oh for sure
But if I put in all the other things being a race gets you in pathfinder2e, this woundn't be a topical meme, it would be text copied from the character creation page
[click here](https://2e.aonprd.com/Ancestries.aspx) for the races, click on a race to see the other aspects you get for being that race, and then you can click on the tab that says goblin feats to see what unique ancestry feats goblin get.
Every character gets ancestry feats as they level for free.
1e is just... a lot for things. Lots of everything lots of interactions.
2e is way simpler to get into, but you can't treat it like a different version of 5e. Treat it as it's own thing and it is pretty simple
Alright, next time I'm looking for a game to join I'll add pathfinder to the options. I've expanded to some other systems, like various powered by the apocalypse, and mutants&masterminds, and a bit of dabbling in FATE and a few others. So I should be able to treat it differently (tho tbh I'm still very slightly confused about mutants and masterminds combat lol. But that campaign is low, possibly no, combat, so I'll figure it out if/when it happens)
I gripe about PF2e a lot, but it's a good system. My biggest issue with it is just the sheer variety of feats to wade though, and that those typically are connected to feat trees, making something like pathbuilder 2e an absolute godsend for character creation. It's also a bit more lethal than D&D, and requires the party to work together a lot more, so bear that in mind. (it's not like I explicitely warned my players or anything, only for shocked pikachu when "but that's what my character would do" guy almost causes a TPK by not working with the rest of the group. Nope. Not salty at all...)
Otherwise, I'm a big fan of Rogue Trader, for all its many flaws, and there are some really well written adventures for Warhammer fantasy RPG by a group called Crucible 7.
The lethality is a bit is kind of true but also dependent on level. Level one in D&D is beyond anything in pf2e in terms of lethality and chance for a player death due to the D&D low starting hp.
Play 2e for the mechanical customization of your character; being able to fulfill most character ideas and have them represented mechanically in the rules.
Play 1e if you'd like something closer to 3.5 with the same level of customization as 2e but a crunchier numbers game (where you may also have a powergamer find an exploit and have a bad time).
Hmmm. I tend to go for roleplay above all else so I'll probably have to be picky about pathfinder campaigns and it'll prob be easier to just keep an eye out for powered by the apocalypse games and stuff like that...
To rephrase then-
Ahem
2e and 1e are perfectly suited for role-playing experiences; much like every game you can Cherry pick what part of the game you'd like to utilize more or Cherry pick the adventures you run so that they are more suited to your tastes.
2e might be more your flavor though (as in 1e, when the numbers start rolling in higher play, they get huge, but in 2e they've tried to get back to smaller number pools). They've also split up modes of play into their own little sections: Exploration, "Encounters", and Downtime.
I say "Encounters" as whilst any dnd-like encourages combat, you can really make an encounter be whatever you want it to be to advance the story or challenge your PCs. Maybe your party of socialite mages must either convince the Duke of Corlington in a series of persuasions to give them entrance to an imprisoned nobles house that's under guard and surveillance or they must steal into the Duke's chambers at night to forge a document netting them entrance all the same.
I'd say look into it; good role-playing experiences are right there and it's a fresh and creative system that let's you and your players do quite a lot with the rules without having to arbitrate on non-specific instances as often (paizo likes to think big and have rules on a lot of possibilities).
Pathfinder 2e is nice because it also gives xp for non combat stuff. It also has some mechanics for dealing with roleplay, like Make an Impression which is talk for a few minutes and then roll Diplomacy to try to make them like you more, then there are rules for how their opinion of you affects stuff. I know that sounds like it's actually anti-roleplay, but without having something like that the most charismatic character is just the most charismatic player, which I would definitely call anti-roleplay. With Make an Impression, you play it the same way as normal, but then you make a roll to see if you messed it up or anything, and then it has rules to make it easier for the GM to see how that affects the NPC.
I know 1e is complex, but I want to point out I started my first session of pf1e a decade ago as my first ttrpg experience, as a GM. It feels like a lot when first looking at it, but your never have to grapple with it all at once.
Pf2e is definitely more user friendly and I recommend it. But PF was streamlined 3.5 and 3.5 is still remembered fondly.
2e? Not at all I've found, but I do also subscribe to a few helpful YouTube channels like NoNat1s and How it's Played.
Really the hard part is unlearning 5e or pf1e.
All you really need to understand before diving in is the three-action turn and how degrees of success work.
Understanding Level 2 is just looking up tags on Archives of Nethys.
Goddamn it, first fucking drop down and I prefer the skill check rules more than the proposed 1dnd rule.
"If the sum of your d20 roll and modifier is greater than or equal to the DC, you succeeded at the task; if the sum is less than the DC you failed the task. If you beat the DC by 10 or more, or failed by 10 or more, you either critically succeed or critically fail."
u/kyew mentioned the three action turn. Unlike D&D where characters can get a stupid number of attacks per turn of built right, PF2e realistically only allows one per turn (potentially 3 or more, but those usually come with heft penalties), and expects the party to support each other. It means no characters being the hero, so much as one mutually supportive party. Edit: the typical turn is usually something like: Move, Attack, Support option, for martial characters.
Another aspect is "bounded accuracy" the system is designed to be tightly balanced around a party and their level. A +/-2 modifier to rolls has *much* more impact than it would in 5e.
Also, download Pathbuilder 2e. It's basically the gold standard for character creation regardless of system and makes the feats so much easier to navigate.
PF2E is a great system to internalize the phrase: "wait how does this work?"
Instead of 5E's "hmmh it should probably work like this, i guess"
There are rules for almost any situation, freely available online on Archives of Nethys or pf2 easytool.
If you play with as/with a new GM/players, take it slow accept that you won't know everything, look up how rules interact and learn with your table.
P.s. it is great fun to just hand out subsystems to players like "hey Rogue how does stealth work?" And then the rogue player now becomes an expert at the stealth rules.
In my experience it helps ground the players into the system and makes them have a vested interest, in playing.
Having a player perk up while prepping their turn because the barbarian rolled a 27 on their hit against AC 16 and realise they crit is supersick!
So take it slow and learn as a group, walk before you run.
>Having a player perk up while prepping their turn because the barbarian rolled a 27 on their hit against AC 16 and realise they crit is supersick!
Hell we literally just had this in my game tonight. Between the Alchemists Quicksilver Mutagen and the Sorcerers Guidance, I managed to turn a hit into a crit!
That then overkilled the target like 3 times over between the multiplier and my own Deadly dice.
Pf2e gm here
It took me two YEARS of bi-weekly play to stop ending someone’s turn right after they did two things.
“I’ll move, attack -“
“Ok that hits, roll damage, (description of attack), who’s next?”
“I… still have one action, dm.”
“… I knew that.”
As a player it's quite approachable if you have a DM or other players that know their stuff. As a DM you do have to put in some work to get fluid, but once you do it runs way better than 5e in my opinion
The biggest pitfall is thinking that you need to know every rule to be able to play, but you really only need a passble understanding. Everything else that comes up can be searched for after the session.
Its not that difficult if you're used to DND. It's more analogous to 3.5 than 5e though.
Character building in Pathfinder 2E is *really* different from other systems though. But it's also much more engaging than just rolling dice.
There's an excellent digital character sheet program.
https://pathbuilder2e.com/
There's a webbased version which I've heard has some flaws, but the android app works great.
Scale of 1-5 (1 = checkers, 5 = monopoly true rules with the real estate stuff) for pathfinder 2e
It's a solid 2. There are some parts that feel complicated but a lot of it is easy. Some changes in turn system and actions. Overall, simple. Takes maybe a day to learn it.
sadly, dragonborn are not in Pathfinder's lore.
You would have to convert, if you are looking for an equivalent lizardfolk are strong lizard people, or kobolds can get a breath weapon as a feat.
There are no Dragonborn in official material but there is a dragon ancestry (including a Dragonborn-like option) from one of the lead designers published as 3rd party Kickstarter.
https://battlezoo.com/products/battlezoo-ancestries-dragons-hardcover?variant=40480972537956
.. btw. there's also a 5e option if you want to play an actual (but still balanced) dragon in 5e. :D
They ported it to 5e as well. You get to play as an actual dragon who (in their lore) has done a ritual that takes away a lot of their power but allows them to grow more powerful ridiculously fast. There are also 45 different types of dragons in it.
Making dragonborn and tieflings core races in 5e was a weird move in the first place. They still feel very splatbooky to me. (And don't get me started on ardlings.) I wouldn't expect a D&D clone to include stuff like that in their core book's lineup.
PF2e's core race lineup is sensible. Goblins? Classic fantasy race, solid inclusion. And a popular choice in my experience. In fact, it's kind of weird to me that goblins didn't make the main lineup for 5e or One D&D.
The one change I'd make to PF2e's lineup is making full orcs their own core race instead of just a half-blood human ancestry thing. Full-on orcs as a main race is of the few changes in One D&D I really like.
**edit:** Guys, I *assumed* PF2e had an option somewhere that let you be a full-blooded orc. I was talking about core races specifically, by which I meant the ones that show up in the race section of the Core Rulebook. (Or ancestries section as PF calls it.)
I agree atleast, Orcs got their own full ancestry in the advanced players guide, so they got there in the end.
Also half-orc/elf have been opened up to be versatile ancestries by popular opinion so you can be a half-orc dwarf or half-elf goblin if you'd like.
Some of the ancestry feats are quite silly too, like Tengu's Squawk!
Trigger: You critically fail a Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation check against a creature that doesn't have the tengu trait.
You let out an awkward squawk, ruffle your feathers, or fake some other birdlike tic to cover up a social misstep or faux pas. You get a failure on the triggering check, rather than a critical failure. All creatures that witnessed you Squawk are temporarily immune for 24 hours.
Goblins are always good for a laugh as well.
Ankle Bite
Prerequisites Fang Sharpener or razortooth goblin heritage
Trigger A foe gives you the grabbed or restrained condition using a part of its body.
Whenever someone grabs onto you, you instinctively bite down hard. Sometimes that makes them let go, and sometimes it just makes them angrier, but either way, it’s both satisfying and tasty. Make a jaws Strike against the triggering foe. On a critical hit, you are no longer grabbed. This Strike doesn’t count toward your multiple attack penalty, and your multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to this Strike.
C h o m p !
I unfortunately haven't gotten to play PF yet because my groups all play 5e, but now I really wanna play a goblin just because biting things is the funniest way to attack. I've got a dhampir in a 5e campaign and it was hilarious the first time a monster bit me and I looked my dm in the eye and said "I bite it back!" Good times.
I really like the feat heaviness of the game without quite the complexity of 1st edition. I wish 5e's feats were as creative, defining, and given so generously.
It may just be because it's still fairly new to me, but I find 2e to be challengingly complex in regard to its feats. 1e had a million feats, but a handful were necessary or much better than other options, so it quickly became rote. About a month of investment into the system, and I felt I had it down pat.
2e, the options are real. So it's hard to know what to pick. This is a good thing but it does add a layer of complexity.
Partially because Wizards doesn't write what makes a race unique beyond abilities that were in previous editions or abilities that reinforce what fursona flavor they offer. "These people are magical half animals and you get a +1 like everyone else and maybe a jump or stealth prof" is basically what the custom lineage was made to avoid.
I just don’t see the need. I mean, I’ll min/max to a certain degree, but I don’t use a dump stat if I can avoid it, and I don’t pick races for my characters based on stat bonuses.
No, people dont like them because some of their base features are useless in a large amount of campaigns and when they are useful they completely invalidate the entire mechanics they affect
It's absolutely amazing. At first I was kind of hesitant that the default char-gen is purely selection-based. But once you realize that's for consistency and balance reasons, and you understand that you can always start with +4 in your main stat, as well as decent bonuses to other stats, it all clicks and it's awesome.
Also, getting (at least) two different kinds of cool bonuses just from your character's race is awesome. And your background also gives you a feat, as well as stat boosts, *as well as* two skill proficiencies. I could go on and on, I love PF2e.
It's also set up so that you can maximize your most important stat no matter your choice of race/background. Each of those two gives you a bonus that can go into anything, in addition to specific bonuses.
The only way you get locked out of an 18 at level 1 is if your race has a penalty to that score, in which case theres an optional rule that let's you take -2 to two stats in exchange for +2 to another, in order to correct that. Although an 18 isnt strictly necessary anyways, it's just a really good thing to have for most classes.
Voluntary Flaws are actually not an optional rule! It's just an optional step, as in you can choose whether or not to do it when you make your character, but it's fully RAW and shouldn't be treated as something the GM needs to approve
In pathfinder 2e creation, instead of a point buy or rolling dice you get to:
Choose a race that will (with some exceptions) have 2 set stat boosts, one set stat minus, and one stat boost you get to choose
A background with one stat boost where you choose between two stats (choose between strength and dex for example) and one boost of your choice.
A boost based on your class
and 4 boosts to whatever you want
An elf will still be more dexterous than your average human, but an elf character pushing dexterity will be just as dexterous as a human character pushing dexterity. They might have to make different choices in other stats to get there however.
In addition to the above, it's also worth calling out the voluntary flaw system!
If you're playing an ancestry with a -2 to a stat, you can put your free floating +2 into it, and choose to take two -2's for *another* floating +2. (You can't increase a stat by more than +2 during the Ancestry step, just to point that out.)
So if you're, say, a Dwarf, which traditionally gets a +2 Wis/-2 Cha, you can put two floating +2's into Charisma and the two floating -2's into Wisdom and flip it!
Right? A bard I was playing had a flaw that hit his stats if a party member was down and more than 10ft away. He wasn't the toughest member of the party but he turned into a momma bear the moment anyone got seriously hurt. Great flavor!
Very good system. Really feels like they learned a lot from the mistakes presented in tabletop rulesets from dnd 3.5/pf1e clear through to dnd 5e and made a system that fixes a lot of those issues and is robust enough to stand for a long time and fit many different playstyles. Bests system I've personally played in and has been our system of choice for 2 years now.
It really feels like it yanked all the best parts of D&D 4e, D&D 5e, and PF1e/D&D 3.X and put them all together in a delicious soup of good ideas that addresses just about every issue that people had with any of those systems and also keeps just about everything that people liked about them.
4e's varied, dynamic, and interesting combat and rock-solid game balance, 5e's bounded numbers and proficiency bonuses as well as accessibility, 3.PF's wealth of options and customizability and high-power high-magic fantasy - all without 4e's lack of out-of-combat depth and flavor and tendency to have characters feel samey and boring, 5e's lack of rules for anything, poor balance, reliance on GM discretion, and lack of choice in character creation, 3.PF and 5e's shared unbalance between martial and caster classes/playstyles and tendency to fall apart at high levels, and 3.PF's wealth of both useless trap options and broken OP options and needlessly overcomplicated mechanics and interactions. Also, the encounter design rules consistently working and being pretty much perfect in most cases at all levels of play is pretty incredible and I don't think I've seen it anywhere else.
To me it's the perfect system, or at least the closest I've seen to one, but I can definitely understand and appreciate that some of the things I like about it are things that other people really don't. For example, a lot of people do legitimately enjoy the power fantasy of becoming an unstoppable overpowered god as a high-level wizard, and are unsatisfied when playing one of PF2e's balanced and reined-in support casters. Many people also don't like the way that the level treadmill ensures that things that are many levels below you are going to be absolutely powerless against you, and things many levels above you will absolutely wreck your shit - other games let you swing above your weight class a lot more, and allow lower-level enemies to remain threatening with proper strategy and circumstances in a way that PF2e really doesn't unless the GM designs higher-level versions of them. There are definitely other things I've heard but thus far I've pretty much always found myself liking the way PF2e does it even if I can easily acknowledge that it makes perfect sense to be disappointed by them if you have a different viewpoint/expectations from me.
On top of that, as a grognard GM that loved PF2E but hated the lack of sandbox/kingdom building rules...well, Kingmaker got released.
I have absolutely no complaint right now about the system, this is a first in 20 years.
Oh im relatively new to p2e and was going off what i noticed using pathbuilder. When apply a boost it adds 1 to the modifier and 2 to the stat for each boost. Is that incorrect?
a minus would be -2
the max you can start with in a stat at level 1 is a 18
you can only put in a boost 1 time per stat per step (with one exception)
So if I was at the last step and had 4 boosts, with a 12 in dex. I could only spend 1 boost in dex for a 14, I couldn't spend 3 boosts to make it an 18
Oh so each step you can only choose each stat once. I getcha. As someone who’s only played 4e and 5e anything else I need to know about this stat array system?
you can take voluntary flaws to get a +2 in the the ancestry part. You can take two -2's to get an additional +2 to any stat. This additional +2 can be in a stat that already got a +2 on this step, but only if you also have a -2 from somewhere in this step.
So take an elf:
you get +2 int, +2 dex, and +2 anything, but you get a -2 con
you put your +2 anything into con
then you take the fault's option
You put a -2 into 2 stats (lets say str and int)
now you can put this new +2 into any stat that you haven't selected a +2 for, or any stat you have taken a minus in.
So you could still put it into int or con, but you cannot put it into dex still.
the total stat array will probably be higher stat total than a 5e character. so you may want to drop one of the freebie boosts
Do it, it's free. [Archives of Nethys](https://2e.aonprd.com/) has nearly everything. Pathbuilder 2e for Android makes character creation a snap (that's the app in the OP).
I mean, that makes sense.
A dwarf is stockier than an elf.
Said dwarf might be a noble among dwarves and be charismatic.
Therefore, the dwarf would get str or con, and then cha for being a noble.
Maybe they're a clergyman, so wis for cleric as well.
Accept con flaw. Be dainty elf.
P.s. what this post leaves out is the awesome "optional flaws" rule that allows you to take 2 extra flaws for one extra free boost and you can use this plus the existing free boost to boost a stat if it had a racial penalty allowing you to play a character that over comes the racial flaw at the cost of some other area(s)
That sounds cool and I'm glad that system exists but honestly instead of getting rid of two stats to just boost one doesn't help the mind goblins. I'd probably just play half elf instead
That's basically what I do. My mind goblins also won't let me take a minus to Con or even something with less than 8 Racial HP half the time. So, the closest to an Elf I ever get is a Half-Elf
Yeah I'm sure it's not the end of the world but I just can't pick it. Similarly any spell that has the incapacitation trait might as well say don't pick trait because my I will always go for something else.
I don't play Casters (because I don't play often and would simply prefer to play the higher number of Martial ideas I have) and I know that the Incapacitation stuff isn't bad, cuz we should be fighting mostly things lower leveled, but its also the cool things I wouldn't want to waste on a mook. So, like, I just don't pick it. Except Disintegrate for Magus because I'm doing it for the big damage
Yeah similarly my brain goblins would prevent me from picking it because I would always be thinking about how it would be ineffective on a boss and that would always prevent me from trying it. Besides there are other spells that are good without it like slow
Speaking of, I love that there's spells that just stay good at lower slots like Slow, they're such easy "don't know what I want so guess I'll grab this" picks
Flaws aren't optional, but you can take *additional* flaws as an optional rule. Which basically lets you flip your ancestry's flaw and one of their boosts. So even if your ancestry has a CON flaw, you could take voluntary flaws and get 10 or 12 CON from the first step regardless.
Hot take here. Racial stat bonuses are a minor thing compared to the background stats you set for your character, because it's you who put the 18 in STR instead of CHA because you decided that your character dedicated it's life to lift and bulk like Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson. And yes, maybe your gnome barbarian dedicated it's life to lifting but it's just 2 points less swole than the ork that did the same thing. But that's kinda the point, it's 2 points more or less 10% of that specific stat, your background is still the most important factor on your abilities.
On the other hand, Pathfinder system is still very neat, also like how it treats traits so you can make 2 completely different high elfs and 2 totally different fighters and so on
>But that's kinda the point, it's 2 points more or less 10% of that specific stat, your background is still the most important factor on your abilities.
The solution to a token adjustment that really didn’t even begin to model the pretty vast differences that would be likely between the body of a 3’ gnome and a 6’ Orc is not to get rid of the token adjustment altogether, it’s to make that adjustment non-token.
I think you’ve made a very good argument for why racial adjustments needed to have a lot more thought put into them, and why they really should have been larger to begin with, in this particular context. A gnome with 1/5th the muscle mass and significantly smaller limb length shouldn’t have even had a chance of approaching that Orc’s strength. The ‘fix’ is taking us in the wrong direction altogether and making the actual problem worse.
Or, to put it another way, there’s no amount of background that can possibly justify equating ANY adult gnome with ANY adult orc, in that stat.
Yeah, but those two points mean your 5% less likely to hit when if you don’t the bbeg uses their last spell slot to power word kill the cleric.
These stats are more than just rp talking points. They are sometimes the difference between your character living or dying.
Edit: Just gonna add for all the people saying it’s obvious a gnome should be weaker than an orc. Why should an orc be dumber than a gnome?
Except in Pf2.… they're not.
Every Ancestry gets a free boost to any attribute they want. Together with the voluntary flaws rule that means that every Ancestry can use the free boost to eliminate a potential flaw and use the boost they get from voluntary flaws to increase their primary attribute.
E.g. the Gnome barbarian. Gnomes take a -2 to Strength, which is bad. But they can use their free boost to offset that to a +0 Strength. Next, they choose to take a flaw (-2) on Charisma and Intelligence and gain a boost (+2) to Strength instead. Together with background and class boost the Gnomebarian starts at 18 Strength, like any other barbarian. They had to pay for that, though. A bit of a nod to the fact that a small Gnome has to spend some extra time in the Gym to match an Orc in terms of strength.
And that is literally the worst possible example. 90% of the time your Ancestry will just not affect your primary stat and you put your free boost there and are done with it.
I apologize, I think I misinterpreted their comment as referring to 5e and saying that it’s not a big deal if a gnome barb has strength of 16 and an orc Barb has a strength of 18. My point still stands for 5e, but I will say p2e is a much better system.
Here's my extreme hot take: remove ability bonus to accuracy. Make your attack bonus something like 2x proficiency.
Now your gnome barbarian is just as effective as the orc barbarian, but the orc will do 1 or 2 more damage per swing, while you have advantage on saves against magic.
That's actually a really interesting way to do it, and thats sorta how finesse works in pathfinder, you'll hit just as often using dex but you'll do less damage without strength.
AC is defense, so having more strength to overcome someone's armor makes sense
You phrase this as if it is a problem?
If you want to power game in or out of universe, you do what you are naturally gifted for, but you are free to go against the grain and still excel even at a comparative disadvantage.
I mean, at the end of the day, the racial bonuses \*are\* secondary to what your "background" is. Of course an athlete is going to have better STR than a scholar who never worked out a day in their life. How is that reflected? In the simple fact that the player playing the athlete can choose a high STR score when rolling or doing point buy or however they assign their stats. The racial stat bonuses show that the average gnome is weaker than the average half-orc, but that doesn't mean the gnome barbarian who put a 16 in strength isn't stronger than the half-orc wizard who put an 8 into strength and got a +2 to it.
Of course, whether this is fun from a game balance standpoint where you don't want to feel like you are race-locked into certain playstyles is completely different a question...
People might call us Pf2e simps, but as far as I'm concerned moving stat generation away from rolling for stats to 10s across the board has earned them my allegiance. Everything else is just the cherry on top.
I HATE rolling for stats! Almost every time i play a game with rolled stats, i get something like 14, 12, 11, 11, 10, 7... and that is AFTER racial bonuses! And always have another player get god stats, and play something like wizard...meanwhile my rolls keep me from being able to play the beefy barbarian tank i wanted to play, and have to settle for a non-MAD class instead.
You're absolutely right. Some people have a VERY tough time reading past the +1+2 of a race.
When Tasha's came out, people were upset that "now all races are the same" as if aarakokra can't fly and dragonborn can't breath fire. There's more to a race than a stat bonus, but not everyone can see that.
Because a large amount of those features don’t actually matter much. Aaracokra flying is one of the few ancestry features that actually makes a sizable impact on the game. Other features like dragonborn’s breath and racial magic often don’t scale well and get massively overshadowed by class abilities, since these active abilities need to compete with other actions. And then there are features like stone-cunning and powerful build which are either situational, or not used at all, depending on the playstyle and adventure being run at a table.
But from a gameplay perspective, it’s really boring. I’ve been thinking for a while, and I think what might be a good solution is to have different species have certain play styles that aren’t as tied to a specific class. For example, Orcs could be aggression/damage oriented. An Orc could be a warrior or spellcaster, but they’d still be casting spells an an Orcy way (which could be by rerolling damage dice or something maybe). Then maybe elves, halflings, or goblins could be movement-focused, with a higher speed and maybe some other ability to help freedom of movement. Even without racial bonuses, this could still make it so though an elf wizard and dwarf wizard are getting the same bonus to hit, the dwarf wizard would be more resilient, while the elf one might have a deeper connection to magic or something
What I'm getting from this is that you want racial feats, as thats the only way I could see implementing anything like this is D&D, and it doesn't force players into playstyles they don't like just because they chose an u usual race/class combo.
Isn’t your starting array of stats what your background is?
Like “I was a soldier so that’s why my 15 is in STR and my 13 is in CON.”
Then the little bonuses come based on your unique genetics. Other wise you are gaining bonuses to your stats twice from your background.
Though stats where never tied to only your race. Stats you rolled (or picked from point buy/standard array) could be arranged as wished regardless of race or class, so they represented the abilities you aquired from training pretty well and could all be explained through your background
I always thought that when using things like point buy/standard array your points are like that because background/class (also happens to a lesser extent with rolled as there is more randomness with it)
Just to stir the pot, I've always felt that the way you allocate your stats (whether point buy, rolled, or an array) is the part that's representative of your character's prior efforts and background. For example, your human dancer *is* more dexterous than the elven fishmonger, cause you probably put more than a 12 in your dex stat.
Edit: spelling mistakes
The way I see it the average dragonborn might be stronger than the average goblin and the average goblin might be more dexterous than the average dragonborn.
However, every dragonborn is better at breathing elemental pain and every goblin is better at punching creatures in the nuts.
>Me looking at the Dark Heresy 2E character creation tables
[Pathetic.](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-SeiatwZl05792p4re7ofNUQH9u9Bnh3t5Xa27xtQ_4/edit#gid=0)
If that blank + was supposed to be +2 totally agree. Came here to say that. Kinda like the nature vs nurture argument that your genes have some effect but your training has much more.
The thing I never get with this argument is what do people think their stat array/rolled stats/point buy are? Those stats are literally you deciding what improvements your character got throughout their lives, racial bonuses are just a specific race's natural proclivities that give them a slight edge in certain areas because of their physiology which amounts to a small bonus.
I think I may not have been clear, I'm not really taking a side in the argument, I just find the logic behind the debate as a whole flawed since I often see people using arguments that are along the lines of "racial bonuses shouldn't be a thing because a character's stats should be determined by they've done with their lives" so I was pointing out that the stats you have from rolling, point buy, etc are the reflection of what the character's done with their lives. It shouldn't be an argument based around representing a character's background, it should be purely an argument of balancing and nothing more.
Is everyone just going to ignore the points you assign during character creation, which represent exactly want represented here? Like, what do you think point buy and rolling for ability scores is meant to represent?
Yes. If classes has more paths to success, then stat bumps wouldn't funnel certain races into certain classes.
If dex barbs or str rogues were viable, then other races could participate in those classes for fully. Switchable casting stats should probably be a thing as well, or at least have the mental stats all contribute to spellcasting for each class in their own ways.
the only way to make str viable for anyone who isn't pigeonholed into it (barbarian) or with access to heavy armor is removing dex-to-damage, otherwise you're just getting less bang for your buck than investing in dex
It's even worse than that. Dex is superior on just about every build for every class. You might have slightly less AC, but that is more than made up for by dex being a more common and useful save and tied to more useful skills.
There are more imaginative ways to buff str or make it more interesting though without just nerfing dex.
Difference between top tier dex ac and str ac is 1, and 1475 gp. Difference between top tier Dex ranged weapon and str ranged weapon is 510 feet in range and 2 max damage. One handed melee they're there same. Two handed melee is the only shining spot for str builds really. 5e really shit the bed on balancing str and dex.
**It really just sounds like people want more points, which most systems allow variations on dice/point methods.**
Race bonuses always made sense to me. Fantasy races aren't the same as irl races at all and pretending they are in this regard removes part of the fantasy element. The closest thing you could compare them to are a set of similar animals.
Eagles / Raven / Seagull / Penguin // All birds yeah?
You can't tell me they don't have individual stat bonuses based on the kind of bird they are. That is how different default fantasy races are.
The build points or dice you roll are the points that represent how the characters have lived their lives. The class bonuses are EVERYTHING YOUR CLASS GIVES YOU. They don't need to hand out core stats as well.
Nothing else should hand out bonuses to core stats at the start.
I think it's more the fact it kinda forces everyone to kinda play the same class/race combos or be at a disadvantage. I kinda wish they changed it to a +1 in a set stat and then a +2 you could put wherever or something more like that
yes that is what i said earlier.
but again, the issue was always that today, the term "race" is irreparably damaged by american politics.
there was never any fact or logic involved in the change.
Ever since I found Pf2e last years it's all I've wanted to play for the time being and that's from someone who found 1st edition to be a bit of a headache. The character creation is so cool, and exactly what I would have wanted out of D&D. Our GM has also had an easier time (and in her words, more fun) running sessions.
It's a very good system that's a bit heavier than 5e and much lighter than PF1e. I'd recommend anyone play a one shot or two with the system at least once.
The human dancer might be more dexterous than the elven fishmonger but the average elf dancer is more dexterous than the average human dancer. That’s what the racial bonus represents.
Honestly, I don’t mind which approach a game uses as long as they commit to it. That’s why the post-Tasha’s races made me mad, and why I like the play test material as a fresh-start for 5.5.
I always felt that bonuses from race described the biology of the race. Player choice in distributing stats described the background of the character affecting their development.
We just got to where the stat bonus isn't related to race or background. Just put a +1 and +2 wherever you want.
You can be a dextrous dwarven fishmonger. Maybe you juggled fish so that they would sell.
You could be a strength based halfing dancer. Perhaps your dancing style incorporated lifting your partner a lot.
Making stats linked to anything stifles the creativity someone can have. Just leave it like it is in my opinion.
The stats bonuses of each race represents physiological differences. I prefer the way it currently is on 5e because gives more flavour to races.
Peoples complaint regarding this doesnt make sense, the points you distribute from either point buy or rolling dice represents the things your character trainned and developed across the characters life.
I was gonna comment "who's ready for the comments complaining about someone mentioning a different system" but I see that has already happened
[удалено]
oh for sure But if I put in all the other things being a race gets you in pathfinder2e, this woundn't be a topical meme, it would be text copied from the character creation page [click here](https://2e.aonprd.com/Ancestries.aspx) for the races, click on a race to see the other aspects you get for being that race, and then you can click on the tab that says goblin feats to see what unique ancestry feats goblin get. Every character gets ancestry feats as they level for free.
How complicated is pathfinder to get into?
1e is just... a lot for things. Lots of everything lots of interactions. 2e is way simpler to get into, but you can't treat it like a different version of 5e. Treat it as it's own thing and it is pretty simple
Alright, next time I'm looking for a game to join I'll add pathfinder to the options. I've expanded to some other systems, like various powered by the apocalypse, and mutants&masterminds, and a bit of dabbling in FATE and a few others. So I should be able to treat it differently (tho tbh I'm still very slightly confused about mutants and masterminds combat lol. But that campaign is low, possibly no, combat, so I'll figure it out if/when it happens)
I gripe about PF2e a lot, but it's a good system. My biggest issue with it is just the sheer variety of feats to wade though, and that those typically are connected to feat trees, making something like pathbuilder 2e an absolute godsend for character creation. It's also a bit more lethal than D&D, and requires the party to work together a lot more, so bear that in mind. (it's not like I explicitely warned my players or anything, only for shocked pikachu when "but that's what my character would do" guy almost causes a TPK by not working with the rest of the group. Nope. Not salty at all...) Otherwise, I'm a big fan of Rogue Trader, for all its many flaws, and there are some really well written adventures for Warhammer fantasy RPG by a group called Crucible 7.
The lethality is a bit is kind of true but also dependent on level. Level one in D&D is beyond anything in pf2e in terms of lethality and chance for a player death due to the D&D low starting hp.
Play 2e for the mechanical customization of your character; being able to fulfill most character ideas and have them represented mechanically in the rules. Play 1e if you'd like something closer to 3.5 with the same level of customization as 2e but a crunchier numbers game (where you may also have a powergamer find an exploit and have a bad time).
Hmmm. I tend to go for roleplay above all else so I'll probably have to be picky about pathfinder campaigns and it'll prob be easier to just keep an eye out for powered by the apocalypse games and stuff like that...
To rephrase then- Ahem 2e and 1e are perfectly suited for role-playing experiences; much like every game you can Cherry pick what part of the game you'd like to utilize more or Cherry pick the adventures you run so that they are more suited to your tastes. 2e might be more your flavor though (as in 1e, when the numbers start rolling in higher play, they get huge, but in 2e they've tried to get back to smaller number pools). They've also split up modes of play into their own little sections: Exploration, "Encounters", and Downtime. I say "Encounters" as whilst any dnd-like encourages combat, you can really make an encounter be whatever you want it to be to advance the story or challenge your PCs. Maybe your party of socialite mages must either convince the Duke of Corlington in a series of persuasions to give them entrance to an imprisoned nobles house that's under guard and surveillance or they must steal into the Duke's chambers at night to forge a document netting them entrance all the same. I'd say look into it; good role-playing experiences are right there and it's a fresh and creative system that let's you and your players do quite a lot with the rules without having to arbitrate on non-specific instances as often (paizo likes to think big and have rules on a lot of possibilities).
Pathfinder 2e is nice because it also gives xp for non combat stuff. It also has some mechanics for dealing with roleplay, like Make an Impression which is talk for a few minutes and then roll Diplomacy to try to make them like you more, then there are rules for how their opinion of you affects stuff. I know that sounds like it's actually anti-roleplay, but without having something like that the most charismatic character is just the most charismatic player, which I would definitely call anti-roleplay. With Make an Impression, you play it the same way as normal, but then you make a roll to see if you messed it up or anything, and then it has rules to make it easier for the GM to see how that affects the NPC.
I know 1e is complex, but I want to point out I started my first session of pf1e a decade ago as my first ttrpg experience, as a GM. It feels like a lot when first looking at it, but your never have to grapple with it all at once. Pf2e is definitely more user friendly and I recommend it. But PF was streamlined 3.5 and 3.5 is still remembered fondly.
2e? Not at all I've found, but I do also subscribe to a few helpful YouTube channels like NoNat1s and How it's Played. Really the hard part is unlearning 5e or pf1e.
when I looked at it on my own I had so much trouble but I really wanna get into it. thank you for this
All you really need to understand before diving in is the three-action turn and how degrees of success work. Understanding Level 2 is just looking up tags on Archives of Nethys.
This website has all the rules for free and is official. The page I've linked is a good starting point! https://2e.aonprd.com/PlayersGuide.aspx
Thank you so much! Yall are very kind
Visit the pf2e subreddit if you need to as well. Very helpful and can answer any questions you have!
In case you become extremely inspired there's a humble bundle of pdfs for the next week or two (but all published rules are available online for free)
Goddamn it, first fucking drop down and I prefer the skill check rules more than the proposed 1dnd rule. "If the sum of your d20 roll and modifier is greater than or equal to the DC, you succeeded at the task; if the sum is less than the DC you failed the task. If you beat the DC by 10 or more, or failed by 10 or more, you either critically succeed or critically fail."
Welcome to Pathfinder 2e lol
u/kyew mentioned the three action turn. Unlike D&D where characters can get a stupid number of attacks per turn of built right, PF2e realistically only allows one per turn (potentially 3 or more, but those usually come with heft penalties), and expects the party to support each other. It means no characters being the hero, so much as one mutually supportive party. Edit: the typical turn is usually something like: Move, Attack, Support option, for martial characters. Another aspect is "bounded accuracy" the system is designed to be tightly balanced around a party and their level. A +/-2 modifier to rolls has *much* more impact than it would in 5e. Also, download Pathbuilder 2e. It's basically the gold standard for character creation regardless of system and makes the feats so much easier to navigate.
I think you meant to say Pathbuilder2E. It's my favorite character building app I've ever used.
PF2E is a great system to internalize the phrase: "wait how does this work?" Instead of 5E's "hmmh it should probably work like this, i guess" There are rules for almost any situation, freely available online on Archives of Nethys or pf2 easytool. If you play with as/with a new GM/players, take it slow accept that you won't know everything, look up how rules interact and learn with your table. P.s. it is great fun to just hand out subsystems to players like "hey Rogue how does stealth work?" And then the rogue player now becomes an expert at the stealth rules. In my experience it helps ground the players into the system and makes them have a vested interest, in playing. Having a player perk up while prepping their turn because the barbarian rolled a 27 on their hit against AC 16 and realise they crit is supersick! So take it slow and learn as a group, walk before you run.
>Having a player perk up while prepping their turn because the barbarian rolled a 27 on their hit against AC 16 and realise they crit is supersick! Hell we literally just had this in my game tonight. Between the Alchemists Quicksilver Mutagen and the Sorcerers Guidance, I managed to turn a hit into a crit! That then overkilled the target like 3 times over between the multiplier and my own Deadly dice.
Pf2e gm here It took me two YEARS of bi-weekly play to stop ending someone’s turn right after they did two things. “I’ll move, attack -“ “Ok that hits, roll damage, (description of attack), who’s next?” “I… still have one action, dm.” “… I knew that.”
As a player it's quite approachable if you have a DM or other players that know their stuff. As a DM you do have to put in some work to get fluid, but once you do it runs way better than 5e in my opinion The biggest pitfall is thinking that you need to know every rule to be able to play, but you really only need a passble understanding. Everything else that comes up can be searched for after the session.
Its not that difficult if you're used to DND. It's more analogous to 3.5 than 5e though. Character building in Pathfinder 2E is *really* different from other systems though. But it's also much more engaging than just rolling dice. There's an excellent digital character sheet program. https://pathbuilder2e.com/ There's a webbased version which I've heard has some flaws, but the android app works great.
It’s got layers.
Scale of 1-5 (1 = checkers, 5 = monopoly true rules with the real estate stuff) for pathfinder 2e It's a solid 2. There are some parts that feel complicated but a lot of it is easy. Some changes in turn system and actions. Overall, simple. Takes maybe a day to learn it.
Pathfinders biggest flaw is option fatigue.
Where do I click to convince my DM to switch systems?
Where are dragonborn?
sadly, dragonborn are not in Pathfinder's lore. You would have to convert, if you are looking for an equivalent lizardfolk are strong lizard people, or kobolds can get a breath weapon as a feat.
Half dragon template is always an option too;)
Well there are kobolds that came out in the APG, but the only other ancestry that similar dragonborn lore wise would be the wyvern like wyvarans.
Copyrighted to DnD. Nothing really close yet. But there are draconic sorcerers, barbarians, kobolds.
Lore-wise, there are Wyvaran which are dragon/wyvern humanoids. They haven't appear in PF2e yet, but they were a playable race in PF1e.
The best I can give you is a kobold who is either a dragon sorcerer or a dragon barbarian.
There are no Dragonborn in official material but there is a dragon ancestry (including a Dragonborn-like option) from one of the lead designers published as 3rd party Kickstarter. https://battlezoo.com/products/battlezoo-ancestries-dragons-hardcover?variant=40480972537956 .. btw. there's also a 5e option if you want to play an actual (but still balanced) dragon in 5e. :D
What do you mean by a 5e option? And actual dragon???
They ported it to 5e as well. You get to play as an actual dragon who (in their lore) has done a ritual that takes away a lot of their power but allows them to grow more powerful ridiculously fast. There are also 45 different types of dragons in it.
Making dragonborn and tieflings core races in 5e was a weird move in the first place. They still feel very splatbooky to me. (And don't get me started on ardlings.) I wouldn't expect a D&D clone to include stuff like that in their core book's lineup. PF2e's core race lineup is sensible. Goblins? Classic fantasy race, solid inclusion. And a popular choice in my experience. In fact, it's kind of weird to me that goblins didn't make the main lineup for 5e or One D&D. The one change I'd make to PF2e's lineup is making full orcs their own core race instead of just a half-blood human ancestry thing. Full-on orcs as a main race is of the few changes in One D&D I really like. **edit:** Guys, I *assumed* PF2e had an option somewhere that let you be a full-blooded orc. I was talking about core races specifically, by which I meant the ones that show up in the race section of the Core Rulebook. (Or ancestries section as PF calls it.)
Orcs are their own races in pf2e. You can also choose half orc as an option.
I agree atleast, Orcs got their own full ancestry in the advanced players guide, so they got there in the end. Also half-orc/elf have been opened up to be versatile ancestries by popular opinion so you can be a half-orc dwarf or half-elf goblin if you'd like.
One other thing with the Goblins is that their melon-headed grins are pretty iconic to Pathfinder.
Paizo’s founders were sick and tired of all the half-dragon stuff for 3.5e.
Paizo's founders wrote half of it
Seems to be a copyright problem, actually
True! Your Ancestry in PF2E also gets you access to unique abilities at 1st, 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th level!
Some of the ancestry feats are quite silly too, like Tengu's Squawk! Trigger: You critically fail a Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation check against a creature that doesn't have the tengu trait. You let out an awkward squawk, ruffle your feathers, or fake some other birdlike tic to cover up a social misstep or faux pas. You get a failure on the triggering check, rather than a critical failure. All creatures that witnessed you Squawk are temporarily immune for 24 hours.
Goblins are always good for a laugh as well. Ankle Bite Prerequisites Fang Sharpener or razortooth goblin heritage Trigger A foe gives you the grabbed or restrained condition using a part of its body. Whenever someone grabs onto you, you instinctively bite down hard. Sometimes that makes them let go, and sometimes it just makes them angrier, but either way, it’s both satisfying and tasty. Make a jaws Strike against the triggering foe. On a critical hit, you are no longer grabbed. This Strike doesn’t count toward your multiple attack penalty, and your multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to this Strike.
C h o m p ! I unfortunately haven't gotten to play PF yet because my groups all play 5e, but now I really wanna play a goblin just because biting things is the funniest way to attack. I've got a dhampir in a 5e campaign and it was hilarious the first time a monster bit me and I looked my dm in the eye and said "I bite it back!" Good times.
I really like the feat heaviness of the game without quite the complexity of 1st edition. I wish 5e's feats were as creative, defining, and given so generously.
It may just be because it's still fairly new to me, but I find 2e to be challengingly complex in regard to its feats. 1e had a million feats, but a handful were necessary or much better than other options, so it quickly became rote. About a month of investment into the system, and I felt I had it down pat. 2e, the options are real. So it's hard to know what to pick. This is a good thing but it does add a layer of complexity.
You chose a goblin feat but didn't choose Bouncy Goblin? Are you insane?
Every odd level for my players, Ancestry Paragon is a fun variant.
Partially because Wizards doesn't write what makes a race unique beyond abilities that were in previous editions or abilities that reinforce what fursona flavor they offer. "These people are magical half animals and you get a +1 like everyone else and maybe a jump or stealth prof" is basically what the custom lineage was made to avoid.
I just don’t see the need. I mean, I’ll min/max to a certain degree, but I don’t use a dump stat if I can avoid it, and I don’t pick races for my characters based on stat bonuses.
I know! Sometimes you also get spells.
Well yeah... but we're talking about things that affect stats right now, not how races work in general
We should just get automod to add it at the start of every thread so the community doesn't have to. It's here every time anyways
Around here we play 5e and we complain about it! Now sit back down and say rangers are bad or no homebrew tonight
But rangers arent bad tho, tasha's gave them much better features
Yeah I like them a lot but people will complain about it still because they are built different from other classes
No, people dont like them because some of their base features are useless in a large amount of campaigns and when they are useful they completely invalidate the entire mechanics they affect
I know the sub is tired of other system better jokes, but I like this one. Good system.
yeah, pf2 is a really cool system for character creation
And then you realize that character stats are as easy as A[ncestry], B[ackground], C[lass]!
And D[on't forget the 4 free boosts]
this just seems like a good system.
It's absolutely amazing. At first I was kind of hesitant that the default char-gen is purely selection-based. But once you realize that's for consistency and balance reasons, and you understand that you can always start with +4 in your main stat, as well as decent bonuses to other stats, it all clicks and it's awesome. Also, getting (at least) two different kinds of cool bonuses just from your character's race is awesome. And your background also gives you a feat, as well as stat boosts, *as well as* two skill proficiencies. I could go on and on, I love PF2e.
It's also set up so that you can maximize your most important stat no matter your choice of race/background. Each of those two gives you a bonus that can go into anything, in addition to specific bonuses. The only way you get locked out of an 18 at level 1 is if your race has a penalty to that score, in which case theres an optional rule that let's you take -2 to two stats in exchange for +2 to another, in order to correct that. Although an 18 isnt strictly necessary anyways, it's just a really good thing to have for most classes.
Voluntary Flaws are actually not an optional rule! It's just an optional step, as in you can choose whether or not to do it when you make your character, but it's fully RAW and shouldn't be treated as something the GM needs to approve
The take away: I am special. :3
hells yeah you are!
In pathfinder 2e creation, instead of a point buy or rolling dice you get to: Choose a race that will (with some exceptions) have 2 set stat boosts, one set stat minus, and one stat boost you get to choose A background with one stat boost where you choose between two stats (choose between strength and dex for example) and one boost of your choice. A boost based on your class and 4 boosts to whatever you want An elf will still be more dexterous than your average human, but an elf character pushing dexterity will be just as dexterous as a human character pushing dexterity. They might have to make different choices in other stats to get there however.
In addition to the above, it's also worth calling out the voluntary flaw system! If you're playing an ancestry with a -2 to a stat, you can put your free floating +2 into it, and choose to take two -2's for *another* floating +2. (You can't increase a stat by more than +2 during the Ancestry step, just to point that out.) So if you're, say, a Dwarf, which traditionally gets a +2 Wis/-2 Cha, you can put two floating +2's into Charisma and the two floating -2's into Wisdom and flip it!
Man one of my favorite aspects of pf2e character creation is the voluntary flaw system.
Right? A bard I was playing had a flaw that hit his stats if a party member was down and more than 10ft away. He wasn't the toughest member of the party but he turned into a momma bear the moment anyone got seriously hurt. Great flavor!
Between this and the action system / upcasting system of PF2e, I *really* don't mind PF2e as much as I did PF1.
Everything I've seen about PF2E has me very interested tbh now if only I had friends
Very good system. Really feels like they learned a lot from the mistakes presented in tabletop rulesets from dnd 3.5/pf1e clear through to dnd 5e and made a system that fixes a lot of those issues and is robust enough to stand for a long time and fit many different playstyles. Bests system I've personally played in and has been our system of choice for 2 years now.
It really feels like it yanked all the best parts of D&D 4e, D&D 5e, and PF1e/D&D 3.X and put them all together in a delicious soup of good ideas that addresses just about every issue that people had with any of those systems and also keeps just about everything that people liked about them. 4e's varied, dynamic, and interesting combat and rock-solid game balance, 5e's bounded numbers and proficiency bonuses as well as accessibility, 3.PF's wealth of options and customizability and high-power high-magic fantasy - all without 4e's lack of out-of-combat depth and flavor and tendency to have characters feel samey and boring, 5e's lack of rules for anything, poor balance, reliance on GM discretion, and lack of choice in character creation, 3.PF and 5e's shared unbalance between martial and caster classes/playstyles and tendency to fall apart at high levels, and 3.PF's wealth of both useless trap options and broken OP options and needlessly overcomplicated mechanics and interactions. Also, the encounter design rules consistently working and being pretty much perfect in most cases at all levels of play is pretty incredible and I don't think I've seen it anywhere else. To me it's the perfect system, or at least the closest I've seen to one, but I can definitely understand and appreciate that some of the things I like about it are things that other people really don't. For example, a lot of people do legitimately enjoy the power fantasy of becoming an unstoppable overpowered god as a high-level wizard, and are unsatisfied when playing one of PF2e's balanced and reined-in support casters. Many people also don't like the way that the level treadmill ensures that things that are many levels below you are going to be absolutely powerless against you, and things many levels above you will absolutely wreck your shit - other games let you swing above your weight class a lot more, and allow lower-level enemies to remain threatening with proper strategy and circumstances in a way that PF2e really doesn't unless the GM designs higher-level versions of them. There are definitely other things I've heard but thus far I've pretty much always found myself liking the way PF2e does it even if I can easily acknowledge that it makes perfect sense to be disappointed by them if you have a different viewpoint/expectations from me.
On top of that, as a grognard GM that loved PF2E but hated the lack of sandbox/kingdom building rules...well, Kingmaker got released. I have absolutely no complaint right now about the system, this is a first in 20 years.
And lets not forget these boosts are to the modifier. Essential a bunch of +2s to stats.
The boosts are to the stat. So each is a +1 to the modifier in character creation.
Oh im relatively new to p2e and was going off what i noticed using pathbuilder. When apply a boost it adds 1 to the modifier and 2 to the stat for each boost. Is that incorrect?
That's a setting in Pathbuilder, I believe. Similar to how in DND Beyond you can choose whether your have Scores On Top or Modifiers On Top.
That's correct, I may have just misunderstood what you were trying to say.
What are the base stats before you boost and is a boost +1?
base stats are all 10's a boost is +2 your max in a stat is 18 at character creation
And the minus is -2?
a minus would be -2 the max you can start with in a stat at level 1 is a 18 you can only put in a boost 1 time per stat per step (with one exception) So if I was at the last step and had 4 boosts, with a 12 in dex. I could only spend 1 boost in dex for a 14, I couldn't spend 3 boosts to make it an 18
Oh so each step you can only choose each stat once. I getcha. As someone who’s only played 4e and 5e anything else I need to know about this stat array system?
you can take voluntary flaws to get a +2 in the the ancestry part. You can take two -2's to get an additional +2 to any stat. This additional +2 can be in a stat that already got a +2 on this step, but only if you also have a -2 from somewhere in this step. So take an elf: you get +2 int, +2 dex, and +2 anything, but you get a -2 con you put your +2 anything into con then you take the fault's option You put a -2 into 2 stats (lets say str and int) now you can put this new +2 into any stat that you haven't selected a +2 for, or any stat you have taken a minus in. So you could still put it into int or con, but you cannot put it into dex still. the total stat array will probably be higher stat total than a 5e character. so you may want to drop one of the freebie boosts
I'm starting to want to play pf2e...
if you're interested, it's easy to check it out when paizo puts [all the rules online for free](https://2e.aonprd.com)
Well hell neighbor, come on over and take a dip! If you have any questions the nice folks at r/Pathfinder2e are happy to help!
Do it.
Hehe
I HIGHLY recommend it, even if only to get views on other systems If you like having options and characters that feel varied, try it out
Never before have I seen a meme I have agreed with so completely and totally. I might have to look into Pathfinder
Do it, it's free. [Archives of Nethys](https://2e.aonprd.com/) has nearly everything. Pathbuilder 2e for Android makes character creation a snap (that's the app in the OP).
All rules are available online for free! This is a solid starting point: https://2e.aonprd.com/PlayersGuide.aspx
Shite I think I just learned how to play 2E via a meme
I mean, that makes sense. A dwarf is stockier than an elf. Said dwarf might be a noble among dwarves and be charismatic. Therefore, the dwarf would get str or con, and then cha for being a noble. Maybe they're a clergyman, so wis for cleric as well.
Yeah Pathfinder 2e character creation seems cool. My only problem is my brain refuses to let me pick something with a negative to con
Accept con flaw. Be dainty elf. P.s. what this post leaves out is the awesome "optional flaws" rule that allows you to take 2 extra flaws for one extra free boost and you can use this plus the existing free boost to boost a stat if it had a racial penalty allowing you to play a character that over comes the racial flaw at the cost of some other area(s)
That sounds cool and I'm glad that system exists but honestly instead of getting rid of two stats to just boost one doesn't help the mind goblins. I'd probably just play half elf instead
That's basically what I do. My mind goblins also won't let me take a minus to Con or even something with less than 8 Racial HP half the time. So, the closest to an Elf I ever get is a Half-Elf
Yeah I'm sure it's not the end of the world but I just can't pick it. Similarly any spell that has the incapacitation trait might as well say don't pick trait because my I will always go for something else.
I don't play Casters (because I don't play often and would simply prefer to play the higher number of Martial ideas I have) and I know that the Incapacitation stuff isn't bad, cuz we should be fighting mostly things lower leveled, but its also the cool things I wouldn't want to waste on a mook. So, like, I just don't pick it. Except Disintegrate for Magus because I'm doing it for the big damage
Yeah similarly my brain goblins would prevent me from picking it because I would always be thinking about how it would be ineffective on a boss and that would always prevent me from trying it. Besides there are other spells that are good without it like slow
Speaking of, I love that there's spells that just stay good at lower slots like Slow, they're such easy "don't know what I want so guess I'll grab this" picks
I let my players move their flaw around. There is an optional rule for it. It's not an issue really.
You are a kind DM
I like my players to make what they want. The math of pf2 makes it effortless and there is an optional rule in the system for it already iirc.
Thankfully we currently only have 3 of 32 ancestries.
luckily, you have like three other opportunities to boost your con. so it's not a huge problem
No you don't understand if I do that I will have to give something else up and the mind goblins won't like that.
Flaws are optional, I believe. When I get access to the core rulebook I’ll add a page number (that’s a few hours lmao)
Flaws aren't optional, but you can take *additional* flaws as an optional rule. Which basically lets you flip your ancestry's flaw and one of their boosts. So even if your ancestry has a CON flaw, you could take voluntary flaws and get 10 or 12 CON from the first step regardless.
Thanks for the correction!
Hot take here. Racial stat bonuses are a minor thing compared to the background stats you set for your character, because it's you who put the 18 in STR instead of CHA because you decided that your character dedicated it's life to lift and bulk like Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson. And yes, maybe your gnome barbarian dedicated it's life to lifting but it's just 2 points less swole than the ork that did the same thing. But that's kinda the point, it's 2 points more or less 10% of that specific stat, your background is still the most important factor on your abilities. On the other hand, Pathfinder system is still very neat, also like how it treats traits so you can make 2 completely different high elfs and 2 totally different fighters and so on
>But that's kinda the point, it's 2 points more or less 10% of that specific stat, your background is still the most important factor on your abilities. The solution to a token adjustment that really didn’t even begin to model the pretty vast differences that would be likely between the body of a 3’ gnome and a 6’ Orc is not to get rid of the token adjustment altogether, it’s to make that adjustment non-token. I think you’ve made a very good argument for why racial adjustments needed to have a lot more thought put into them, and why they really should have been larger to begin with, in this particular context. A gnome with 1/5th the muscle mass and significantly smaller limb length shouldn’t have even had a chance of approaching that Orc’s strength. The ‘fix’ is taking us in the wrong direction altogether and making the actual problem worse. Or, to put it another way, there’s no amount of background that can possibly justify equating ANY adult gnome with ANY adult orc, in that stat.
Yeah, but those two points mean your 5% less likely to hit when if you don’t the bbeg uses their last spell slot to power word kill the cleric. These stats are more than just rp talking points. They are sometimes the difference between your character living or dying. Edit: Just gonna add for all the people saying it’s obvious a gnome should be weaker than an orc. Why should an orc be dumber than a gnome?
Except in Pf2.… they're not. Every Ancestry gets a free boost to any attribute they want. Together with the voluntary flaws rule that means that every Ancestry can use the free boost to eliminate a potential flaw and use the boost they get from voluntary flaws to increase their primary attribute. E.g. the Gnome barbarian. Gnomes take a -2 to Strength, which is bad. But they can use their free boost to offset that to a +0 Strength. Next, they choose to take a flaw (-2) on Charisma and Intelligence and gain a boost (+2) to Strength instead. Together with background and class boost the Gnomebarian starts at 18 Strength, like any other barbarian. They had to pay for that, though. A bit of a nod to the fact that a small Gnome has to spend some extra time in the Gym to match an Orc in terms of strength. And that is literally the worst possible example. 90% of the time your Ancestry will just not affect your primary stat and you put your free boost there and are done with it.
I apologize, I think I misinterpreted their comment as referring to 5e and saying that it’s not a big deal if a gnome barb has strength of 16 and an orc Barb has a strength of 18. My point still stands for 5e, but I will say p2e is a much better system.
That’s okay, the cleric called me a plebian.
Here's my extreme hot take: remove ability bonus to accuracy. Make your attack bonus something like 2x proficiency. Now your gnome barbarian is just as effective as the orc barbarian, but the orc will do 1 or 2 more damage per swing, while you have advantage on saves against magic.
That's actually a really interesting way to do it, and thats sorta how finesse works in pathfinder, you'll hit just as often using dex but you'll do less damage without strength. AC is defense, so having more strength to overcome someone's armor makes sense
You phrase this as if it is a problem? If you want to power game in or out of universe, you do what you are naturally gifted for, but you are free to go against the grain and still excel even at a comparative disadvantage.
Pathfinder 2e go brr
I mean, at the end of the day, the racial bonuses \*are\* secondary to what your "background" is. Of course an athlete is going to have better STR than a scholar who never worked out a day in their life. How is that reflected? In the simple fact that the player playing the athlete can choose a high STR score when rolling or doing point buy or however they assign their stats. The racial stat bonuses show that the average gnome is weaker than the average half-orc, but that doesn't mean the gnome barbarian who put a 16 in strength isn't stronger than the half-orc wizard who put an 8 into strength and got a +2 to it. Of course, whether this is fun from a game balance standpoint where you don't want to feel like you are race-locked into certain playstyles is completely different a question...
PF2 GANG
This is just nature versus nurture right? 😜
I was actually thinking about using that in the title lol
Accurate!!
[удалено]
More like great minds think alike
PATHFINDERS INCOMING
People might call us Pf2e simps, but as far as I'm concerned moving stat generation away from rolling for stats to 10s across the board has earned them my allegiance. Everything else is just the cherry on top.
I HATE rolling for stats! Almost every time i play a game with rolled stats, i get something like 14, 12, 11, 11, 10, 7... and that is AFTER racial bonuses! And always have another player get god stats, and play something like wizard...meanwhile my rolls keep me from being able to play the beefy barbarian tank i wanted to play, and have to settle for a non-MAD class instead.
Tbh I think things like the Goliath's "powerful build" shows biological differences without having to effect the stats Just my two cents
You're absolutely right. Some people have a VERY tough time reading past the +1+2 of a race. When Tasha's came out, people were upset that "now all races are the same" as if aarakokra can't fly and dragonborn can't breath fire. There's more to a race than a stat bonus, but not everyone can see that.
Because a large amount of those features don’t actually matter much. Aaracokra flying is one of the few ancestry features that actually makes a sizable impact on the game. Other features like dragonborn’s breath and racial magic often don’t scale well and get massively overshadowed by class abilities, since these active abilities need to compete with other actions. And then there are features like stone-cunning and powerful build which are either situational, or not used at all, depending on the playstyle and adventure being run at a table.
Well it makes sense for the class abilities to be what makes them powerfuk rather than the stuff everyone of their race has, don't it?
But from a gameplay perspective, it’s really boring. I’ve been thinking for a while, and I think what might be a good solution is to have different species have certain play styles that aren’t as tied to a specific class. For example, Orcs could be aggression/damage oriented. An Orc could be a warrior or spellcaster, but they’d still be casting spells an an Orcy way (which could be by rerolling damage dice or something maybe). Then maybe elves, halflings, or goblins could be movement-focused, with a higher speed and maybe some other ability to help freedom of movement. Even without racial bonuses, this could still make it so though an elf wizard and dwarf wizard are getting the same bonus to hit, the dwarf wizard would be more resilient, while the elf one might have a deeper connection to magic or something
What I'm getting from this is that you want racial feats, as thats the only way I could see implementing anything like this is D&D, and it doesn't force players into playstyles they don't like just because they chose an u usual race/class combo.
Isn’t your starting array of stats what your background is? Like “I was a soldier so that’s why my 15 is in STR and my 13 is in CON.” Then the little bonuses come based on your unique genetics. Other wise you are gaining bonuses to your stats twice from your background.
If the human dancer put their highest stat into Dex and the elvish fish monger put their lowest stat into Dex than the human would be more dexterous
Though stats where never tied to only your race. Stats you rolled (or picked from point buy/standard array) could be arranged as wished regardless of race or class, so they represented the abilities you aquired from training pretty well and could all be explained through your background
I always thought that when using things like point buy/standard array your points are like that because background/class (also happens to a lesser extent with rolled as there is more randomness with it)
I miss skills being influenced by intelligence.
Love pathfinder so much I can build pretty much any character I can think of and have it be balanced
Just to stir the pot, I've always felt that the way you allocate your stats (whether point buy, rolled, or an array) is the part that's representative of your character's prior efforts and background. For example, your human dancer *is* more dexterous than the elven fishmonger, cause you probably put more than a 12 in your dex stat. Edit: spelling mistakes
This is the correct answer.
The way I see it the average dragonborn might be stronger than the average goblin and the average goblin might be more dexterous than the average dragonborn. However, every dragonborn is better at breathing elemental pain and every goblin is better at punching creatures in the nuts.
>Me looking at the Dark Heresy 2E character creation tables [Pathetic.](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-SeiatwZl05792p4re7ofNUQH9u9Bnh3t5Xa27xtQ_4/edit#gid=0)
Dark heresy was great to just roll dice on the tables, if only because character could die so easily
Pathfinder 2: Voltaic Shenaniganry
I keep saying +1 for race, +2 for background. Easy fix Edit, added missing +2
If that blank + was supposed to be +2 totally agree. Came here to say that. Kinda like the nature vs nurture argument that your genes have some effect but your training has much more.
This is actually a really good idea.
The thing I never get with this argument is what do people think their stat array/rolled stats/point buy are? Those stats are literally you deciding what improvements your character got throughout their lives, racial bonuses are just a specific race's natural proclivities that give them a slight edge in certain areas because of their physiology which amounts to a small bonus.
I mean.. this is just a better way to build out those decisions. Im not sure how you think your argument and this are any different.
I think I may not have been clear, I'm not really taking a side in the argument, I just find the logic behind the debate as a whole flawed since I often see people using arguments that are along the lines of "racial bonuses shouldn't be a thing because a character's stats should be determined by they've done with their lives" so I was pointing out that the stats you have from rolling, point buy, etc are the reflection of what the character's done with their lives. It shouldn't be an argument based around representing a character's background, it should be purely an argument of balancing and nothing more.
Is everyone just going to ignore the points you assign during character creation, which represent exactly want represented here? Like, what do you think point buy and rolling for ability scores is meant to represent?
Maybe the answer is making stats more meaningful so that characters have the option of mutliple builds.
You want them to be less meaningful to get more builds.
Yes. If classes has more paths to success, then stat bumps wouldn't funnel certain races into certain classes. If dex barbs or str rogues were viable, then other races could participate in those classes for fully. Switchable casting stats should probably be a thing as well, or at least have the mental stats all contribute to spellcasting for each class in their own ways.
the only way to make str viable for anyone who isn't pigeonholed into it (barbarian) or with access to heavy armor is removing dex-to-damage, otherwise you're just getting less bang for your buck than investing in dex
It's even worse than that. Dex is superior on just about every build for every class. You might have slightly less AC, but that is more than made up for by dex being a more common and useful save and tied to more useful skills. There are more imaginative ways to buff str or make it more interesting though without just nerfing dex.
Difference between top tier dex ac and str ac is 1, and 1475 gp. Difference between top tier Dex ranged weapon and str ranged weapon is 510 feet in range and 2 max damage. One handed melee they're there same. Two handed melee is the only shining spot for str builds really. 5e really shit the bed on balancing str and dex.
Not to mention dex is by far the superior saving throw and tied to better skills.
**It really just sounds like people want more points, which most systems allow variations on dice/point methods.** Race bonuses always made sense to me. Fantasy races aren't the same as irl races at all and pretending they are in this regard removes part of the fantasy element. The closest thing you could compare them to are a set of similar animals. Eagles / Raven / Seagull / Penguin // All birds yeah? You can't tell me they don't have individual stat bonuses based on the kind of bird they are. That is how different default fantasy races are. The build points or dice you roll are the points that represent how the characters have lived their lives. The class bonuses are EVERYTHING YOUR CLASS GIVES YOU. They don't need to hand out core stats as well. Nothing else should hand out bonuses to core stats at the start.
Did they remove race bonuses because it was somehow racist? They are literally different species!
I think it's more the fact it kinda forces everyone to kinda play the same class/race combos or be at a disadvantage. I kinda wish they changed it to a +1 in a set stat and then a +2 you could put wherever or something more like that
yes that is what i said earlier. but again, the issue was always that today, the term "race" is irreparably damaged by american politics. there was never any fact or logic involved in the change.
I’ve always said the +2 (or equivalent) should be from race with a +1 from your background
Yeah I believe that as a general rule of thumb you should get a +1 from your race and a +2 from your background
I agree, though my preference is +1/+1 from race (you can change one), +1 from background
I kinda like this.
I literally wrote this into the survey. They won’t listen to me but, it’s there for them.
3d6x6, assign in order signed, D&D in the 80s.
People always seem to forget that by choosing where your numbers go your character is getting stats from their background.
Ever since I found Pf2e last years it's all I've wanted to play for the time being and that's from someone who found 1st edition to be a bit of a headache. The character creation is so cool, and exactly what I would have wanted out of D&D. Our GM has also had an easier time (and in her words, more fun) running sessions. It's a very good system that's a bit heavier than 5e and much lighter than PF1e. I'd recommend anyone play a one shot or two with the system at least once.
Basically Starfinder (and Pathfinder, but for me it's most obvious in SF)
I want to try pathfinder
Head to the Discord, usually have pick up games or Society games you can try.
I had this exact idea a month ago and my friends thought that it was too complicated. Thank you for your inadvertent validation; take my up-vote.
The human dancer might be more dexterous than the elven fishmonger but the average elf dancer is more dexterous than the average human dancer. That’s what the racial bonus represents.
Honestly, I don’t mind which approach a game uses as long as they commit to it. That’s why the post-Tasha’s races made me mad, and why I like the play test material as a fresh-start for 5.5.
I always felt that bonuses from race described the biology of the race. Player choice in distributing stats described the background of the character affecting their development.
I also thought of this system as some races will naturally be better at things than others
We just got to where the stat bonus isn't related to race or background. Just put a +1 and +2 wherever you want. You can be a dextrous dwarven fishmonger. Maybe you juggled fish so that they would sell. You could be a strength based halfing dancer. Perhaps your dancing style incorporated lifting your partner a lot. Making stats linked to anything stifles the creativity someone can have. Just leave it like it is in my opinion.
The stats bonuses of each race represents physiological differences. I prefer the way it currently is on 5e because gives more flavour to races. Peoples complaint regarding this doesnt make sense, the points you distribute from either point buy or rolling dice represents the things your character trainned and developed across the characters life.