PF2e Advanced Player's Guide playtest

[137beth]

Paizo has released a playtest document for the 2nd edition APG (https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sh04?Welcome-to-the-Advanced-Player-s-Guide-Playtest). As with most PF1e playtest, it only includes base classes. There are four classes in the playtest: Investigator, Oracle, Swashbuckler, and Witch. So far, I have only read the witch section.

Unlike the core spellcasting classes, the witch gets access to a grab-bag of spells from three of the core spell lists (arcane, primal, and occult). They also seem to have done away with the choices of patron themes from the PF1e witch.

For me, at least, nothing in the witch playtest makes me all that excited about playing it, but that's how I felt about the PF2 core rules as a whole (with one exception: Namely, I liked that downtime was baked into the core rules).

[NomGarret]

Just starting to look it over, but the first question I have is whether the oracle really has enough to set it apart from a divine sorcerer? So far it seems like if you swapped focus casting for mystery you’d get pretty much the same class. Again, only starting to skim it, so we’ll see.

[upho]

Ugh... As I suspected, this keeps to the same minimal mechanical variation span set by the core book, providing a huge number of character build choices choices with very little impact on an encounter or adventure. And this further confirms that a 3PP releasing something actually interesting based on the potentially great design concepts of the core system would be incompatible with that minimal mechanical variation span and Paizo material. It's just sad IMO.

That said, it seems they managed to fit some decent new trademark abilities into the set minimal variation, at least for the investigator and the swashbuckler. Of course, they don't change the fact that the die decides the outcome almost independently of action use choices and build choices made after 1st level.

[mythmonster2]

Ugh... As I suspected, this keeps to the same minimal mechanical variation span set by the core book, providing a huge number of character build choices choices with very little impact on an encounter or adventure. And this further confirms that a 3PP releasing something actually interesting based on the potentially great design concepts of the core system would be incompatible with that minimal mechanical variation span and Paizo material. It's just sad IMO.

That said, it seems they managed to fit some decent new trademark abilities into the set minimal variation, at least for the investigator and the swashbuckler. Of course, they don't change the fact that the die decides the outcome almost independently of action use choices and build choices made after 1st level.

Sorry, could you clarify what you mean here? Is it just that you don't get enough numerical buffs to your actions, or is there another point you were making?

[upho]

Sorry, could you clarify what you mean here? Is it just that you don't get enough numerical buffs to your actions, or is there another point you were making?A part of it has to do with the limited numerical buffs, yes, but most of it has to do with the lack of ways to choose build options and use actions in combos resulting in distinctly different mechanics and impacts on the story.

To give you an example on the build side of things, there's nothing which allows a non-caster class to take on a primary combat role/function which doesn't largely rely on taking enemies out by reducing their hp to 0. Compare to PF1, where say one 12th level bloodrager could be one of the game's most (if not THE most) accomplished single-target melee damage dealer with virtually no debuff or control power, and another 12th level bloodrager could be a fantastic multi-target melee control/debuff specialist dealing pathetic damage, yet both of them are highly effective combatants. Even if PF2 had as many PC build options as PF1, a similarly great difference between two viable builds of the same (especially non-caster) class would be far outside the system's maximum allowed mechanical variation span. And on top of that, PF2 severely restricts the build option compatibility enabling such specialized builds to begin with, especially by more or less arbitrarily limiting access behind class and level restrictions.

On the in-game action side of things, as long as a player/PC isn't plain stupid, the number of mechanical tools they have available to overcome a specific challenge or in each round of combat are very small, and there's very little difference in mechanical impact between those choices. Likewise, the small number of choices remain largely the same almost regardless of the specifics of the situation. This is surprisingly often true also for the tons of highly situational actions a character may have access to; for example, carrying a shield is virtually never going to be worth the raise shield action, associated manipulate provocation and the weapon limitation costs (unless perhaps if you're a fighter who specialize in using the shield).

The main reason for having such limited mechanical variation between PCs and parties of a certain level is found on the designers' side of things; it makes it easy to design challenges which are very close to equally difficult for all parties at the intended level, without the need for any GM adaptions. IOW, it makes it easier to manage PFS.

I hope that makes my previous post a bit clearer.

[Kurald Galain]

Ok, at first glance,
Investigator is all about complicated ways to get a non-stacking +1 bonus. No, spending an action to get +1 to your next attack is not worthwhile. They do have a funny ability that lets you retroactively buy an item when you need it, but outside a city campaign it's basically unusable.
Oracle's curse is now automatically tied to your mystery, so less character diversity there. The theme is powerful abilities with drawbacks (i.e. casting "revelation spells" increase your curse), but the drawbacks are just not very noticeable (although you can also just use normal spells instead, revelation spells aren't that impressive).
Swashbuckler has the same idea; you have a bonus to damage and movement, and specific moves ("finishers" or "riposte") switch it off until you successfully do a combat maneuver. The issue here is the opposite, i.e. that finishers are nowhere near powerful enough (and riposte too unreliable) to justify losing the bonus.
Hexes are no longer at-will; you can only use up to three per ten minutes. That by itself negates the whole point of P1's witch.


So overal... meh. Risk/reward moves are a fun concept, but to work they need to have an actual risk and an actual reward.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by 137ben
As with most PF1e playtest, it only includes base classes. There are four classes in the playtest: Investigator, Oracle, Swashbuckler, and Witch.

This makes me cherish the PF1 oracle all the more.

Apart from that, I’m mildly intrigued that there seems to be a tengu iconic, since most of the previous iconics have been the staple fantasy races. Or have tengu been included in the core races in PF2?

[Ssalarn]

Apart from that, I’m mildly intrigued that there seems to be a tengu iconic, since most of the previous iconics have been the staple fantasy races. Or have tengu been included in the core races in PF2?

Tengu are one of the new ancestries that will be included in the APG. New system, new paradigms, so there may be iconics for future classes that also use non-core ancestries.

[Psyren]

Ok, at first glance,
Investigator is all about complicated ways to get a non-stacking +1 bonus. No, spending an action to get +1 to your next attack is not worthwhile. They do have a funny ability that lets you retroactively buy an item when you need it, but outside a city campaign it's basically unusable.
Oracle's curse is now automatically tied to your mystery, so less character diversity there. The theme is powerful abilities with drawbacks (i.e. casting "revelation spells" increase your curse), but the drawbacks are just not very noticeable (although you can also just use normal spells instead, revelation spells aren't that impressive).
Swashbuckler has the same idea; you have a bonus to damage and movement, and specific moves ("finishers" or "riposte") switch it off until you successfully do a combat maneuver. The issue here is the opposite, i.e. that finishers are nowhere near powerful enough (and riposte too unreliable) to justify losing the bonus.
Hexes are no longer at-will; you can only use up to three per ten minutes. That by itself negates the whole point of P1's witch.


So overal... meh. Risk/reward moves are a fun concept, but to work they need to have an actual risk and an actual reward.

My plaintive "who asked for this outside of maybe PFS" continues.

But maybe it was a loud enough ask in PFS that it justified a whole edition?

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Ssalarn
Tengu are one of the new ancestries that will be included in the APG.

Interesting, thanks. I don’t really have an understanding of what “ancestries” are, but tengu are one of my favorite Pathfinder races—not for the mechanics so much as their role in real-world mythology.

If only there was a playable tanuki race, I'd build a yokai party in a heartbeat. :smalltongue:

[mythmonster2]

Interesting, thanks. I don’t really have an understanding of what “ancestries” are, but tengu are one of my favorite Pathfinder races—not for the mechanics so much as their role in real-world mythology.

If only there was a playable tanuki race, I'd build a yokai party in a heartbeat. :smalltongue:

Ancestries are just the name for races in PF2e.

[BWR]

Apparently 'race' was racist.

[NomGarret]

I mean, ancestry is certainly a better term for what’s being described. Sure, the term ‘race’ gives room for uncomfortable implications, but given that it doesn’t actually describe the difference between an elf and a goblin and implies that all such creatures are biologically not only the same species but the same subspecies (which is a very particular game implication), it’s probably time to do discard the legacy term that exists for legacy’s sake.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by BWR
Apparently 'race' was racist.

Is this just random snark on your part, or was this actually the logic involved?


Originally Posted by NomGarret
*snip*

I can’t make sense of your meaning here. Are you saying the game is claiming that a tengu, a vishkanya and a halfling are all interfertile subspecies?

.

[NomGarret]

I’m not saying that the game intends for these to be interfertile, but that’s what relying on the lazy, outdated term implies.

[Psyren]

Is this just random snark on your part, or was this actually the logic involved?

Random snark.

As NomGarret described, "ancestry" allows for concepts that are broader or more nuanced than "race" might capture; you can more readily represent things like, say, a halfling with a demonic tinge to his bloodline, or a dwarf with some gnome, or my personal favorite, a dragon with both metallic and chromatic aspects.

[137beth]

I suspect a big part of the reason they were called ancestries was to allow for their explanation of the "ABCs of character creation: Ancestry, Background, Class." It might also be partly a way to make their game seem superficially distinct from D&D without actually changing the mechanics too much.

"Race" has never been a particularly good word to describe what D&D calls races, but I don't think "ancestry" is necessarily better.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Psyren
…"ancestry" allows for concepts that are broader or more nuanced than "race" might capture….

Interesting, thanks. Sounds like the concept does have some actual utility, then.


Originally Posted by Psyren
…or my personal favorite, a dragon with both metallic and chromatic aspects.

That’s one awkward family reunion. :smalltongue:


Originally Posted by 137ben
It might also be partly a way to make their game seem superficially distinct from D&D without actually changing the mechanics too much.

You’re probably not wrong on this one.

Although, full disclosure, what little I’ve seen of the mechanics doesn’t inspire me to pursue this edition any further. But we’ve already had several detailed threads on the mechanics of PF2, so I’ll leave it there.

[zlefin]

PF2 seems like it has a lot of stuff which could be usefully backported into 1E, with some modifications ofc, but conceptually they work well.

Ancestry feats seems like a good alternate way to handle bloodline powers/bloodlines; get some of the stuff like from racial paragon classes or other boosts to races signature abilities.