#d20 history

[kakita-shisumo]

In which I sound off for much too long about PF2 (and why I like it better than D&D 5E)

So, let me begin with a disclaimer here. I don’t hate 5E and I deeply despise edition warring. I like 5E, I enjoy playing it, and more, I think it’s an incredibly well-designed game, given what its design mandates were. This probably goes without saying but I wanted it on the record. While I will be comparing PF2 to D&D 5E in what follows and I’ve pretty much already spoiled the ending by the post title (that is, PF2 is going to come out ahead in these comparisons most of the time), I don’t want there to be any misunderstanding about my position or intention. My opinions do not constitute an attack on anybody. For that matter, things I might list as weaknesses in 5E or strengths of PF2 might be the exact opposite for other people, depending on what they want from their RPG experience.

As I said before, 5E is an exceedingly well-designed game that does an exceptional job of meeting its design goals. It just so happens that those design goals aren’t quite to my taste.

# A Brief History of the d20 RPG Universe #

I’m going to indulge myself in a little history for a second; some of it might even be relevant later, but for the most part, I just want to cover a little ground about how we got here. By the time the late ‘90s rolled around TSR and its flagship product, Dungeons and Dragons, were in trouble. D&D was well over two decades old by that point and showing its age. New ideas about what RPGs could and even should be had taken over the industry; TSR had finally lost its spot as best-selling RPG publisher to comparative upstart White Wolf and their World of Darkness games; the company even declared bankruptcy in 1997. Times were grim.

That, however, was when another comparative newcomer, Wizards of the Coast, popped up and bought TSR outright. Flush with MtG and Pokemon cash, they were excited to try to revitalize the D&D brand and began development on a new edition of D&D: third edition, releasing in August 2000.

Third edition was an almost literal revolution in D&D’s design, throwing a lot of “sacred cows” out and streamlining everywhere: getting rid of THAC0 and standardizing three kinds of base attack bonus progressions instead; cutting down to three, much more intuitive kinds of saving throws and standardizing them into two kinds of progression; integrating skills and feats into the core rules; creating the concept of prestige classes and expanding the core class selection. And of course, just making it so rolls were standardized as well, using a d20 for basically everything and making it so higher numbers are basically always better.

At the same time, WotC also developed the concept of the Open Gaming License (OGL), based on Open Source coding philosophies. The idea was that the core rules elements of the game could be offered with a free, open license to allow third-parties develop more content for the game than WotC would have the resources to do on their own. That would encourage more sales of the base game and other materials WotC released as well, creating a virtuous cycle of development and growing the industry for everyone.

Well, long story short (too late!), it worked like fucking gangbusters. 3E was explosive. It sold beyond anyone’s expectations, and the OGL fostered a massive cottage industry of third-party developers throwing out adventures, rules material, and even entire new game lines on the backs of the d20 system. A couple years later, 3.5 edition released, updating and streamlining further, and it was even more of a success than 3rd ed was.

At this point, we need turn for a moment to a small magazine publishing company called Paizo Publishing, staffed almost exclusively by former WotC writers and developers who had formed their own company to publish Dungeon and Dragon, the two officially-licensed monthly magazines (remember those?) for D&D. Dungeon focused on rules content, deep dives into new sourcebooks, etc., while Dragon was basically a monthly adventure drop. Both sold well and Paizo was a reasonably profitable company. Everything seemed to be going swimmingly.

Except. In 1999, WotC themselves were bought by board game heavyweight Hasbro, who wanted all that sweet, sweet Magic: the Gathering and Pokemon money. D&D was a tiny part of WotC at the time and the brand was moribund, so Hasbro’s execs hadn’t really cared if the weirdos in the RPG division wanted to mess around with Open Source licensing. It wasn’t like D&D was actually making money anyway… until it was. A lot of money. And suddenly Hasbro saw “their” money walking out the door to other publishers. So in 2007, WotC announced D&D 4th Ed, and unlike 3rd, it would not be released under an open license. Instead, it would be released under a much more restrictive, much more isolationist Gaming System License, which, among other things, prevented any licensee from publishing under the OGL and the GSL at the same time. They also canceled the licenses for Dungeon and Dragon, leaving Paizo Publishing without anything to, well, publish.

At first, Paizo opted to just pivot to adventure publishing under the OGL. Dungeon Magazine had found great success with a series of adventures over several issues that took PCs from 1st all the way to 20th level, something they were calling “Adventure Paths,” so Paizo said, “Well, we can just start publishing those! We’re good at it, the market’s there, it will be great!” And then, roughly four months after Paizo debuted its “Pathfinder Adventure Paths” line, WotC announced 4th Ed and the switch to the GSL. Paizo suddenly had a problem.

4th Ed wasn’t as big a change from 3rd Ed as 3rd Ed had been from AD&D, but it was still a major change, and a lot of 3rd Ed fans were decidedly unimpressed. Paizo’s own developers weren’t too keen on it either. So they made a fateful decision: they were going to use the OGL to essentially rewrite and update D&D 3.5 into an RPG line they owned: the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. It was unprecedented. It was a huge freaking gamble. And it paid off more than anybody ever expected. Within two years Paizo was the second-largest RPG publisher in the industry, only behind WotC itself, and for one quarter late in 4E’s life, even managed to outsell D&D, however briefly. Ten years of gangbuster sales and rules releases followed, including 6 different monster books and something over 30 base classes when it was all said and done. It was good stuff and I played it loyally the whole time.

Eventually, though, time moves on and things have to change. The first thing that changed was 4E was replaced by D&D 5E in 2014, which was deliberately designed to walk back many of the changes in 4E that were so poorly received, keep a few of the better ones that weren’t, and in general make the game much more accessible to new players. It was a phenomenal success, buoyed by a resurgence of D&D in pop culture generally (Stranger Things and Critical Role both having large parts to play), and its dominance in the RPG arena hasn’t been meaningfully challenged since. It also returned to the use of the OGL, and a second boom of third-party publishers appeared and thrived for most of a decade.

The second thing was that PF1 was, itself, showing its age. RPGs have a pretty typical life cycle of editions and Pathfinder was reaching the end of one. It wasn’t much of a surprise, then, when, in 2018, Paizo announced Pathfinder 2nd Ed, which released in 2019 and will serve as the focus of the remainder of this post (yes, it’s taken me 1300 words to actually start doing the thing the post is supposed to be about, sue me).

There’s a coda to all of this in the form of the OGL debacle but I don’t intend to rehash any of it here - it was just like six months ago, come on - beyond what it specifically means for the future of PF2. That will come back up at the very end.

# Pathfinder 2E Basics #

So what, exactly, makes PF2 different from what has come before? There are, in my opinion, four fundamental answers to that question.

First: Unified math and proficiency progression. This piece is likely the part most familiar to 5E players, because 5E proficiency and PF2 proficiency both serve the same purpose, which is to tighten up the math of the game and make it so broken accumulations of bonuses aren’t really a thing. In contrast to 5E’s very limited proficiency, though, which just runs from +2 to +6 over the entire 20 levels of the game, Pathfinder’s scales from +0 to +28. Proficiency isn’t a binary yes/no, the way it is in 5E. PF2’s proficiency comes in five varieties: Untrained, Trained, Expert, Master, and Legendary. Your proficiency bonus is either +0 (Untrained) or your level + 2(Trained), +4 (Expert), +6 (Master) or +8 (Legendary). So if you were level five and Expert at something, your proficiency bonus would be level (5) plus Expert bonus (4) = +9.

Proficiency applies to everything in PF2, really - even more than 5E, if you can believe it, because it also goes into your Armor Class calculation. You can be Untrained, Trained, Expert, Master, or Legendary in various types of armor (or unarmored defense, especially relevant for many casters and monks), and your AC is calculated by your proficiency bonus + your Dex modifier + the armor’s own AC bonus, so AC scales just as attack rolls do. Once you get a handle on PF2 proficiency, you’ve grasped 95% of how any game statistic is calculated, including attacks, saves, skill checks, and AC.

Second: Three-Action Economy. Previous editions of D&D, including 5E, have used a “tiered” action system in combat, like 5E’s division between actions, moves, and bonus actions. PF2 has largely done away with that. At the start of your turn, you get three actions and a reaction, period (barring haste or slow or similar temporary effects). It takes one action to do one basic thing. “Attack” is an action. “Move your speed” is an action. “Ready a weapon” is an action. Searching for a hidden enemy is an action. Taking a guarded step is an action. Etc. The point being, you can do any of those as often as you have the actions for them. You can move three times, attack three times, move twice and attack once, whatever. Yes, this does mean you can attack three times in one turn at 1st level if you really want to (though there are reasons why you might not want to).

Some special abilities and most spells take more than one action to accomplish, so it’s not completely one-to-one, but it’s extremely easy to grasp and quite flexible at the same time. It’s probably my favorite of the innovations PF2 brought to the table.

Third: Deep Character Customization. So here’s where I am going to legitimately complain just a bit about 5E. I struggle with how little mechanical control I, as a player, have over how my character advances in 5E.

Consider an example. It’s common in a lot of 5E games to begin play at 3rd level, since you have a subclass by then, as well as a decent amount of hit points and access to 2nd level spells if you’re a caster. Let’s say you’re playing a fighter in a campaign that begins at 3rd level and is expected to run to 11th. That’s 8+ levels of play, a decent-length campaign by just about anyone’s standards. During that entire stretch of play, which would be a year or more depending on how often your group meets, your fighter will make exactly two (2) meaningful mechanical choices as part of their level-up process: the two points at 4th and 8th levels where you can boost a couple stats or get a feat. That’s it. Everything else is on rails, decided for you the moment you picked your subclass.

Contrast that with PF2. In that same level range, you would get to select: 4 class feats, 4 skill feats, two ancestry feats, two general feats, and four skill increases. At every level, a PF2 player gets to choose at least two things, in addition to whatever automatic bonuses they get from their class. These allow me to tailor my build quite tightly to whatever my idea for my character is and give me cool new things to play with every time I level up. This is true across character classes, casters and martials alike.

PF2 also handles multiclassing and the space that used to be occupied by prestige classes with its “pile o’ feats” approach. You can spend class feats from class A to get some features of class B, but it’s impossible for a multiclass build to just “steal” everything that makes a single class cool. A wizard/fighter will never be as good a fighter as a regular fighter is, and a fighter/wizard will never be the wizard’s match with magic.

Fourth: Four Degrees of Success. 5E applies its nat 20, nat 1, critical hits, etc. rules in a very haphazard fashion. PF2 standardizes this as well, in a way that makes your actual skill with whatever you’re doing matter for how well you do it. Any check in PF2 can produce one of four results: a critical success, a regular success, a regular failure, or a critical failure. In order to get a critical success on a roll, you have to exceed your target DC by 10 or more; in order to get a critical failure, you have to roll 10 or more less than the DC. Where do nat 20s and nat 1s come in? They respectively increase or decrease the level of success you rolled by one step. In practice, it works out a lot like you’re used to with a 5E game, but, for instance, if you have a +30 modifier and are rolling against a DC 18, rolling a nat 1 nets you a total of 31, exceeding the DC by more than 10 and earning you a critical success, which is then reduced to just a normal success by the fact of it being a nat 1. Conversely, rolling against a DC 40 with a +9 modifier can never succeed, because even a nat 20 only earns a 29, more than 10 below the DC and normally a crit failure, only increased to a regular failure by the nat 20.

Now, not every roll will make use of critical successes and critical failures. Attack rolls, for instance, don’t make any inherent distinction between failure and critical failure. (Though there are special abilities that do - try not to critically fail a melee attack against a swashbuckler. The results may be painful.) Skill rolls, however, often do, as do many spells with saving throws. Most spells that allow saves are only completely resisted if the target rolls a critical success. Even on a regular success, there is usually some effect, even on non-damaging rolls. That means that casters very rarely waste their turn on spells that get resisted and accomplish nothing at all. It also doubles the effect of any mechanical bonuses or penalties to a roll, because now there are two spots on a die per +1 or -1 that affect the outcome; a +1 might not only convert a failure to a success but might also convert a success to a crit success, or a crit fail to a regular fail.

# What About Everything Else? #

There is a lot more to it, of course. As a GM I find PF2 incredibly easy to run, even at the highest levels of game play, as compared to other d20 systems. The challenge level calculations work, meaning you can have a solo boss without having to resort to special boss monster rules to provide good challenges. I find the shift from “races” to “ancestries” much less problematic. PF2 has rules for how to handle non-combat time in the dungeon in ways that standardize common rules problems like “Well, you didn’t say you were looking for traps!” Everything using one proficiency calculation lets the game do weird things like having skill checks that target saves, or saves that target skill-based DCs. Inter-class balance, with some very specific exceptions, is beautifully tailored. Perception, always the uber-skill, isn’t a skill at all anymore: everyone is at least Trained in it, and every class reaches at least Expert in it by early double-digit levels. Opportunity Attacks (PF2 still uses the 3rd Ed “Attack of Opportunity” - but will soon be switching over to "Reactive Strike") isn’t an inherent ability of every character and monster, encouraging mobility during combats, and skill actions in combat can lower ACs, saves, attacks, and more, so there are more things to do for more kinds of characters. And so on.

Experiencing all of that is easiest just by playing the game, of course, but suffice it to say PF2 has a lot of QoL improvements for players and GMs alike in addition to the bigger, core-level mechanical differences.

# The OGL Thing #

Last thing, then. In the wake of the OGL shit in January, Paizo announced that it would no longer be releasing Pathfinder material under the OGL, opting instead to work with an intellectual property law firm to develop the Open RPG Creative (ORC) License that would do what the OGL could no longer be trusted to do: remain perpetually free and untouchable for anyone who wanted to publish under it. The ORC isn’t limited specifically to Paizo or to Pathfinder 2E or even to d20 games; any company can release any ruleset under it and allow third-party companies to develop and publish content for it.

Shifting away from the OGL, though, required making some changes to scrub out legacy material. A lot of the basic work was done when they shifted to 2E, but there are still a lot of concepts, terminologies, and potentially infringing ideas seeded throughout the system. These had to go.

Since this meant having to rewrite a lot of their core rules anyway, Paizo opted to not fight destiny and announced “Pathfinder 2nd Edition Remastered” in April. This is a kind of “2.25” edition, with a lot of small changes around the edges and a couple of larger ones to incorporate what they’ve learned since the game first launched four years ago. A couple classes are getting major updates, a ton of spells are either getting renamed or swapped out for non-OGL equivalents, and a couple big things: no more alignment and no more schools of magic.

The first book of the Remaster, Player Core 1, comes out in November, along with the GM Core. Next spring will see Monster Core and next summer will give us Player Core 2. That will complete the Remaster books; everything else is, according to Paizo, going to be compatible enough it won’t need but a few minor tweaks that can be handled via errata. So if you’re thinking about getting into PF2, I’d give serious thought to waiting until November at least, and maybe next summer if you want the whole Remastered package.

And that’s it. That’s my essay on PF2 and what I think makes it cool. The floor is open for questions and I am both very grateful and deeply apologetic to anyone who made it this far.

[prokopetz]

don't answer that last ask I sent you actually. a) because I've since realized you rightfully don't give a shit about wizards of the coast, and would be justified in deleting the info I wanted from your brain as soon as you learned it, b) because I realized you aren't Google, and c) because I Googled it and found out myself.

on a related note, did you know wizards copyrighted the term "d20 system??" wtf. that was the last place I expected to have problems. I thought it'd be, like, "armor class" or "difficulty class" or something else similarly oppressive and cruel to copyright that would force me to change my whole rules document, and mess with my player's ability to remember which mechanics have had their name changed.

Somehow copyrighting the term "d20 system" feels even wronger than that.

Wizards of the Coast is the outfit that popularised the idea of categorising game systems according to the shape of the dice you roll in the first place. There are a few prior examples of games with similar naming conventions, including West End Games' D6 System – which is where WotC probably got the idea – but the idea of "dX systems", where X is the shape of the dice you roll, as coherent categories of games is very much a post-d20 System phenomenon.

That is, it's not that WotC trademarked (note: not "copyrighted") an existing piece of in-use terminology when they trademarked the term "d20 System"; it's that the idea of lumping all game systems which make use of twenty-sided dice together under the category of "d20 systems" was popularised by WotC's trademark.

(Indeed, if one were feeling conspiratorial, one might observe that the idea that all systems which roll the same-shaped dice are basically interchangeable with one another is a notion whose popularisation has proven very convenient for WotC's post-3E marketing strategy!)

[a-bloom-to-remember]

Thinking about how in sophomore year Ayda and Fig were each wondering if the other loved them for themselves and all the while there were fossils at Mordred Manor and a scroll kept by an order of knights for 1500 years just for Ayda to tell Fig HOW MUCH she loved her.

[ironinkpen]

hands down one of the best pieces of subtle world building this season is the name High Five Heroes and the way it doesn't mean anything. the Bad Kids and the Maidens' names actually say something about their respective groups and what they've done/been through. meanwhile High Five Heroes is clearly a name that was handpicked by Kipperlilly long before she stepped foot in aguefort on the first day or actually met any of her party members. it's a pre-approved inside joke specifically designed in a lab to be as bland and palatable and inoffensive as possible—a middle manager's attempt at manufacturing camaraderie. the most generic, perfectly marketable name she could come up with for her Perfect, Optimal Adventuring Party.

[southpauz]

Black History Month Art Challenge

DAY 8: Fabian Seacaster from Fantasy High

[rubedeckillerofficial]

This is KILLJAM X X X.

~ Logo by Jasper Taylor and Meg Tuten, Logo text by @valdevia ~

The deranged, queer cyberpunk death game audio drama podcast that myself, @machetebisexual, @reignoftiramizu, and @cannibalmukbang have been working on for the last two years.

You can follow it right here on tumblr at @killjamxxx

It features actors who have been in:

The Magnus Archives. (As a Friendly Surgeon Who Cannot Catch A Break)

The Amazing Digital Circus. (As an Enterprising Organ Harvester)

Slay The Princess. (As a Sadistic Superpowered Assassin)

Final Fantasy Seven Remake. (As a Truly Evil Corporate Bastard)

The Mortuary Assistant. (As a Ravenous Wolf Woman)

Lackadaisy. (As a Helpful Murder Nerd)

Dimension 20. (As a Mom-Friend Dominatrix)

Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure: Stone Ocean. (As a Cyborg out for Revenge)

Another Crab’s Treasure. (As a Homicidal Wife Guy)

The Kingmaker Histories. (As a Solipsistic Killer Clown Girl)

Caravan. (As a Guy You’ll Really Want to Punch)

Mobile Suit Gundam: The Witch from Mercury. (As an Incredible Narrator)

Zom 100: Bucket List of the Dead. (As a Stab-Happy Street Punk)

Eeler’s Choice. (As Diabolical German Pawnbroker and a Humanoid Catfish)

Two Flat Earthers Kidnap a Freemason. (As a Loan Shark Who Might Be The Devil)

Less Is Morgue. (As a Woman Who Will Drill You To Death)

The NoSleep Podcast. (As The Ghost of a Questionable Father)

The Dead Meat YouTube Channel. (As a Terrifying Robotic Nun)

And that’s not even getting into the SNILF (Snake Milf), the buff lady with the eyepatch, the dorky trans reptile scientist, the charming British thief, or the evil undead Ringmaster.

You can subscribe to KILLJAM X X X on Podbean using this link here. We’re working on getting it on all the major podcatchers, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Official trailer drop coming October 31st.

[powersandplanetaries]

Thinking about Kristen Applebees, fleeing a hostile home for people who fully accept her but still feeling guilty about not being there to "shield" her younger brothers...

Thinking about Penny Luckstone, with 18 siblings who are all definitely loved but she's still helping her parents run the house and struggling between duty to a family she loves fiercely and pursuing her own dreams...

Thinking about Aelwynn Abernant redirecting her parents' scorn for Adaine, again and again, not always kindly but eventually, finally standing up to her parents when it became clear what they were willing to do to her little sister. "But Father, Adaine's just a baby..."

Idk guys having some real normal thoughts about the role of eldest daughters in Fantasy High.

[fantasticgothicpeachsludge]

Something something Agent Haldwell being from Jennifer’s movie something something probably her love interest something something they probably had weird “you’re coming with me little missy” kind of banter written by weird male writers something something Jennifer changing the misogynistic script something something drowning him in his own piss

[rocks-in-space]

This episode of Burrow's End was absolutely incredible (I just started watching D20 and I'm losing it. This isn't scripted how is it so incredible? Like one of the best-"written" things I've ever seen).

So much happened, but I have to wonder if the whole stoats possibly intentionally causing a nuclear meltdown was in any way inspired by the time a weasel (and later, a marten) temporarily shut down the CERN Large Hadron Collider by chewing through wires.

See this article, which contains the incredible line, "It is unclear whether the animals are trying to stop humanity from unlocking the secrets of the universe."

Raccoons also once attacked the Fermilab particle accelerator, leading to this official report from the lab:

"At 1:24 a.m., Operations reported a raccoon attack in the Linac gallery. It seemed to be a coordinated effort. Fortunately, by 1:53 AM, a joint force of operators and Pbar experts managed to drive the raccoons out of their hastily made fortifications. Then at 4:18 p.m., the raccoons made what some thought to be a counterattack on the Division Headquarters, but others believed it to be only a simple reconnaissance incursion. No raccoons were either injured or captured during these encounters. Operator losses were low."

[justletmeon12]

How many illegal racers has Kingskin slept with?

[workingwhileidream]

If you know, you know

[whereserpentswalk]

Shootout to the ancient d20s I saw at the Met the other day.

[kettlechip-krispy-kreme]

may i present 2 very important lists in my notes app

[malinkymax]

@everyone who is complaining and in some places I’ve seen insulting Emily Axford for wanting to retire HER character: please stop.

The character is hers, she can do with it what she wants! From a creative standpoint it seems like Emily doesn’t feel like she had much else to say or explore with Fig. Would you rather she play Fig in a boring, uninterested way where she’s going through the motions? And ultimately ends up with people critiquing her for not “giving enough to the show” or “disappointing the fans”. You guys are gonna bully her either way? I just think it’s important to remember that Emily, like all the cast, are people who exist outside of entertaining you, and this game is supposed to be a place for players to have fun. If Emily didn’t feel like she was going to have fun playing Fig, why on earth would you want her to???

This is all to say I LOVE fig and am excited for another season of her, but if I was playing a TTRPG campaign and had to renew a character I wasn’t interested in anymore I’d change it too. Why should you expect anything different??

[tsuki-in-faerun]

FUCK ‘DREAM SMALL’ DREAM BIG MOTHERFUCKER!!!!!

[beebeesiims]

SHUT UP!! NO SHUT UUUUP!!!