Pathfinder 2e

Here are my thoughts on Pathfinder 2e bits! Conclusion at the bottom! (Just read that bit if you don't care why I think what I think!)

Things I like

 * It seems spells level with you, and are more flexible that's cool!
 * Sounds like classes are going to be closer to each other in power level.
 * I like the idea of initiative bonuses based on how an encounter starts
 * Spell crits!


 * Level 10 spells!
 * Making it so illusions can resist detect magic
 * Critical hits being based on attack vs AC rather than a Nat 20


 * Less linear feat progression, and more player choice.
 * Crafting changes (Kinda)

Things I am not sure about

 * Critical fumbles being based on check and Roll rather than a Nat 1
 * Possible lack of rules for critical success out of combat
 * Action economy changes (Lot to talk about here!)
 * The implementation of initiative
 * Crafting changes
 * Losing most Advanced Combat classes and Races

Saige's thoughts!!!
Ok! Gonna talk about Pathfinder 2E here, and layout some of the things I like, and some of the things I am worried about! First thing's first, initiative.

Initiative
I love the idea that doing certain actions out of combat gives you bonuses to initiative, like sneaking, or tracking someone. However I also feel like it's a bad idea to completely replace initiative, I think in most situations it makes sense for those that focus DEX to go first. Fighters, rangers, and rogues tend to be the most combat heavy characters, and with that also tend to have the highest DEX.

I think making init rely on perception will discourage building initiative, as almost everyone will get a +1 to it each level. It also may effectively reduce the amount of skill points players REALLY get to use. Requiring a point put into something at every level to continue beating enemies in initiative.

Magic bits!
There are a lot of changes to spellcasters and magic that seem they could be fun, keeping lower level spells usable into the high levels, and a whole new tier of spells, and making some things a bit more mystic. I also like the idea of spellcasters being able to cast more than one spell in a round if they use their actions right. I don't have much to say here, but that seems good!

Critical hits!
I like the changes to critical hits. In 2e a "crit" just means you beat the enemies AC by 10, which I think will reward high attack builds more, and remove some of the chance around crit builds. However, I don't care for the change to critical fumbles, defining a critical fail as simply "Failing by 10 or more" I think is too harsh.

I already believe that Nat 1's happen too often, and not every Nat 1 should be a critical failure (Otherwise your level 20 fighter will drop one of his swords every 10 rafting!) and I think making crit fails even more common might suck...

Crafting
Crafting shows promise, although I do have worries. Like Starfinder's weapon levels, and the way that crafting is based on skill rank and not difficulty checks. That seems to be the way that Pathfinder 2e is moving. However, I feel like it encourages regularly discarding equipment which I feel makes less sense in a fantasy setting than it does in a Sci-fi one. We can simply house rule that away, but I need to see more about the crafting system to make a honest judgement on it.

Action Economy!
I think a couple people might disagree with me here, but I am not sure about the changes to action economy. (Replacing Move + Standard + (Swift, Free, Five foot fuckery) with 3 actions will harm the game in the long run, and slow it down at the start. (Although I would be happy to be wrong, and I want to hear what other people think!)

There will be a couple issues starting out, obviously most people will have to get used to the new movement system, but on top of that, I think the option to take second and third attacks at level 1 will waste a lot of time. More secondary attacks will miss than hit, especially if the first one was already a miss. That will mean more rolls, more chances of critical fails at level 1, and longer turns.

Into the mid and late game, I think that this will harm non-magic classes. In Pathfinder 1e most combat classes get 2nd, 3rd, and 4th attacks faster than say a wizard or a summoner. However, in 2e it seems that the amount of attacks won't be changing as we level. This issue is compounded by the fact that it will now require an action to "Raise you shield" to receive your shields AC bonus, which will reduce sword and shield fighters to one attack per round.

Races and Classes
Lastly, there are the classes and races. I do think there is a lot of promise here, re-balancing the classes, and bringing them closer together in power level, hopefully following after Starfinder and allowing more varied builds without compromising their abilities in combat. Less requirement to build heavily into long feat trees, eating the first half of your progression on 'must haves'. Those sound like great improvements!

That being said, we would lose most of Pathfinder 1e's Advanced Combat Races, Classes, and Monster manual. While a couple of classes like Alchemist are being added in day one, and we could homebrew most of the races, Advanced Combat includes classes like Magus, Gunslinger, and Witch. I am not sure we can stat those in a balanced way in a new system, and even if we could I think that it would require a lot of work and play testing to perfect.

Conclusion
All together, I am excited for Pathfinder 2e, and think it could make a great system for our next campaign, but it could be a couple of years until we have the content we need to run Heirman Ja. I personally vote that we remain with Pathfinder 1e for the upcoming campaign, and focus on stealing and homebrewing certain things we like from other systems, possibly giving circumstance bonuses to initiative, or reworking crafting skills. I think it's important to remember that they will be two separate systems and not just "Old" and "New", Pathfinder 1e being more complex, and Pathfinder 2e more streamlined. While there is a lot of merit to the streamlining of 2e, I don't think it can replace all of the complexity it loses. Thanks for reading ~ Saige