Pathfinder 2e - Character creation - Return of Devi Stoneson

    Back when the second edition playtest came out I made a Dwarf Fighter as a sample character (part 1 and part 2).  So now that the official second edition is out, let's make him again, and walk through all the choices you have at character creation.

Ancestry

    So we have a few choices in the Core Rulebook-

• Dwarf
• Elf
• Gnome
• Goblin
• Halfling
• Human (which includes options for Half-Elf and Half-Orc).

Since I'm re-creating the same character I'm sticking with Dwarf.

Dwarf comes with a few stats-

• Hit Points: 10
• Size: Medium
• Speed: 20'
• Ability Boosts: Con, Wis, free
• Ability Flaw: Cha
• Languages: Common, Dwarven + Int (which I'll revisit when I've got my final Int mod)
• Traits: Dwarf, Humanoid (duh)
• Darkvision - can see in darkness and dim light as well as bright, but in black & white

Now the choices.  First off, Dwarves have 5 heritages-

• Ancient-Blooded: gives you an ability to resist magic
• Death Warden: increases saves against necromancy
• Forge: fire resistance
• Rock: bonus to resist being moved
• Strong-Blooded: poison resistance

    I'm not writing the one sentence bit of flavor, it's not enough to be worth paying attention to.  I took a poison resistance feat with him last time, so I noticed Strong-Blooded.  But my loose concept for him is really more of a Fighter/Cleric, so I like the idea of Death Warden, maybe he guarded his clan's ancestral tombs and knows all about the old heroes and gods.  Yeah, I like that.

 Last is the Ancestry feat, you get one at 1st, 5th, 9th, 13th and 17th levels.  Let's see what we've got to choose from-

• Dwarven Lore - you're Trained in Crafting and Religion (can swap if gain one of them from another source) and Dwarven Lore
• Dwarven Weapon Familiarity - considered trained in some weapons, no bonus beyond what your class gives
• Rock Runner - can move better across difficult stone and earth
• Stonecunning - bonus to skills with stone and finding stone secret doors
• Unburdened Iron - ignore some speed penalties
• Vengeful Hatred - a small damage bonus against some enemies

    Okay, first some hot takes on the abilities, most of them suck.  These are first level feats, so you don't expect them to be too powerful, but that's balanced against the fact that you only ever get 5 of them.  The Unburdened Iron seems super-useless.  Sure you get that one extra square of movement in heavy armor, but just how often is that really going to make a big difference?  As a Fighter (which I'm planning on) the Dwarven Weapon Familiarity is pretty useless, unless one of those exotic Dwarf weapons is clearly superior to all others (which I doubt, thought I haven't looked yet... okay, I looked there's 1 simple weapon and 1 martial weapon and they're decent but nothing that superior to all the other weapons).  I will concede that for non-Fighters it might be kind of worthwhile, but I can't see it being by a lot.  Stonecunning is not bad, secret things are usually worth finding.  Rock Runner is pretty specialized, not sure how often it's going to come into play.  Vengeful Hatred is extra damage, which is never a bad thing, but 1 point is not a big difference, especially with the HP bloat at higher levels.
    This one is easy, I'm taking Dwarven Lore.  Maybe not the greatest feat, but two skills that fit my concept (and whatever the hell Dwarven Lore is good for?).
    And that finishes up the Ancestry, moving on to...

Background

    I wanted to walk through all the available options and take a quick look at each with this post, but Backgrounds pose a bit of a problem.  There are a lot of them, 35 to be exact.  However, they are all very brief.  The total Background section takes up 5 pages, with pictures on 3 of those pages.  So since the book doesn't devote much space to them, I'm not either - I'm just going to list them by title below:

• Acolyte
• Acrobat
• Animal Whisperer
• Artisan
• Artist
• Barkeep
• Barrister
• Bounty Hunter
• Charlatan
• Criminal
• Detective
• Emissary
• Entertainer
• Farmhand
• Field Medic
• Fortune Teller
• Gambler
• Gladiator
• Guard
• Herbalist
• Hermit
• Hunter
• Laborer
• Martial Disciple
• Merchant
• Miner
• Noble
• Nomad
• Prisoner
• Sailor
• Scholar
• Scout
• Street Urchin
• Tinker
• Warrior

    Whew, what a list.
    Last time I made Devi I took the Warrior background.  And I thought it was very strange that I got the Quick Repair skill feat but didn't get the Crafting skill it depends on.  I'm happy that they fixed that from the playtest.  Now Warriors get the Intimidation skill and the related Intimidating Glare skill feat.
    This time though, I think I'm going for the Scholar Background.  I'm seeing this character as a special guard, that he was kind of sequestered away from other Dwarves, kind of like a scholar.  I'm thinking that maybe something was stolen, an artifact or even a body, and he's left to reclaim it.  So he would have studied the history of all the items/relics and people that he was guarding.  This background also gives him the Occultism skill, which I think could be a cool hint as to the thieves.  He also gets the Assurance skill feat w-Occult, which let's him "take 10" on a roll - yup, no longer are take 10/20 parts of the core game, now they are specific feats (well, 10, not sure if there is a take 20 feat, haven't read them all yet.) and the Academia Lore skill, which is so vague I'm going to interpret it as a list he has of notable scholars and educational institutions to help him find the thieves.
    He also gets a boost to Int or Wis and a free boost.  I'll tally those up at the end.

Class

    The big one now, Class.  There are 12 in the Core Rulebook-

• Alchemist
• Barbarian
• Bard
• Champion
• Cleric
• Druid
• Fighter
• Monk
• Ranger
• Rogue
• Sorcerer
• Wizard

    I'm not going to describe them all, they're the same ones from first edition with the addition of the Alchemist.  The "Champion" is the new name for the old Paladin.  I like that idea, it is long overdue to broaden the concept of the Paladin from the "generic good guy" into something more nuanced.  Sadly they didn't quite go all the way with that concept (as I'm noticing a lot in these rules).

 I was a Fighter last time and I'm sticking with that again.  So he gets a few things from the class...

• Key Ability: Strength or Dexterity.  I see him as being a Str fighter, and he gets a boost in that.
• Hit Points: 10 + Con mod
• Perception:  expert
• Saving Throws: expert in Fort and Ref, trained Will
• Skills: trained in choice of Acrobatics or Athletics, and trained in choice of 3 + Int mod
• Attacks: expert in simple, martial and unarmed
• Defenses: trained in all armor and unarmored

    And these are the Class Features-

• I'm going to write this one out verbatim from the book, "Ancestry and Background- In addition to the abilities provided by your class at 1st level, you have the benefits of your selected ancestry and background, as described in chapter 2."  What the hell is this?  Pages 21-30 have all the character creation steps and even a sample character (we're on page 142).  This is such a common thing in 2e, repeating information like you're a stupid 5 year old who can't figure anything out on your own.  I am super-sick of it, and it's killing any desire to go on reading this let alone actually run it.  Paizo, if you want to write books for children, then don't sell them for $60.  The next "class feature" is Initial Proficiencies, which is all the stuff I already mentioned above, which was in a clearly marked sidebar, and again you must be pretty damn stupid to not get that.  This crap makes me want to puke.
• Attack of Opportunity - like the 1e ability everybody had, in 2e only Fighters can attack on someone else's turn.  I'm actually okay with that, it makes Fighters a little more dangerous and special, and tracking AoOs for everybody was a fair amount of work.
• Shield Block - this is a bonus feat Fighters get.  Now, I totally hate how 2e treats shields.  Combat in Pathfinder is actually quite abstract, hit points represent luck and exertion as well as physical damage, and armor class represents the ability to dodge as well as to absorb blows.  This is the legacy that was inherited from Dungeons and Dragons.  Which is why it's always baffled me why Pathfinder 1e was so precisely simulation-ist with things like DR (which was never used with Armor by default, the one place it would make the most sense if you want to model reality) and the combat grid.  Weirdly 2e has decided to double-down on that in some ways, shields being most notable.  In 1e shields we're abstracted as a bonus to your armor class (ie, odds of not getting hurt) and that was it, you just had to remember a few times when you didn't get your shield bonus.  2e decided that was too simple, now you have to take one of your 3 actions each turn to "Raise a Shield" in order to get that AC bonus, and then you can use the Shield Block feat to spend your Reaction (ability to act on someone else's turn, you only get one each turn, period) and use your shield as DR, but both you and the shield take any damage above it's hardness and so you now also have to track your shield's HP to check for when it breaks.  Oh yeah, and since the Shield Block takes your reaction, you can't both block and use your Attack of Opportunity.  Now, this does give you another layer of defense with a shield, which is not a bad thing, but it also adds the bookkeeping of taking the action every turn just to get the bonus, guessing if you should use your AOO or block or any other reactions each turn, and it just feels super stupid that you can forget to use your shield, or watch shield after shield break while your sword never does (nothing I'm aware of yet specifically damages weapons).

   Anyways, those are the class features, so all that's left is picking our level 1 Class feat-

• Double Slice - 2 acts - when dual-wielding you can attack twice without increasing the multiple attack penalty (on these two, normally on a 3rd) and combine the damage into one attack
• Exacting Strike - 1 act, Press; this is one of the times when the keywords actually matter, "Press" means you can only use this when you have a multiple attack penalty, so this has to be your 2nd attack - if this attack misses it doesn't increase the multiple attack penalty for your 3rd attack
• Point-Blank Shot - "Open" this has to be the first thing you do in a turn, "Stance" it takes an action to start this, and it continues until you cannot maintain it or choose to end it, 1 act (so is that the action you have to take to enter the stance or is it an extra action you have to take before the shot?) - has 2 effects; (1)with a "ranged volley weapon" (the longbow, only) you "ignore the attack roll penalty from the volley trait."  Okay, so in 2e longbows apparently have -2 a penalty to hit anything within 30' (don't ask me why), with this ability you can ignore that.  (2)with a non-volley ranged weapon you get +2 damage within the first range increment (which is 60' for the shortbow)
• Power Attack - "Flourish" you cannot take a second action with flourish in the same turn, 2 acts -  take the multiple attack penalty but do an extra die of damage, with another die at levels 10 and 18
• Reactive Shield - React when hit w-shield - auto Raise A Shield and gain the AC bonus on this attack and for rest of turn
• Snagging Strike - have one hand free, 1 act - make a Strike, if hit target is flat-footed (-2 AC) until your next turn or it moves out of reach
• Sudden Charge - Open, Flourish, 1 act - Stride (move up to your speed) twice and make a melee attack

    I am thinking about multi-classing this character with Cleric, but you have to be at least 2nd level to do that.  So something for the future.
    Everything I hate about 2nd edition is right in the Point-Blank Shot ability.  In 1st edition PBS was easy, you get +2 damage within 30' with a ranged weapon.  Simple.  Useful (to a degree, not accounting for HP bloat).  So did they keep it the same (ain't broke don't fix it principle) or did they improve it in 2nd?  No.  Instead we make it a hell of a lot more complicated and clutter it with weird pseudo-realism in our non-realistic high fantasy game.  The text defining the "Stance" trait says you need to take an action to activate the stance, but the ability itself says it takes an action to use - so did they duplicate the same action out of stupidity, or does it take one action to start and then another action for each shot, and is that action in place of the shot or in addition to it?  This does not have to be confusing - in point of fact it wasn't confusing before, instead 2e took something that worked and screwed it up.  And why the hell can't longbows shoot accurately within 30'?  I have shot a kid's bow in my younger days, so I'm not a professional archer, but from what I've done and people I've watched it seems that shooting closer things is easier since you don't have to account for gravity as much as with a far away target.  And why are we trying to inject some kind of realism with bow usage into a game with fireball-throwing elves?  This ain't Riddle of Steel Paizo!
    Otherwise, Double Slice seems to be okay, make two attacks but without the penalty, allright.  Exacting Strike seems stupid, it's a re-named version of the same ability I gave the original character, all it does is let you miss better.  Wow, that makes me feel special.  Power Attack is actually okay, it's like the original - a penalty to hit for extra damage - and it even levels up a little with you to stay relevant.  I'm good with that one, wish more abilities were like it.  Reactive Shield is stupid because everything we do with shields in the game is stupid.  Snagging Strike is also good, it's a simple ability that makes it easier for your friends to hit somebody, and party cooperation is a good thing.  Sudden Charge is also alright, kind of hate that you need a special ability to do it, I'd imagine I could run up to somebody and hit them with a stick, but it's not terrible.
    Since I hate the new shield rules so much, I'm thinking of making him a two-handed weapon fighter, so I'm going to take Power Attack.

Ability Scores

    According to the character creation checklist I'm now at Step 6- Determine Ability Scores.  So let's recap the ability scores so far:

Ancestry:  +2 Con, +2 Wis, free, -2 Cha
Background:  +2 Int or Wis, free
Class:  +2 Str

    I first need to decide on those "free" boosts, each is a +2 but cannot be applied twice.  Even though Dwarves are antisocial (Cha penalty) and he's lived apart from other Dwarves as a guard, I'm thinking I want him to be decent at talking to people (he likes to share the epic tales of old), so I'm putting the Ancestry free boost into Cha to offset that penalty.  I want him to Cleric later, so the Background boost is going into Wis and the free is going to Con because he's lived a spartan life of hardship as a tomb guard.  That leaves me with:

Str  12 (+1)
Dex  10 (0)
Con 14 (+2)
Int 10 (0)
Wis 12 (+1)
Cha 10 (0)

    Finally everybody gets 4 free boosts, like the others they cannot be applied to a score twice.  I'm going for Str, Con, Wis, Cha for my final attributes as:

Str  14 (+2)
Dex  10 (0)
Con  16 (+3)
Int  10 (0)
Wis  14 (+2)
Cha  12 (+1)

Odds and Ends

    Just some final numbers and things to figure out.

• Hit Points - 10 Dwarf + 10 Fighter + 3 Con = 23
• Bonus Languages - 0 Int mod means none (too bad, I'd like the flavor of him knowing an ancient language or something)
• Skills - From my Dwarven Lore Ancestry feat I get: Crafting (Recall Knowledge, Repair, trained: Craft, Earn Income, Identify Alchemy), Religion (Recall Knowledge, trained: Decipher Writing, Identify Magic, Learn A Spell) which I think would cover his own and enemy pantheons and Dwarven Lore (Recall Knowledge and trained: Earn Income).  Scholar gives him Occultism (Recall Knowledge, Decipher Writing, Identify Magic, Learn A Spell - only the first untrained) and Academia Lore (Recall Knowledge and trained: Earn Income).  From Fighter I get, Acrobatics or Athletics.  Athletics is the Str one, so he can Climb, Force Open, Grapple, High Jump, Long Jump, Shove, Swim, Trip and Disarm (only the last needing to be skilled).  And he gets 3 + 0 Int bonus skills.  I'm going to take Diplomacy (Gather Information, Make an Impression, Request -no trained only actions), so I can ask people if they've seen the stolen McGuffin.  Arcana (Recall Knowledge, trained: Borrow an Arcane Spell, Decipher Writing, Identify Magic, Learn a Spell) since knowing about magic might be helpful?  Lastly Medicine (Administer first Aid, Recall Knowledge, trained: Treat Disease, Treat poison, Treat Wounds).

    I have to say that having actions anyone can do and actions only trained people can do makes sense to me, it's pretty much the definition of a skill as opposed to an attribute.  But you'd think that every skill would have trained-only actions then.  Stealth, Intimidation and Diplomacy don't.  Yet Diplomacy's actions are all personal - Gather Information, Make an Impression, Request.  Why not have Mediate (get two opposing groups to agree, which justifiably takes advanced knowledge of talking to people) or Whisper Campaign (to raise or lower the reputation of a group or person) as trained skills?

Equipment

    This is the last big step, once I get my gear I can fill out a character sheet and be good to go.  Of course I have to find a character sheet since I'm not using the backside-ugly one in the book.  One problem at a time.
    All characters get 150 SP (or 15 GP) to start, and I'm going to buy the following:

• Scale Mail - 40sp, +3 AC, Dex Cap +2, no armor check penalty due to Str, no move penalty due to Str, Bulk 2 (3 carried), composite material
• Greataxe - 20sp, 1d12 S dmg, 2 Bulk, 2 Hands, Axe group, Sweep (+1 cir attack against a different enemy)
• Hatchet - 4sp, 1d6 S dmg, 0.1 Bulk, 1 Hand, Axe group, Agile (multi attack penalty -4/-8), Sweep, Thrown 10'
• Adventurer's Pack - 7sp, 2 Bulk, contains: backpack, bedroll, 2 belt pouches, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks rations, soap, 5 torches, waterskin
• Manacles, simple - 30sp, 3 DC 22 thievery checks to pick, 0 Bulk
• Religious Text - 10sp
• Repair Kit - 20sp, 1 Bulk

Spent - 131sp
Money: 19sp,  Bulk: 7.1, carry 7.9 w/o penalty, max 12 lift/carry

Final Thoughts

    My character's finished.  It was a lot harder process than I expected.  It is a new game, and with every new game comes the adjustment period until you get the hang of the system.  But there were also moments of screaming at the book and harassing my friends asking them to explain some baffling choices to me (which was unfair as I don't think even the designers know what they were doing).  I'm not excited to play this game, not looking forward to seeing what my character can do.  It's way too simple and way too complicated at the same time - which I'll grant is an impressive feat.
    I managed to find a fillable pdf, not from Paizo of course but at: https://queuetimes.com/fillable-character-sheet-for-pathfinder-2e/.  Big thanks to them for working it up!
    You can download Devi from my Google Drive here.

Pathfinder 2e - First Read-through

    So I broke down and got the new Pathfinder 2nd Edition Core Rulebook and the Monster Manual.  About $100 worth of books, though I was lucky and got a sale, on top of all the books my friends and me have purchased for the 1st Edition.  I have not yet had a chance to run it, but I want to do a few articles with my first impressions, and some character creation.

My Background With the Series

    I came to Pathfinder a little late, a few years after it came out.  I co-ran a rotating GM campaign that went from levels 1 to 12, played the Rise of the Runelords campaign all the way through (to level 18), and ran a lot of 1-shot adventures.  So I have a good amount of experience with the 1st Edition, and we have a communal pile of books that include every hardback that Paizo published, and the Ultimate Psionics because that book totally rocks.
    As for what I think about Pathfinder, I don't like it as much as I used to.  I initially liked it a lot, I thought it did a good job of building on the old Dungeons and Dragons 3.5.  And at first it was neat to see the new options in each book, but soon it started to become a lot to keep track of.  One of the turning points was when talking to a friend and one of us made the comment that, "it's more fun to make a character than to play a character."  With so many options, such intricate feat chains, it takes a lot of effort to plan out your character to be effective or take advantage of a particular mechanic - which makes actually playing them a bit of a letdown.  Worse, the proliferation of options means that the quality of those options varies wildly.  Some feats are so specific that you wonder if you'd ever use them - and others seem like things anybody should be able to do, or should be covered by a skill or part of another feat.  Which means you have to wade through a ton of options and throw out lots of them to try and find the little gold nuggets.
    Still, while it is not my favorite system (none is at the moment, I like DnD 5th overall but it has some serious problems in my opinion) I have run games for it recently, and keep up on what's happening.  When I heard about the playtest I was optimistic.  I would love a simpler, more streamlined Pathfinder.  I got the Playtest Pdf and I was not impressed.  Like with DnD 5e I think it's a great idea to have fewer abilities to keep track of (and plan for), but I also think that if you're going to have fewer abilities then they need to be broader and more generally useful so you don't feel like you're wasting anything.  Which neither DnD or the Playtest seem to agree with.  So I didn't follow all the twists and turns of the Playtest, and didn't run out to buy the new 2e book.  Still, I couldn't resist (I'm weak-willed, I'll admit it), and thus we are where we are.

What I Don't Like After Reading Over The 2e Core Rulebook

    In no particular order...

1) The layout is weird to me

    The 2e book is about the same size as the 1e book, 623 to 568 counting to just before the character sheets and index/glossary.  Now, the page count only matters to me because I'm paying for it - the bigger the book the more it costs.  So I really don't want to pay for anything useless.  Let's look at the new (left) and old (right) pages of class abilities side-by-side (and I apologize for my phone camera pics, I couldn't find a Pdf to screenshot so had to do it by hand)...

    Okay, so having the name of the ability larger is a good thing, but the space under the name for the keywords (which I'll rant about next) has a lot of wasted whitespace.  Here's another sample page, from the Fighter's class feats...

     Having artwork scattered throughout the book gives your eyes a break from all the text, but it also takes up space that could be used by the text.  The art doesn't tell you anything about the game or how to play it, so it is low-value to me as a GM.  Likewise the sidebar on every right-hand page listing the major chapters of the book is kind of useful, but it also takes up space.  This book is about $60, which is $10 more than the last book, but with the layout I feel like I've paid more for less game.

2) I am not a computer

    I mentioned the keywords above, they are on everything.  Every ancestry (race) and feat has them, take a look at some fighter feats...

    I really, really hate this.  This is computer-speak.  I, as a sentient being, know that if I am reading the list of Fighter Feats, then all of these feats belong to fighters.  I don't need you repeating it EVERY TIME.  The example above at least has some other keywords, the Concentrate, Stance and Flourish keywords do at least refer to specific rules.  It's kind of annoying to have to flip back to the page that defines those rules, but eventually they'll get memorized so that's not a big deal.
    What pisses me off is insulting my intelligence by telling me that Halflings have the keywords of "Halfling and Humanoid."  No s**t Sherlock.  It says Halfling on the box, and a Humanoid is anything human-shaped.  Maybe you might have to define humanoid in the glossary, but it is not hard to figure out.  If you want to write computer rules for your game, put them in a separate document.  One of the things I love about RPGs is the human element, so computer-speak is not welcome at all, in the slightest.  Again, I'm paying for each page, so me paying you to insult me is not cool bro.

3) People have said the book contains "everything you need to play" and that is incorrect

    NO MONSTER RULES, AT ALL.  So the 1e Core Rulebook didn't have any monster creation rules either, but it did at least have 7 pages on creating NPCs.  Not much, and I'm not saying it's praise-worthy, but at least it had something.  With this book I can only make monsters as PCs, which is more work than I want to do and I'm not sure how well it would balance in the long run.  In 2e, no monsters for you, go buy the $50 book with them (Spoiler Warning- there are no monster creation rules in there either, maybe those will be in the next $80 book).  Come on people, this is a basic thing you need to run a game.  If you're going to make one super-huge and expensive book then at least make it complete.
    I have a suggestion for where those monster rules could go - in the 25 pages of useless background.  Oh yeah, who cares about stupid rules for building monsters, what you really need is a broad and so-vague-it's-worthless setting.  Here is an image for the "Inner Sea" region, note the desert area called "Golden Road" in the middle-ish...

    Now here is the entry for the "Golden Road" country/region...

      This description is crammed into the bottom-half of the page (who needs more text or a close-up map when you can stare at the lovely picture of camels?) and is full of names that mean nothing and hints at story that boil down to "like Egypt and the Silk Road."  The little setting material here is not enough to do anything meaningful with - and totally zero value to me since I'm not paying another $100 for stuff I can write on my own (or with my players).  Even for those who do want a setting, this is not enough to start writing campaigns.

4) The art is different, but not in a good way

    This is a pretty small complaint, but I'm talking about all of my first impressions here so I'm including it.  Look at this...

     I know my phone picture is bad, but this has a kind of cartoon-y feel that is at odds with the more realistic style in the last book and elsewhere in this book.  Just a random, minor complaint.  Back to more pressing issues...

5) Who the hell designed that character sheet, and why haven't they been publicly beaten with a stick?

    This is the sample character sheet in the back of the book...

     (to mis-quote Crow T Robot) I'm a color-blind robot and even I know you don't use Burnt Umber as a background color!
   

6) I was really hoping for a lot more innovation, I'm not sure who this game is written for

    Here's a page out of the combat section...

    There's the good old grid.  Hope you don't like that artsy story-game "theater of the mind" crap.  Okay, so some out there are saying/ thinking, "well, the first edition only had a grid" and they are right.  So who is this game for?  Is it only for the people who liked the first edition? (and in that case, why would they re-spend all their money for this instead of playing the game they already like?)  Why can't it also accommodate new players and styles of play?
    Here's an easy example.  In 2e, just as in 1e, all living creatures move in exactly 5-foot increments.  And if you like that, great.  But what about this extra rule...

Gridless Combat (optional rule)
    If you don't use a grid, then divide all speeds by 5, so the standard 30' movement become a "Speed 6" value.
    When using skills, if multiple characters are racing each adds their Speed value to their Acrobatics roll.
    In combat, you can spend 1 action to move towards or away from a foe that is near you (GMs call), or 2 actions to close to melee if the foe is far away (again, ask your GM about this).  With or in place of that, you can spend one action and divide your Speed value as you see fit as a bonuses to either your AC, Attack roll or Damage roll (representing your moving for an advantageous position during the turn).

    There, simple, takes as much space as one picture and gives some options to those people who don't like playing on a grid.  So why can't Pazio do that?  Why isn't this edition trying to reach a broader audience and be better than the last?
    The funny thing about reading this rulebook is that I don't see why I would recommend this to someone who either hates or likes the first edition.  If you hate the crunch, this is still pretty crunchy and is likely not going to add anything new that your current game doesn't do.  If you liked the crunch then this is likely going to be too simple, and a lot of the new stuff you could house-rule yourself into your current game (take out the stupid rule to change all of an anchetype's abilities or none, instead pick and choose from the same level or lower - and bam, you're got almost all the extra flexibility in character creation; then simplify everything down to 1, 2 or 3 actions, maybe drop or consolidate any skills you don't like - there you have it) (ie, use the stuff in Pathfinder Unchained and some elbow grease).

7) If you're going to say that Encounters, Exploration and Downtime are the 3 major pillars of play then you should organize your rulebook around them

    This one really drives me nuts.  So the rules divide the game into those 3 phases above.  Which means the game is supposed to flow between them.  So you would think the rules would be laid out around them.  Nope.  Let's look at one phase, Downtime.  Now, the "official" Downtime section - the one with the chapter title of "Downtime Mode," is on page 481.  And just page 481, that's it.  not much to go on.  Well, those are not all the Downtime rules though.  Page 294 has the table with the Costs of Living.  Pages 236-237 have the "Earn Income" skill action and the table for how much you earn based on how well you roll.  Page 240 has the "Subsist" skill action.  Pages 244-245 have Crafting (pages 577-579 have the rules for normal and special materials).  Pages 500-502 have some more downtime rules in general.  And finally page 248 has "Treat Disease" and page 251 has "Create Forgery" and I don't know how many pages have downtime-related feats.  So that's at least 9 non-contiguous blocks of rules for what is supposed to be 1/3rd of the game.
     Who wrote this?  Who proof-read it and thought it was good?  You create a system to help guide the game, for both players and GMs, from the large background stuff to the moment-by-moment stuff and back, and you decide to cut it up and scatter it across your book instead of committing to it and build on it?  Why create it in the first place?  Again, not a computer, I know that crafting a sword and swinging a sword are two different time-frames, I don't need you to call them "Downtime" and "Encounter" - don't make up these divisions unless you want to actually use them.

What I Like After Reading Over The 2e Core Rulebook

    Okay, so the whole thing isn't bad, there is stuff I like (again, in the order it came to me)...
   

1) You Build Your Attributes Over Your Background

    Rolling for attributes is no longer the default method.  Instead all attributes start at 10.  When you pick your Ancestry (used to be called Race, I'm okay with that change too) you get a +2 bonus to 2 attributes, usually a -2 to one, and then one +2 that can't go in your boosts, but can go anywhere else.  So from your culture and your free time you built up some of your abilities.  Then you pick a Background and it gives you one boost chosen from two skills, and one more boost that can't go to the one you picked.  Again, your first job gave you some abilities.  Your Class has a key ability score that gets a boost.  And finally you have 4 more boosts, they just have to be applied to 4 different attributes.
    I really like this because your character's attributes now align with their history.  If your Wizard has an 18 Strength then it's because you've been sinking every free boost (and your character his/her free time) into developing Strength.  No more all-18s from the dice gods or rolling set after set after set trying to get the scores you want.  Love this, it will be mandatory in all games of 2e I GM.

2) Multiclassing is closer to my ideal

    I have always loved multiclass characters, but I've always hated the systems.  If I want to play a Fighter/Wizard hybrid it's because I want some of both classes - like the Fighter's Melee abilities and the Wizard's spells that enhance melee.  I don't care about Charm Person or Teleport, I'm a fighter who uses magic to be a better fighter.  But in 1e (and other systems) you have to take a whole level, getting all that Wizard stuff I don't want and diluting the character instead of enhancing it.
    Now, sadly the 2e system is not exactly at that ideal (actually I should have put some of it in the stuff I don't like, but I don't fell like editing this even more - I'll address it in another post), but it is a lot closer.  You can choose individual (mostly) abilities and combine them with fewer wasted options.

3) Things have been simplified

    Bulk is a good thing to import from Starfinder.  The 3 action system is pretty good (with some exceptions, "Raise A Shield" is a f***ing joke).  I like the Arcane, Divine, Occult, Primal divide of spells and some abilities (again, some issues with it).  Choosing an ability each level instead of a fixed class and interminable anchetypes is a good change (though as I said above, you could house rule it into 1e).

Mostly Though, It's A Mix

    From what I've read I've got a few "damn"s and a few "cool"s and a lot of "meh"s.  I don't think it's a bad game, I don't think it's a good game.  I think it's a confused game, that doesn't know who it wants to appeal to or what it wants to be good at.  I think some work and house rules could make it a lot better, I'm not sure if I would want to do that work though.  Going to keep reading it, not sure if I want to run it.


    So those are my first impressions, and I'm sure I left out a lot of stuff.  So I'm going to be making some characters and looking at the rules in more detail in the future.  Let me know in the comments if you've read or run it and what you think.