Pathfinder 2e Playtest: First Impressions

This Saturday I’m going to join a playtest campaign for Pathfinder 2^nd Edition.  I’m trying to read over the rulebook, but it’s already giving me a headache.   At first glance it’s less complicated than Starfinder, but I still prefer the simplicity of D&D 5e.  I promise I will keep an open mind, though.  A lot of games play better than they read.

Here’s some things that jump out at me so far.  Disclamer: I might be wrong a lot.  So far I’ve only skimmed the PDF, so I may have missed a few things.  I also might mention some things that haven’t changed from Pathfinder 1e, because I’m used to playing D&D.

Action Economy – You get three actions per round (plus 1 reaction and unlimited free actions).  These actions can be movement, attacks, or all kinds of things.  To discourage people using all three actions to attack, the second and third attacks have a cumulative attack penalty.  Many spells cost multiple actions to cast, so you can only get one out per round.  I find this elegant, and a lot easier to remember than “Standard/Move/Minor” or whatever.

Attacks of Opportunity – I’ve gotten used to D&D 5e, in which you provoke when you leave an enemy’s threat range.  PF2e has you provoke when you make any movement while inside a monster’s threat range, which is going to get me in trouble.  One the bright side, it’s easier to Step (aka shift, 5-foot-step, withdraw, etc) in PF2e than in D&D 5e.   Just use one of your actions to Step one square, without provoking.

Diagonal Movement – Uses the 1, 2, 1, 2 method again.  I’ve always hated that.  I know it’s not strictly realistic having diagonal movement equal horizontal/vertical movement, but it’s not as exploitable as people seem to think.  Simpler is better.

Feats – The biggest part of character customization appears to revolve around feat selection.  It looks like you get at least one feat at every level.  Some feats come from for your ancestry, others from your class, and some are related to your skills .  So even if you have multiple Elven Fighters in the party, they’re still going to play very differently.  However, one downside is that each class’s section in the rulebook looks very similar to D&D 4e.  Yeah, feats aren’t quite the same as powers, but the aesthetic still brings back bad memories.

Stats – The method for generating your stats is a lot different than what I’m used to, but I really like it.  You start with all 10s, then you get bonuses from your Ancestry, Class, and Background.

Races – They’re now called “ancestries”, which is more accurate than “race”, and has the advantage of pissing off the neckbeards.   The Half-Orc and Half-Elf ancestries are now first-level feats that can be taken by Humans, which is pretty cool, but it makes me wish they’d taken the opportunity to add a few more half-ancestries in.  And why only for Humans?  Hopefully the final product will have more.

Goblins and Alchemists – Pathfinder’s most signature race and class are finally in the core rulebook.  I’m personally not interested, but I know a certain player who is probably thrilled.

Proficiency Bonus – I’ve never been fond of the “Base Attack Bonus” some RPGs use, and found D&D 5e’s proficiency bonus much easier.  Glad to see it here as well.  However, as I understand it, your level is part of your Proficiency bonus, which seems like will translate into absurdly bonuses at high levels.  I hope I’m reading that wrong.  I’m so used to D&D 5e’s tight math, that I don’t want to see another system where you roll a d20 and add something astronomical.

TEML – This is another thing that gets added to most die rolls.  You get another bonus to the roll depending on whether you’re Untrained (-2), Trained (+0), Expert (+1), Master (+2), or Legen... wait for it... dary (+3).  It seems as good a method as any.

Touch AC – Seriously, I hate systems with two types of AC.  If you know most characters’ TAC is going to be a little lower than their regular AC, why not just have one AC and raise the attack bonus to touch attacks?

Encumbrance – I’m not a fan of strict encumbrance rules, but this one’s at least kind of interesting.  Instead of keeping track of the exact weight in pounds, it uses a "Bulk" system that categorizes items in terms of size and shape.  It reminds me of how certain video games have you fitting different-sized items into your inventory pages.  It's neat, but it's yet another system-within-a-system I have to learn when all I want to do is pick up some dice and play.

Healing – Don’t get me started.  There’s no such thing a short rest, and long rests don't heal much (your CON mod times your level).  If you don’t have a healer in the party, you’re going to have a really slow campaign.  Most people reading this already know my feelings on hit points (Hint: I mostly consider it Stamina), and it’s hard for me to get excited about a campaign where I’m going to spend so much time recovering in bed. 

Resonance – This seems like a complicated addition, but it’s kind of interesting.  Basically it’s a score (CHA mod + level) that affects how many magic items you can carry and/or use at a time.   Charisma is my favorite stat, and I’m all for finding more uses for it.  Plus it’s kind of cool that you can build your character with the intention of specializing in magic items.

Hero Points – These days every system has to have some version of Action Points or Bennies or Inspiration or whatever.   I don’t have a problem with it, but it’s one more thing to keep track of in a game overloaded with different kinds of points.

Spellcasting – At first glance, it’s not too different from D&D 5e, but it shares some of the same problems.  Certain characters will end up having to juggle Vancian “spell slots per level per day” spells, as well as dealing with spell points, and some specific spells that have their own “per day” limit.  It seems like a lot of different systems to keep track of.

Character Sheet – The default character sheet appears to be in Landscape mode, which is awesome because I usually make myself some landscape sheets anyway. 

Overall, I like some of the changes, dislike others, and hate some of the things they kept the same.  I’ll have to wait until Saturday to know what I think for sure.  But even if it turns out to be excellent, I keep wondering, is a new edition a good idea?  Is this ultimately going to be a good thing or a bad thing for Paizo as a company? 

Here’s the thing:  D&D 3.5 was the most prolific version of D&D ever released.  When WOTC went on to 4^th edition, many people felt this was a bad idea, because it abandoned so much existing content.  I still say what I’ve always said: 4^th edition is a pretty fun game, but it should have been a spin-off product, not a replacement for 3.5.  I’m having similar thoughts about PF2e.

Today, Pathfinder has a very niche market.  It caters to the people who didn’t want to move on from D&D 3.5.  I wouldn’t be so skeptical if the new edition was a spin-off product, but by calling it “Pathfinder 2^nd Edition”, it replaces their masthead product.  Many gamers play Pathfinder for one reason: 3.5 nostalgia.  Throw out that reason, and suddenly there are hundreds of RPG systems out there to try.  Without that 3.5 connection, Pathfinder 2e is going to have a lot more competition.  I honestly think they are going to lose business over this.

I hope I'm wrong.