Posted in General

Pathfinder Unchained is expected to release April 29. That’s, like, a week from now. From what I understand, this is Pathfinder’s version of Unearthed Arcana, featuring variant classes, special abilities, and new subsystems. Far be it from me to speculate too wildly, but I have a feeling that Paizo is using this source book as a testing ground for new material. Bluntly, they’re throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks for Pathfinder 2.0. That’s not a bad thing, far from it. With the release of D&D 5e, I’m hoping the Pathfinder developers show their gaming chops and move Pathfinder away from its D&D roots into its own game. I’m crossing my fingers to see D&D and Pathfinder diverge so that gamers have two distinct games to play.

On ENWorld, there was a guy who was kind enough to drop a whole bunch of spoilers on Pathfinder Unchained’s content, so I’m just going to comment on a few interesting things.

First, let’s talk variant multiclassing.

Variant Multiclassing is theoretically compatible with normal multiclassing, though the book advises that you stick with one or the other. As it stands, only classes published before the Advanced Class Guide’s release are in this book. I’m guessing that ACG classes will be in some sort of “Unchained Origins” Player Companion. You get Variant Multiclass options at 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th levels. If your secondary class has a deity, code of honor, or aura, you get that at first level. Variant Multiclasses don’t grant spell, save, or BAB progression; they only give class features. They also usually suffer a -2 to -4 penalty on level based effects.

This sounds pretty neat. It’s a throwback to dual-classing, but in a slightly less hamfisted way. The usefulness of this will undoubtedly depend on the class combination, and I’m cautiously optimistic at how Paizo is going to handle balancing single-classed characters and multiclassers.

The guy mentions a new action economy.

Players get three actions per turn. Things that took a swift, standard, or move action now just take an action. Spell casting usually takes two actions. More complex stuff takes three.

Sounds like spellcasters may be getting nerfed with this. May. I wouldn’t complain, and the system sounds easier to explain to new players than swift/standard/move. On the other hand, I foresee issues as the wizard drops a gate spell with two actions while the fighter spends three to drink a potion of cure light wounds.

The monk has full BAB, so Flurry now just adds bonus attacks.

As it should have been from the very start. While the Pathfinder developers said “backwards compatibility” was the reason they didn’t give the monk full BAB, I would have said “giving the monk full BAB only when he flurries or uses combat maneuvers is a terrible decision that makes the game even more needlessly complicated,” but I’m iconoclastic like that.

One of the real treats of the system is the changes to skills.

Adventuring Skills are the ones like Perception, Stealth, Disable Device, and knowledges directly associated with adventuring. Background skills are ones like Handle Animal, Profession, Craft, and Perform, plus knowledges like History and Nobility. You get two bonus skill ranks per level to spend on background skills in this system. There are also two new skills in the form of Artistry (which is like craft for the literary, rhetorical, and musical arts), and Lore (Which is a hyper specific knowledge skill that only applies to a narrow category of things). Artistry I could see working in a normal campaign, but Lore really only works in the background system.

Yes, yes, yes, yes. Absolutely. Some people will complain that you don’t need “background skills” because roleplaying should handle them. I disagree. If you’re a farmer, there should be some mechanical impact on your character. This is something D&D has needed for a very long time, not unlike the removal of iterative attacks:

The next part is the removing Iterative Attacks system. It works like this: When you make a full attack, roll your highest bonus and then compare it to the target’s AC. If you fail by less than 6, you do miss damage. You do damage on a hit, and land an additional hit for each 5 points of success. Criticals apply to one hit, and there are special rules for TWF, Natural Attacks, Haste, Rerolls, and True Strike that I won’t explain here.

I was just about to mention the massive boost to True Strike that this would give, but it appears they’re changing that. Although iterative attacks do slow down gameplay, and it would be lovely to see them gone for good, I hesitate to fully embrace this change before reading the actual rules. My fear is that non-casters are going to get nerfed by this. Fewer attacks means fewer critical hits (a waste of all those critical hit feats that Paizo published), and damage may end up very, very swingy. (This round you do 0 damage, the next round you do 10d6+48.) Again, this is all WILD SPECULATION, but isn’t that the best kind?

Another goodie that has piqued my interest: hacking down wealth-by-level, burning it, and scattering the ashes in the sea. Well, not quite, but:

The first is Automatic Bonus Progression, in which your WbL is cut in half in exchange for regular improvements to your character. The chart also has options for limiting access to normal magic items, in which case you speed up bonus progression to compensate. It covers all of the Enhancement, Deflection, and Resistance bonuses you need. Magic Weapons and Armor still exist, but don’t grant bonuses, just abilities. You could theoretically get rid of WPL with this, though.

The last little bit I’ll comment on is a monster system that seems cribbed (and simplified) from 4e. I won’t post the whole thing here, but you choose a monster class, apply some templates, and you’re good to go. Damage, hit points, etc. is determined by the monster’s class (Spellcaster, Expert, or Combatant). Not so much a fan of this, but anything that reduces the workload of the GM is good by me.

If I still had a group that played Pathfinder, I would be overjoyed at these changes (and now I’m a sad that I don’t!). I won’t say that Pathfinder Unchained is on my Need To Own list simply because my group plays Savage Worlds 95% of the time, it sounds like it’s a must-have for diehard Pathfinder fans. Here’s to Pathfinder Unchained and, some day, Pathfinder 2.0!