Fresh off the Developers desk straight to your greedy hands, the Pathfinder 2e Advanced Player's Guide Playtest has been rel;eased into the wild.

The Investigator, Oracle, Swashbuckler, and Witch are back and Paizo wants you to have a chance to make sure they are as great as you remember.

Man, still no gunslinger? I know I'm likely in the minority, but that was my favorite class in Pathfinder

Quote from: steelshadow;1113242Man, still no gunslinger? I know I'm likely in the minority, but that was my favorite class in Pathfinder

It's the one Critical Role made so popular it's about to be featured in an Amazon animated show for multiple seasons...but Paizo can't be bothered to give it priority.

I'm not surprised they are taking their time with the Gunslinger. Paizo screwed up how guns worked in 1E by ignoring playtest feedback and making Guns so much better than other Ranged weapons. To the point that already some in the hobby don't like guns in Fantay including the Gun rules as RAW was and is a good way to ruin a campaign imo. Mind you given how their playtests are usual a huge sham and more to make points with the fans. I'm fully expecting them to ruin guns again for PF 2E.

Quote from: Mistwell;1113271It's the one Critical Role made so popular it's about to be featured in an Amazon animated show for multiple seasons...but Paizo can't be bothered to give it priority.

Fair enough - I've never listened to an actual-play podcast, nor am I plugged into the Critical Role community (so I wasn't aware what they've popularized). I just always liked the gunslinger but have run into a lot of 'Fantasy Gun Control' (ie, no guns in fantasy) types locally and online in the past. Yeah, it seems even more silly for Paizo to be holding off on it, even if some (like sureshot), feel they got it pretty wrong the first time (I don't mind how they did it myself, but I can see where they're coming from)

Quote from: sureshot;1113312I'm not surprised they are taking their time with the Gunslinger. Paizo screwed up how guns worked in 1E by ignoring playtest feedback and making Guns so much better than other Ranged weapons. To the point that already some in the hobby don't like guns in Fantay including the Gun rules as RAW was and is a good way to ruin a campaign imo. Mind you given how their playtests are usual a huge sham and more to make points with the fans. I'm fully expecting them to ruin guns again for PF 2E.

Don't worry, I'm sure "touch AC" will just be a plus two to-hit now and they will do something silly like saying that all guns count as plus 1 magic items for damage before being enchanted, making them nonmagic magic weapons.

Thats funny, I would have expected more complaining about the lack of a Summoner rather then a class that is most likely going to be released in the Lost Omens Combat Guide.

Quote from: Shasarak;1113356funny, I would have expected more complaining

I think it is very clear that people don't care enough about PF2 to spend much time pointing out all the ways that it fails to excite them.

I keep hoping people will share some indications that PF is doing really well.  I think a diverse RPG market is a good thing, even if many of the games aren't to my taste. There's a whole bunch of reasons I think Pazio screwed the pooch with PF2, but I'd actually prefer that I'm wrong.

I can't get excited about diversity if that diversity just means basically the same game with a different rules set.

Quote from: Shasarak;1113189Fresh off the Developers desk straight to your greedy hands, the Pathfinder 2e Advanced Player's Guide Playtest has been rel;eased into the wild.

The Investigator, Oracle, Swashbuckler, and Witch are back and Paizo wants you to have a chance to make sure they are as great as you remember.

Sadly, you weren't able to list the Inquisitor class; which was featured in the 1E APG.  I'd hate to see it left out of the early 2E hardbacks.

I would of like to see a lot of classes incorporated as Archetypes or prestige classes. Are we going to see ALL the classes we went through already?


VPN Sai Mannat AnyDesk

I think that my main problem with this edition is two things.

1. My wife pointed this out, but its like every woman in this artwork is particularly less feminine. I was looking through the book and my wife wanted to take a look, and she was kinda disgusted with it. As she put it: "They all have tiny tits, and look like 16 year old dudes in mascara." I can't unsee it after she pointed that out. The barbarian artwork in particular is atrocious, and this book seems to continue the trend sadly which is why I bring it up.

2. Goblins. Hate that their core now, its just kinda eh. I've never really been a fan of pathfinders goblins as their psuedo-mascot.

Other than that, it seems like it would play well. I hope this edition does well, it seems solid, builds upon what happened with 3rd, and a solid substitute for 5e as a modern game. So called "wokeness" aside.

I suppose this sort of splat was inevitable. Looks like you will also be able to be a bird person.

At a glance, the Investigator and Swashbuckler look weaker than their component classes. Not sure the point of them. The Oracle looks interesting although the cloth casters are already so vulnerable staying alive will be a major challenge! Other than possibly the Oracle, "advanced" players probably aren't going to pick these.

Quote from: Conanist;1113587I suppose this sort of splat was inevitable. Looks like you will also be able to be a bird person.

At a glance, the Investigator and Swashbuckler look weaker than their component classes. Not sure the point of them. The Oracle looks interesting although the cloth casters are already so vulnerable staying alive will be a major challenge! Other than possibly the Oracle, "advanced" players probably aren't going to pick these.

Depends. Witch was considered top tier in 1st edition, so I think its very possible that it will be considered such again, I don't see any reason why not. I find it interesting that gunslinger isn't on there anymore though.

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1113636Depends. Witch was considered top tier in 1st edition, so I think its very possible that it will be considered such again, I don't see any reason why not. I find it interesting that gunslinger isn't on there anymore though.

It really plays a lot differently than PF1. They'd have to make major changes to the system in order for any cloth caster to be any good, really. Enemy monsters will be critically hitting unarmored characters very frequently, and those with ranged weapons will often have 3 shots a turn. Getting dropped by two critical hits before a "long rest" means death; Roll another character. The damage of offensive spells is very low, and monsters worth experience points will nearly always have a higher than 50% chance to save against their spells.

The Cackle ability is interesting as it allows you to keep a debuff spell that was saved against going (they usually last for 1 turn if the save was made). However you'd need to delay your turn in the initiative order until your intended target has gone to take advantage of this, as the spell ends at the end of the enemies' turn. Clunky and nonintuitive but still pretty good.

Absent sweeping, fundamental changes I don't see any offensive caster being at the top of the heap. The numbers don't lie and do not support that. I put a review in the Reviews section that goes into more detail on the magic system, if you are interested in a more in depth explanation.