 however, there are almost no traps or tax feats while on the other hand there are no feats which straightup improve stats and only few which modify the math (and that usually to be on par with other options)
So I actually feel comfortable with handing out a bonus feat to my party now and then - heack, I even try a party where everyone gets an archetype for free and they are not imbalanced
because feats are good for one thing in pf2: additional options
and while your options increase you dont get inherently more powerful
combat recources run out (a little) slower, but thats about it
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah you still only have 3 actions in a turn, so while you're better equipped to handle a variety of situations it is hard to apply more DPR than normal.
Archetypes are a cool thing to give out, especially if they can be tied to an in narrative accomplishment. Age of Ashes has several archetypes that are cool, but might not elicit spending a class feat for some folks.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Still I have the sensation that we are losing something (in relation to PF1) in every single class progression, not only in nerfed classes. If I wanted to make a characters with the same features as in PF1 (not speaking of power, just of features) I wouldn't be able to do so in this edition.
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?
|
Still I have the sensation that we are losing something (in relation to PF1) in every single class progression, not only in nerfed classes. If I wanted to make a characters with the same features as in PF1 (not speaking of power, just of features) I wouldn't be able to do so in this edition.That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?
Well, you can't build a Shadow Dancer, but then again PF1 CRB Shadow Dancer wasn't the most stellar execution of the archetype ;)
That being said, many of us feel like you don't get enough class feats by default. Luckily, the devs have made it clear that you can hand out extra class feats without breaking the game math, in a way you couldn't really do in PF1. I've been giving my players a class feat every level and it works fine.
In Pf2 however, there are almost no traps or tax feats while on the other hand there are no feats which straightup improve stats and only few which modify the math (and that usually to be on par with other options)So I actually feel comfortable with handing out a bonus feat to my party now and then - heack, I even try a party where everyone gets an archetype for free and they are not imbalanced
because feats are good for one thing in pf2: additional options
and while your options increase you dont get inherently more powerful
combat recources run out (a little) slower, but thats about it
That is very interesting. After playing with normal rules for a while we'll try that for sure! :)
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?
OK, let's avoid casters and take for example the monk class. Is it possibile to build a monk with the same features than in PF1? (Bonus feats, ki, stunning, timeless body, empty body etc... and let's also consider that I have 1 feat every two levels I can use for stances or other monk features).
If so, how? Could you give me an example of minimal build 1 to 20?| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Try playing a "double feats" or a "double class feats" variant. I'm pretty sure the GMG will have guidelines for this. Since feats are no longer "math enhancers you can stack one upon the other" letting people have extra feats isn't going to make them more powerful, just more versatile.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's start with the fact that PF2 allows you to build a Monk that is actually viable, awesome, distinct from other classes and effective, which you could never say about PF1 cMonk.
Yes, for sure. :) My question was quite different though.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's start with the fact that PF2 allows you to build a Monk that is actually viable, awesome, distinct from other classes and effective, which you could never say about PF1 cMonk.Yes, for sure. :) My question was quite different though.
Because a straight-up answer to your question would you leave you with an impression of PF2 monk being a pale shadow of PF1 monk. There's no ki points for every Monk, no timeless body/empty body you gain automatically, heck, the stunning fist is an optional feat. At this point you would conclude that Monk was robbed of cool abilities it gained automatically in PF1 and its PF2 version is inferior.
But that isn't true. Between no longer having crappy accuracy, having no longer to rely on contrived solutions to get something other classes got just by walking into the shop and getting flaming on their weapon AND having all the class abilities Monk didn't have in PF1, it's a class on a completely different power level relative to other classes than it was in PF1.
Sure, you can add stunning fist, ki stuff, empty body and all the other stuff you had in PF1 Monk, but you aren't married to them and the class design doesn't assume that the Monk needs to be woefully underperforming in combat because, uuuuh, they don't age at some point and oooooh, at level 19 you can turn ethereal. For one minute.
This problem is the equivalent of PF1 Rogue fans looking at PF2 ROgue and concluding that the class sucks because PF1 Rogue got up to 10d6 sneak attack while PF2 Rogue gets up to 4d6. They're missing the greater picture, both of the class itself but also of how it works with the rest of the ruleset.
Because a straight-up answer to your question would you leave you with an impression of PF2 monk being a pale shadow of PF1 monk. There's no ki points for every Monk, no timeless body/empty body you gain automatically, heck, the stunning fist is an optional feat. At this point you would conclude that Monk was robbed of cool abilities it gained automatically in PF1 and its PF2 version is inferior.Let's start with the fact that PF2 allows you to build a Monk that is actually viable, awesome, distinct from other classes and effective, which you could never say about PF1 cMonk.Yes, for sure. :) My question was quite different though.
So, were you guessing my conclusions without even try an explanation? :)
But that isn't true. Between no longer having crappy accuracy, having no longer to rely on contrived solutions to get something other classes got just by walking into the shop and getting flaming on their weapon AND having all the class abilities Monk didn't have in PF1, it's a class on a completely different power level relative to other classes than it was in PF1.Sure, you can add stunning fist, ki stuff, empty body and all the other stuff you had in PF1 Monk, but you aren't married to them and the class design doesn't assume that the Monk needs to be woefully underperforming in combat because, uuuuh, they don't age at some point and oooooh, at level 19 you can turn ethereal. For one minute.
As I've already said I'm not looking for powerbuilds or efficiency. I don't care very much about being good in combat, my group game style is more roleplay oriented than others. We love features because they help you describe your character, they give nuances to roleplay and also increase versatility. So, even stupid useless features could be great for us.
This problem is the equivalent of PF1 Rogue fans looking at PF2 Rogue and concluding that the class sucks because PF1 Rogue got up to 10d6 sneak attack while PF2 Rogue gets up to 4d6. They're missing the greater picture, both of the class itself but also of how it works with the rest of the ruleset.
I'm not worried about it, and I love rogues. I feel more the lack of features as for the monk ;)
That said, maybe I'm wrong. I'm not saying I'm right. I cannot say anything before trying the game. That is just an impression I wanted to share and speak about. :)
I feel like there's definitely a bit of a bottleneck when it comes to trying to build ideas that do a bunch of different things because each new option is basically another feat, sometimes a couple of them.
PF2 also struggles a bit at letting you wander too far away from your class' core concept. To be fair, so did PF1 and it was worse in many respects, but PF1 had a breadth of class archetypes that helped with this and PF2 isn't quite there yet. You'll feel a pinch of you want to do something that isn't part of what your class normally does.
But PF2 is much better at keeping the things you are good at relevant long term, so if you're only looking to do one or two things you'll have a lot more flexibility to take stuff that sounds fun because there's much less of an emphasis on taking maintenance feats than there were in PF1.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK, let's avoid casters and take for example the monk class. Is it possibile to build a monk with the same features than in PF1? (Bonus feats, ki, stunning, timeless body, empty body etc... and let's also consider that I have 1 feat every two levels I can use for stances or other monk features).
If so, how? Could you give me an example of minimal build 1 to 20?
Sure, I'll give it a go. First off, "bonus feats" is not a meaningful currency, given that most PF1 feats are basically just math enhancers... and probably need to be on a monk. There are a few options that add new abilities, like Deflect Arrows, but there are plenty that are just built into the PF2 monk. So while the PF1 monk gets 3 bonus feats, the PF2 monk gets Imrpoved Grapple, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Disarm, Improved Feint, Improved Trip, Dodge, Spring Attack, and arguably Improved Critical. So the PF2 monk got 7 or 8 of the bonus feats the PF1 monk could pick with their 6 "bonus" feats.
So let's look at a build. Human monk, natural ambition at 1st. Beyond that just class feats.
1st: Stance, Ki Strike
2nd: Stunning Fist
4th: Dancing Leaf
6th: Wholeness of Body
8th: Ki Rush
10: Abundant Step
12th: Diamond Soul
14th: Timeless Body
16th: Quivering Palm
18th: Empty Body
20th: Golden Body
Between these class feats and the built in class features, there's something equivalent to every monk feature with the exception of Tongue of the Sun and Moon. I ran out of feats for that one. HOWEVER, our PF2 monk still has all of their skill and general feats left to assign, and most of their ancestry feats. Each of which can be used to supplement your monk features, and, as you put it, "help you describe your character, they give nuances to roleplay and also increase versatility."
For example, Legendary Linguist can replace Tongue of the Sun and Moon. Cat Fall and various athletics feats can do the work of Dancing Leaf. Various ancestry feats provide you with Innate cantrips or spells. If you can replace a monk feature with a skill feat, you can use the class feat to pick up and entirely new ability, like Ki Blast or Whirling Throw.
I don't think PF1 feats are going to provide you with this many new options, much less do so while leaving you a martial class that can actually hang with barbarians and paladins. I mean, you could go qingqong and burn every feat on additional ki powers and ki points, but that's not gonna end great for you.
I feel like there's definitely a bit of a bottleneck when it comes to trying to build ideas that do a bunch of different things because each new option is basically another feat, sometimes a couple of them.
Yes, that was my first feeling about it. It's something like "I can have many different monks (thankfully!) but the difference is in "negative" because I get it by taking all the previous features and selecting only some of them." And my expectations were different, because I thought I would have had something like "normal monk, monk with weaker ki powers but more stances, monk with higher resistances and weaker attacks and so no".
But PF2 is much better at keeping the things you are good at relevant long term, so if you're only looking to do one or two things you'll have a lot more flexibility to take stuff that sounds fun because there's much less of an emphasis on taking maintenance feats than there were in PF1.
Ok, I imagine I could just roleplay some old features, without them being part of the rules. That could be a good solution for us. Thx!
Sure, I'll give it a go. First off, "bonus feats" is not a meaningful currency, given that most PF1 feats are basically just math enhancers... and probably need to be on a monk. There are a few options that add new abilities, like Deflect Arrows, but there are plenty that are just built into the PF2 monk. So while the PF1 monk gets 3 bonus feats, the PF2 monk gets Imrpoved Grapple, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Disarm, Improved Feint, Improved Trip, Dodge, Spring Attack, and arguably Improved Critical. So the PF2 monk got 7 or 8 of the bonus feats the PF1 monk could pick with their 6 "bonus" feats.
Thx for the answer! Ok, my main point about extra feats is about "monk-like feats as stances". They are so "monky" and now I can have them only sacrifying other "monky" features, as the ones you reported below.
So let's look at a build. Human monk, natural ambition at 1st. Beyond that just class feats.
1st: Stance, Ki Strike
2nd: Stunning Fist
4th: Dancing Leaf
6th: Wholeness of Body
8th: Ki Rush
10: Abundant Step
12th: Diamond Soul
14th: Timeless Body
16th: Quivering Palm
18th: Empty Body
20th: Golden Body
Ok, if not human btw I have to sacrify one of this "monky" trait. ;)
Between these class feats and the built in class features, there's something equivalent to every monk feature with the exception of Tongue of the Sun and Moon. I ran out of feats for that one. HOWEVER, our PF2 monk still has all of their skill and general feats left to assign, and most of their ancestry feats. Each of which can be used to supplement your monk features, and, as you put it, "help you describe your character, they give nuances to roleplay and also increase versatility."
For example, Legendary Linguist can replace Tongue of the Sun and Moon. Cat Fall and various athletics feats can do the work of Dancing Leaf. Various ancestry feats provide you with Innate cantrips or spells. If...
That is very interesting. I had imagined there could have bene a way to use skill feats for class nuances, but I haven't already cheked it deeply. Thx! :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with using style feats as something you lose out on is that PF1 style feats were so prerequisite heavy you usually couldn't do more than one style. I'd also argue that a single stance feat captures the functionality of at least 2 of the feats in a style.
And when you use all of your assets, you can easily snag even more monk stuff. Focusing your skill feats on athletics, acrobatics, and society let's us cover at least 3 features without spending class feats. You can use Medicine in lieu of Wholeness of Body and Diamond Body. Heritages like Elemental Heart Dwarf and Wellspring Gnome can get mystic abilities that feel very similar to many ki powers, as can Ancestry feats like Otherworldly magic.
Turnabout is fair play, so can you give me a specific monk build you are concerned about emulating? Because I bet I can emulate it.
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?
Most of the transformational bloodlines the sorcerers had available to them were gutted. Take for instance the undead bloodline. In PF1, the character is slowly becoming more of an undead over time, permanently gaining undead traits until at 20th level the character is all but undead. In PF2, you can get a few focus spells and get stuck with the divine spell list. Even the dragon bloodline, which grants some of the transformational effects, only grants them as temporary focus spells. No permanently transforming into a humanoid dragon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?Most of the transformational bloodlines the sorcerers had available to them were gutted. Take for instance the undead bloodline. In PF1, the character is slowly becoming more of an undead over time, permanently gaining undead traits until at 20th level the character is all but undead. In PF2, you can get a few focus spells and get stuck with the divine spell list. Even the dragon bloodline, which grants some of the transformational effects, only grants them as temporary focus spells. No permanently transforming into a humanoid dragon.
This is actually a good point - I was also a little bit underwhelmes by the new flight capabilities of some classes
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?Most of the transformational bloodlines the sorcerers had available to them were gutted. Take for instance the undead bloodline. In PF1, the character is slowly becoming more of an undead over time, permanently gaining undead traits until at 20th level the character is all but undead. In PF2, you can get a few focus spells and get stuck with the divine spell list. Even the dragon bloodline, which grants some of the transformational effects, only grants them as temporary focus spells. No permanently transforming into a humanoid dragon.
I don't think that's a good example of what we are talking about though. You still get those features, they are just different. The amount of features hasn't really decreased for the sorcerer.
A better example would be the Alchemist, who not only got their transformation options paired down but has less access to what would have been their discoveries, because there's no "extra discovery" general feat. The Alchemist also got skill feats, but that's admittedly a poor substitute. The Alchemist has thus had their features reduced both in quantity and narrative impact.
I am tempted to try a version where a half class feat is given every odd level (your level halved rounded down)
And where general feats can take dedication feats.
I think the game works fine without it, but I do think dedication feats feel a little sucky to get the level that you get them as a class feat in many cases.
Giving out lots of class feats gives a decent boost in power to casters though, focus point recharging is no longer a trade off and it is always optimal to stack spell granting dedications because you are more capable of picking up more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of characters I've built felt like they're like 1 or 2 feats behind where I wound want them to be, which is a thing that seems pretty easy to fix. Either with "everybody gets more feats" or "general feats are more versatile" or "you get some bonus feats through the course of the campaign."
I suspect the "Everyone gets a free archetype" variant in the GMG is going to be very popular.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?Most of the transformational bloodlines the sorcerers had available to them were gutted. Take for instance the undead bloodline. In PF1, the character is slowly becoming more of an undead over time, permanently gaining undead traits until at 20th level the character is all but undead. In PF2, you can get a few focus spells and get stuck with the divine spell list. Even the dragon bloodline, which grants some of the transformational effects, only grants them as temporary focus spells. No permanently transforming into a humanoid dragon.
Also, upon further reflection, I'm not sure how true this of the sorcerer. Consider Draconic. The PF2 version can use its claws for 1 out of every 10 minutes. PF1 was CHA+3 ROUNDS. And the PF1 sorcerer didn't get wings until level 15. The PF2 version gets it at level 10, and by the time level 15 rolls around their heightened form lasts 10 minutes. Considering the sorcerer gets refocused every 10 minutes automatically, that's basically permanent except you can make them go away whenever. And if you have the right feats you can make your claws just as permanent.
The only thing that the PF1 version has an edge in for permanent transformation is the dragon scales, and that just seems to be a math thing in PF2. Well, there's the 20th level capstone's, but those can easily by printed as 20th level feats a la some of the druid options.
A lot of PF1s permanent character transformations are gone since those are all but nonexistent in PF2. You nearly always have to pay an action cost for a temporary transformation.
It's the different design, away from stackable bonusses (permanent) towards tactical decisions.
The alchemist has the class feat to make a mutagen last permanent as a rare example.
That isn't my impression. What is an example of a character concept that you could build with pre-APG PF1 that you cannot build properly with PF2?Most of the transformational bloodlines the sorcerers had available to them were gutted. Take for instance the undead bloodline. In PF1, the character is slowly becoming more of an undead over time, permanently gaining undead traits until at 20th level the character is all but undead. In PF2, you can get a few focus spells and get stuck with the divine spell list. Even the dragon bloodline, which grants some of the transformational effects, only grants them as temporary focus spells. No permanently transforming into a humanoid dragon.Also, upon further reflection, I'm not sure how true this of the sorcerer. Consider Draconic. The PF2 version can use its claws for 1 out of every 10 minutes. PF1 was CHA+3 ROUNDS. And the PF1 sorcerer didn't get wings until level 15. The PF2 version gets it at level 10, and by the time level 15 rolls around their heightened form lasts 10 minutes. Considering the sorcerer gets refocused every 10 minutes automatically, that's basically permanent except you can make them go away whenever. And if you have the right feats you can make your claws just as permanent.
The only thing that the PF1 version has an edge in for permanent transformation is the dragon scales, and that just seems to be a math thing in PF2. Well, there's the 20th level capstone's, but those can easily by printed as 20th level feats a la some of the druid options.
Wow... I forgot that's how that worked... Holy crap baskets, it really is permanent with the right support options (taking the 2 FP back on a refocus feat). *SQUEE!!!!!!!*
According to my reading, that's not entirely true.
You refill your focus pool during your daily preparations, and you can regain 1 Focus Point by spending 10 minutes using the Refocus activity. Unlike other characters, you don’t need to do anything specific to Refocus, as the power of the blood flowing through your veins naturally replenishes your focus pool.
So while you don't need to do anything specific, you do need to spend the ten minutes refocusing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So while you don't need to do anything specific, you do need to spend the ten minutes refocusing.
Yeah, but refocus says you can do other stuff while refocusing as long as it's appropriate and since they don't need to do anything specific they can kinda just do w/e with that time.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
So while you don't need to do anything specific, you do need to spend the ten minutes refocusing.Yeah, but refocus says you can do other stuff while refocusing as long as it's appropriate and since they don't need to do anything specific they can kinda just do w/e with that time.
It's indeed very handy! Of course you still do need to be Refocusing for a contiguous 10 minutes, so if you have combats or otherwise aren't doing exploration activities on occasion, it'll cause brief interruptions to your flight capacity. Though as nick1wasd mentions, being able to recover 2 FP every time you Refocus really helps smooth past those cases .
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a big proponent of double class feats. It's been invaluable in getting the right feel for my converted campaign, since in many cases it was impossible to have a satisfying number of the abilities my characters had previously.
It's 100% an increase in flexibility (which was one of the standards by which a class could be ranked higher on the tier list) and a definite increase in raw power (albeit small). Once I made the house rule, the characters clicked into place and the transition was seamless. The characters feel fleshed out and versatile.
That's not to say the normal number of feats is *bad*, it's just too limited for my taste. Definitely changes the feel of the game.
I'm a big proponent of double class feats. It's been invaluable in getting the right feel for my converted campaign, since in many cases it was impossible to have a satisfying number of the abilities my characters had previously.
It's 100% an increase in flexibility (which was one of the standards by which a class could be ranked higher on the tier list) and a definite increase in raw power (albeit small). Once I made the house rule, the characters clicked into place and the transition was seamless. The characters feel fleshed out and versatile.
That's not to say the normal number of feats is *bad*, it's just too limited for my taste. Definitely changes the feel of the game.
Am doing this too, following your suggestion from long ago. It certainly lets you get some characters just right, but it has mixed results depending on the class. Single Classed Wizards and Sorcs mgirating to PF2 couldn't find enough options that they wanted/had before to even spend all the feats they got (levels 7-10). Their selection is too small (Some levels only have TWO choices) and a lot of the options are lame.
Non-casters have been very satisfied, though!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a big proponent of double class feats. It's been invaluable in getting the right feel for my converted campaign, since in many cases it was impossible to have a satisfying number of the abilities my characters had previously.
It's 100% an increase in flexibility (which was one of the standards by which a class could be ranked higher on the tier list) and a definite increase in raw power (albeit small). Once I made the house rule, the characters clicked into place and the transition was seamless. The characters feel fleshed out and versatile.
That's not to say the normal number of feats is *bad*, it's just too limited for my taste. Definitely changes the feel of the game.
Am doing this too, following your suggestion from long ago. It certainly lets you get some characters just right, but it has mixed results depending on the class. Single Classed Wizards and Sorcs mgirating to PF2 couldn't find enough options that they wanted/had before to even spend all the feats they got (levels 7-10). Their selection is too small (Some levels only have TWO choices) and a lot of the options are lame.
Non-casters have been very satisfied, though!
Yeah, it'll definitely get better with more feat and dedication options!
|
Some things you could do in PF1 but cannot do in PF2.
Several class features are not available with Multiclassing.
You cannot start with Inspire courage at level 1 without becoming a master of Occult spellcasting.
You cannot start as a caster at level 1 and then devote your life to being a martial without being both a far better caster and a far worse martial than the guy who started as a martial and then devoted their life to being a caster.
You cannot retrain your class.
You cannot be a CG Cleric of Gorum.
You cannot be a negative-channeling Cleric of Pharasma.
Despite all this and others, I still very much prefer PF2 though :-)
Some things you could do in PF1 but cannot do in PF2.
Certainly true
Several class features are not available with Multiclassing.
But you at least don't loose the features of your own class
You cannot start with Inspire courage at level 1 without becoming a master of Occult spellcasting.
which certainly is not a bad thing
You cannot start as a caster at level 1 and then devote your life to being a martial without being both a far better caster and a far worse martial than the guy who started as a martial and then devoted their life to being a caster.
That is true but they got their main classes mixed up if you ask me ;)
(And lets be honest, mixing martial and caster was usually not a good idea)You cannot retrain your class.
Which shouldn'T be neccessary (I usually saw that as option to remove your multiclassing mistakes)
You cannot be a CG Cleric of Gorum.
not the only god with changed follower alignments, but every change makes sense so far
You cannot be a negative-channeling Cleric of Pharasma.
On the others hand some other gods opened up options - it is just not linked to good or evil anymore
Despite all this and others, I still very much prefer PF2 though :-)
Totally agreed
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will say that I'd allow someone to retrain their class given enough downtime. It might take longer proportional to the character level though. It should take longer to unlearn 15 levels of barbarian training and replace them with 15 levels of wizard training than 3 levels.
But I feel like that's a pretty rare corner case anyway.
I allow people to change whatever they want about their character during the first two level ups of the campaign. If anything major is changed, we just treat it as if it was always like that. Beyond those levels, I follow the normal retraining rules.
In a reasonable system, "retraining" would not be a thing. You would simply start training some new thing, and over time you'd forget, to some degree at least, how to do the old thing as good as you used to do it. In a class-based system, I suppose that, for a while at least, this means you'd be sort of "dual-classed" to one degree or another.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me, it's:
1. If an ability or feat has literally never come up, replace it to something else, no question.
2. If an ability or feat selection is making you not enjoy your character, replace it after asking me.
3. If something fundamental to your character concept and the story so far no longer strikes your fancy, standard retraining rules may apply to maintain continuity.
4. If you want to retrain purely to maximize your character's DPR or for optimization reasons, I'll ask you to reconsider.
My own way to do retraining is that you have to
a) first multiclass and have more class feats spend on dedication than own class feats.b) then retrain once, rebuilding your character as a core class of your previous multiclass with a multiclass in your old core class. This character must have the same ratio of class feats as prior. E.G a Fighter/Druid who had 2 fighter feats and 3 druid would become a Druid/Fighter with 3 Druid feats and 2 fighter.
c) you can then retrain away your old classes feats as per normal retraining rules.
That’s awesome and totally in keeping with the vibe of the multiclassing and retraining rules. Your process feels like organic character growth to me.