Is WotR going to be based on PF 1e or 2e?

[Sasha]

As the title says, I was wondering if the system the game is using is going to be very late 1e, like Kingmaker, or is going to go with 2e?

[GunofBrixton]

I'm in the 1e camp. 4e/5e and PF2 went for the 'Broaden our market' approach. Which makes it more homogenized, and less intelligence intensive.

If this was in PF2e I just flatly wouldn't be interested, just like BG3 looks incredibly depressingly bad.

[Immortal Reaver]

I do not know much about PF2e other than inheritance, but DnD5e I do not like because of its archetypes, no negatives and only positives and bonuses philosophy, and reduction in feats.

[GrandMajora]

Origineel geplaatst door Immortal Reaver:

I do not know much about PF2e other than inheritance, but DnD5e I do not like because of its archetypes, no negatives and only positives and bonuses philosophy, and reduction in feats.

Personally, I'm fine either way with the racial stat penalties being present / absent from the game. But only as long as EVERY RACE gets the same treatment. Either I want to see every race have stat penalties, or none of them do.

People arguing that Kobolds having a penalty to strength fits with the lore, yet don't think to question why Gnomes, Halflings and Goblins don't have a similar penalty. Every time I think about that mechanic, I like to imagine a Gnome or Goblin challenging an Orc to an arm wrestling competition, and actually winning!

[Alpaka]

I just got into Pathfinder about 2 months ago and have enjoyed reading the 2e books. I planned on getting WotR, but was holding off on Kingmaker since it was 1e. Since WotR is also 1e should I get Kingmaker now when WotR is right around the corner?

[GrandMajora]

Origineel geplaatst door Draser:

I just got into Pathfinder about 2 months ago and have enjoyed reading the 2e books. I planned on getting WotR, but was holding off on Kingmaker since it was 1e. Since WotR is also 1e should I get Kingmaker now when WotR is right around the corner?

Whether or not you purchase Kingmaker will have no impact on your experience with Wrath of the Righteous. With the exception of a few cameo appearances from characters who were present in the first game.

Wrath of the Righteous is set in the same world, but it's a completely separate story from Kingmaker. It might help get you adjusted to the way 1E does things, but I'm lead to believe they altered some stuff from table top to make it fit better for the video game.

A huge chunk of the table top spell book was gutted, with many popular spells missing. For example, the spell Flesh to Stone is not in the game, yet the reverse Stone to Flesh is. This is kind of useless, because the only enemy in the game who uses petrification are the Gorgons; and to the best of my knowledge, there's only like 4 of them in Kingmaker. Two of which are located in an optional exploration zone.

[mayrc]

i am fare more happy with 1e. i am a 3.5 dnd fan. And if its for me we could skip all that simplifying with every new edition

[CDI Mario]

Origineel geplaatst door Sasha:

Tbh, that's kind of a bummer. 1e is super crunchy, but 2e really refines some of the unnecessary crunchiness out and allows for much more customisation. Ah well. I'll still be playing and hoping for a 2e game in the future.

there will probably be a mod to bring it up to 2e. hell maybe that will be dlc who knows

[Lord Falco]

if that be a dlc its an instant skip dlc for meXD

[AzureTheGamerKobold]

Origineel geplaatst door GrandMajora:

Origineel geplaatst door Mauman:

And I'm hoping they stay forever more with 1e.

Dude, 2nd edition is awesome. They made the halfbreed races (Half Elf, Half Orc, Tiefling, Aasimar, Changeling, Dhampir) heritages that could be applied to every race, instead of just humans!

Half-Breed Aasimar and Tieflings of other races exist already. The rules already exist for them, and while its mostly a visual thing its already there.

the Major gripes with PF 2e are as they have always been, it was Paizo trying to mimic 5e and for the most part they did succeed. But alot of PF players chose to play PF because they had no desire to play 5e to begin with. I already asked my group if they wanted to try and and they pretty much had no interest since, like me they all just prefered 3.5 and wanted to stick to 3.5 and PF was just 3.5 but better.

Personally i have zero interest in PF 2e, and only play 5e when i have no other options.

[GrandMajora]

Origineel geplaatst door AzureTheGamerKobold:

Half-Breed Aasimar and Tieflings of other races exist already. The rules already exist for them, and while its mostly a visual thing its already there.

Ah, pretty much my only experience with Pathfinder was Kingmaker. For years, I thought that Pathfinder was just another setting of D&D, like Eberron, Dragon Lance, or Forgotten Realms. Only recently learned it was its own separate game.

So pretty much, my knowledge about Pathfinder for the moment is still largely going by assumptions made from my knowledge of D&D.

[Lord Falco]

yeah pf came when dnd went to 4th edition and they buidled on 3.5 in my friend group msot call it dnd 3.7 (no clue why we picked 7)

ofc before pf paizo did more work for wizards of the coast like the dragoncompendium. a 3rd party book (that in our eyes becomes 1st aprtymaterial with pf) published by the 1st party that is a collectionof 1st party magazine articles

[mayrc]

Origineel geplaatst door GrandMajora:

Origineel geplaatst door AzureTheGamerKobold:

Half-Breed Aasimar and Tieflings of other races exist already. The rules already exist for them, and while its mostly a visual thing its already there.

Ah, pretty much my only experience with Pathfinder was Kingmaker. For years, I thought that Pathfinder was just another setting of D&D, like Eberron, Dragon Lance, or Forgotten Realms. Only recently learned it was its own separate game.

So pretty much, my knowledge about Pathfinder for the moment is still largely going by assumptions made from my knowledge of D&D.

Dont fuzz over the Name of the games. Its a thting of Legal. Pathfinder is DnD in its very core.... and by that its not because of the same rules. Its because of the spirit and gameflow behind it. That changed in DND 4.0 forever and was the reason so many people rejected it and Pathfinder was born. DnD is only DND because of legal name rights. Nothing else is left aside from some minor Lore of the Worlds.
Lol even some Novel Authors rejected to even acknowledge dnd 4.0 as they did continue their book series like the new Lore never happend.

If we talk about Pathfinder community its the oldschool DnD fans largly. And of course also many new get attrakted to more depth and complexity.

[GrandMajora]

Origineel geplaatst door Lord Falco:

yeah pf came when dnd went to 4th edition and they buidled on 3.5 in my friend group msot call it dnd 3.7 (no clue why we picked 7)

ofc before pf paizo did more work for wizards of the coast like the dragoncompendium. a 3rd party book (that in our eyes becomes 1st aprtymaterial with pf) published by the 1st party that is a collectionof 1st party magazine articles

Honestly, the more I learn about Pathfinder, the less I like D&D compared to it. More races and classes means more ways to role play. They even added a Tiny race (Sprites) to the Lost Omens Ancestry Guide.

But one of the biggest differences is, once you hit level 17, Lizardfolk can take a feat that makes them permanently Large!

Seriously, no idea why playing Large character is such a taboo in D&D? I've seen people claim the extra 5 feet melee reach is too powerful, but then they gave Bugbears a racial ability that does exactly that.

[Lord Falco]

Origineel geplaatst door GrandMajora:

Origineel geplaatst door Lord Falco:

yeah pf came when dnd went to 4th edition and they buidled on 3.5 in my friend group msot call it dnd 3.7 (no clue why we picked 7)

ofc before pf paizo did more work for wizards of the coast like the dragoncompendium. a 3rd party book (that in our eyes becomes 1st aprtymaterial with pf) published by the 1st party that is a collectionof 1st party magazine articles

Honestly, the more I learn about Pathfinder, the less I like D&D compared to it. More races and classes means more ways to role play. They even added a Tiny race (Sprites) to the Lost Omens Ancestry Guide.

But one of the biggest differences is, once you hit level 17, Lizardfolk can take a feat that makes them permanently Large!

Seriously, no idea why playing Large character is such a taboo in D&D? I've seen people claim the extra 5 feet melee reach is too powerful, but then they gave Bugbears a racial ability that does exactly that.

uhm dnd 3.5 has mroe base races still. ofc they are wide spread over books, all comeplte books, the pb1 and pb2 for example, but also heroes of horror comes with 2 etc.
there ways to be permanent (except for 1 standard action a day) large but storgner then enlarge person if u go cleric for example.

i think there a few tiny races aswell, atleast tibbit has 2 forms one of which is tiny.

my parties i play in or dm we use both rule sets, oftne races and classes form 3.5 (base classes, so stuff as alchemist cna still join) skills from pf cause 3.5 is skill bloat XD

[mayrc]

Origineel geplaatst door GrandMajora:

Origineel geplaatst door Lord Falco:

yeah pf came when dnd went to 4th edition and they buidled on 3.5 in my friend group msot call it dnd 3.7 (no clue why we picked 7)

ofc before pf paizo did more work for wizards of the coast like the dragoncompendium. a 3rd party book (that in our eyes becomes 1st aprtymaterial with pf) published by the 1st party that is a collectionof 1st party magazine articles

Honestly, the more I learn about Pathfinder, the less I like D&D compared to it. More races and classes means more ways to role play. They even added a Tiny race (Sprites) to the Lost Omens Ancestry Guide.

But one of the biggest differences is, once you hit level 17, Lizardfolk can take a feat that makes them permanently Large!

Seriously, no idea why playing Large character is such a taboo in D&D? I've seen people claim the extra 5 feet melee reach is too powerful, but then they gave Bugbears a racial ability that does exactly that.

Pathfinder seems to have a different mindset. They seem to take the solid base and expand from there. This inevitable adds A TON more complexity and enjoyment. However it raises also the Wall to get into the game easily.
DnD went the other way... throw over board all and everything and make it as casual as possible (also try to even get away with most basic math during gameplay as its pretended that todays student arend capable of enjoying math as part of a game). This makes the game extremly shallow but very very accessible for new players.

Its up to you what you prefer :)