Search Posts
Looks like a great game! Would it be possible to get it from GOG? Maybe it will go to GOG in the future?? Steam works well in the US but because it's online some of the places I go it doesn't work at all. Normally places which don't have a good internet connection.
Thanks once again. Using the lists found above I have around 20-30 scenarios now to play (which should take quite a while to get through).
WOW...great stuff guys. Thanks. I just realized something when trying to get some scenarios. As I already had some scenarios for PF previously (PF1e) it is very confusing in my digital downloads at first glance on which season is which. I think I have some of it figured out (SF is easier to a degree, at first I was tossed with there being two of some seasons, but they are listed as Starfinder first, which makes it easier), but as I get more stuff for Pathfinder and Starfinder, sorting through my digital stuff is getting harder. Is there an easier way to sort stuff into SF, PF1e, and PF2e? Great lists by the way! Thanks a million!
For Starfinder Society, I think you cannot go wrong with the Scoured Stars metaplot for an onging campaign. John Mangrum made an excellent list of the scenarios which make a great overarching storyline, but you might want to wait for when they released together as an Adventure Path this summer. First, Everyone, thanks for all the replies. They are extremely helpful and useful. On the above item, does this mean they are taking the SF society scenarios and making an AP out of them?
The main point of this is to ask what PF2e Society Scenarios and Starfinder Scenarios are the best ones to utilize as adventures independently of Society. I was unsure where to post this as it covers multiple editions and games. I have been traveling quite a bit recently, but normally have a steady group which I travel with. We have been using the PF1e scenarios to play adventures. I have been keeping inside the normal rules found in the guides regarding advancement (3 adventures per level to gain a level, GP given out from adventures is not necessarily gp found in adventure but that awarded, etc). It has been working out quite well. I had picked up quite a few from (I think it was from these) humble bundles given out over the years and decided to try them out as adventures. Since they are on a tablet, they work quite well with our travels in being compact. These are all PF1e scenarios (at least the ones we've played. I don't think I ever got any 2e scenarios...but I might...I'd have to check my downloads on the site again). That said, we've had so much fun doing this with the 1e scenarios I am thinking about trying it with Starfinder and PF2e. The reason I am posting is I want to ask about 1. What guides I'll need to get started. 2. What are the best scenarios to use. I only want to spend around $100 to maybe $200 total on both SF and pF2e scenarios. Which ones would be the best ones to get. Probably focusing on low level adventures if we want to start at 1st level (I figure with my budget that's probably a maximum of 25-50 scenarios, if the advancement is the same as 1e that means that MAX level we'd be able to get would be 7th or 8th level...so probably focusing mostly on the lower levels with maybe 6 or so each the 1-7 tier or things over 5th level). They can be from different seasons, though if there are some that are connected and low level as well that could be fun for a continuity. But my budget is limited on this (at least for now), so some guidance on which to choose would be great. If you could only choose the top 10/20/25 for SF or PF2e, which ones would you choose?
I am bumping this to bring the issue up again, but with another aspect. I tried filtering out files today, and it didn't really work. What occurred to me though was that I have so many digital files it can be hard to scroll through all of them. What I was trying to do was specifically get PF2e items downloaded. There didn't really seem to be an option to only display PF2e items. Just putting an idea out there that with the new webpage implementation of these items, could there be an option where if you just want to download or see items from one edition or game (PF1e vs. SF vs. PF2e) that you could do so? I got confused over different items (some which seem to have the same name, such as the Advanced Players guide...guessed which one was for 2e) and wasn't sure which one was for which game. Thank you for your time.
This could bring another interesting question, if one rules that one cannot draw two weapons (or two items) in action round. This would probably mean an archer (or someone who uses a bow) would NEVER be able to shoot their ranged weapon in the first round without a heavy penalty unless they have both their bow and an arrow drawn already. Afterall, it would take an action to unsling a bow if they have it on their shoulder or in a case at their hip or on their back, and another to get an arrow. Someone probably SHOULDN'T be able to quaff a potion with an action (despite rules) because not only do you need an action to unscrew the lid, but then as you separate them, you have two objects (a lid and a potion bottle), which would be two objects at that point...wouldn't it? This could lead to all sorts of interesting rules cases I think.
Another question, if you help or aid someone on an attack, is the bonus (or penalty if you get a critical failure) applicable only to one attack or all the attacks the PC they are helping makes that turn? If it is only applicable to one attack, can they choose which one (for example, if the PC makes 3 attacks, can they choose to help with the second or third attack instead of the first?) If the party wants to, can more than one person help a PC on a skill check or attack? For example, if all three of the other players wish to help, can they? If they choose to do so, would the PC being helped get a +3 bonus (if they all succeeded) on their roll?
Thanks! This is cool!
Another question. AS I mentioned above, I got the humble bundle a while ago. Another item in that was the Core Rulebook which I have browsed through in case we want to advance past level 3. I had a question regarding class feats. It appears (though in the BB I think they are incorporated into your choices while doing your class) that you can choose class feats at certain levels. Can you choose a class feat from a prior level instead of choosing one for that level? For example, if you were a Fighter, could you choose a Level 1 feat instead of a level 2 feat when you level up to level 2? Thank you for all the replies thus far, and sorry that I'm asking so many questions.
So, I finally convinced people I play with to give PF2e a try with the Beginner Box. It was costly though, as we are not meeting in person and trying to do it over Zoom (I had to get 5 copies, one for each person...which is good for Paizo...expensive for me though). We plan on doing a mega marathon of gameplay over Thanksgiving Weekend. They are making characters in preparation for that today and tomorrow. A few Questions have come up already, which may have been answered in the past...but this thread will probably be if I have other questions as well that pop up over and throughout this week. First - We have a Cleric that gets the ability to Shield Block but also has the Shield Spell. Can they use both at the same time? If they use both at the same time do the combine the AC bonus for a total of +3. Also, if they use them to block, can they use both to block one hit and get a total of -10 to the damage? Second - We have a Fighter and they are trying to find out what they want to select. They are asking about Power Attack. Can they do a normal attack as their first action, and then do a Power Attack? This means they would not suffer a penalty for any additional attacks that round as it is their second attack? Or how is this supposed to work? Third - With the same player as above, they are asking about Double Slice. One, as with Power attack, can they attack first with a normal attack and then do a second and final action with double slice? Two, if they use double slice first, and then follow up but ONLY use one weapon of the two they have, do they still get a penalty when attacking or does it default to a -5 from the first attack like normal? Fourth - This is mine, personally. I have read the core rules and it had ability scores like D&D and PF1, but the BB only uses modifiers. Should I just figure that the ability scores are the even scores (so if they have a +1 it is a 12, a +2 it is a 14, a +3 it is a 16, etc..etc..etc)? Thanks for the answers, and hopefully they enjoy it enough to give PF2e a bigger chance after this Thanksgiving. Ah...yes...one more question now that I think about it. We have the Beginner Box adventure...I have Fall of Plaguestone somewhere (not sure where I put it), if we go through both of those is there any other adventures or scenarios that I could/should use? I did get the Humble Bundle a while ago, which included some society scenarios and such...not sure which I would or should use from those though.
Thank you.
We just started playing Starfinder and I am GMing it. We are playing Firestarters. Multiple PC's are trained in the Medicine Skill. They tried using it multiple times on the same character. What they did was that they only had each PC use the skill on that particular character one time, but both used the skill on the PC. The idea was that though only one of them could use the skill on the character per PC, two different PC's were under a different idea. I ruled that a character could ONLY benefit from the Medicine skill once per day unless in a lab. Thus, even if two different PC's used the Medicine skill, it still fell under the rule that the character could only benefit from it's usage once. This rule wasn't in application to singular PC's but the skill in general. Did I rule this correctly?
Thank you everyone for your advice. I didn't want to make a hasty decision, and to try to make the best decision I could possible. I've considered what everyone wrote here and looked at the options and took into consideration what was suggested. In the end, I decided to go with one of the ideas posted here. I've decided that I'll end my subscriptions overall as I probably won't be using the stuff in the APs or modules as much...BUT that doesn't mean I'm out of it. I won't be a subscriber but I plan on doing more picking and choosing. I'll buy some PF2e stuff in PDF format (which means no more discount for me) which I find interesting. With the Subscription model it felt that I was bound to just the adventures and such overall, but if I drop it I think I'll expand into the Lost Omens (when it has things that look interesting) and expand into other areas (scenarios, etc) with a pick and choose method. Thanks once again for all your suggestions.
Yeah I'd have thought 2e pf would be much more the speed of a 5e preferring group than 1st ed pathfinder. As far as I know I'm the only one running any Pathfinder games at all in my area. Most of the others who play RPGs currently are playing 5e. There is an older group that plays AD&D (not sure of which version...sorry). Part of it is probably that there aren't even any stores that carry RPGs in our area. We had one a few years ago which mainly focused on Magic the Gathering, but you could order Pathfinder stuff through them (along with D&D stuff) and they sold dice, but they are no longer there (I think they went out of business). The closest groups that run anything else are probably around 40-50 miles away. I suppose if I wanted to travel that distance regularly I could find a PF2e group there. That's also where the closest store that sells anything for RPGs is that I can find. There used to be other stores closer, but they went out of business. After that, the next group is around 65-75 miles away. If I were willing to travel that distance I could probably find groups that play all sorts of different RPGs and anything and everything. I had a really tough time convincing the ones that will play PF1e to even play PF1e in the first place. They changed over to 5e pretty strongly pretty early on. It was only after a little while that I was able to convince them to play PF1e again. Part of it may also be that I and the one of the current influencers of RPGs in our area had a pretty big falling out a few years ago (2-3?) that was...very much not a friendly falling out with each other. It makes it harder to work along with some of the players in the community.
I run prepublished stuff for Pathfinder. They have another DM that runs 5e and they normally just run the DM's own created campaign. Last one prior to the 2e module and AP vol 1 that just came out was the Giantslayer AP that I ran. I tried to convert 2e to 1e, and at first it worked decently but as they go up levels it gets tougher to do quickly and thus requires a lot more pre-prep work than what I normally have time for. I found that I wasn't having fun anymore with that and tried to figure out why. The converting just wasn't fun for me. I think a little conversion, or easy conversion I don't mind, but when it gets a little tougher...I really don't think I enjoy it all that much to be honest. 5e adventures to PF would be nightmare to convert I think with my current schedule these days.
This is not the normal request for advice that you find, but something more along the lines of what I should do in regards to my subscriptions. Yes, I know this is a forum favorable to PF2e and that is why I came here. I want to support Paizo in it's efforts, but I'm not sure if doing so will benefit me currently. I have, after deliberations on the matter, decided that I am not going to be running Pathfinder 2e. My group was already sort of hostile to PF (they all are 5e people, but humor me with PF from time to time as long as I GM) so getting them onboard with PF2e is simply not going to happen. So, for the past few weeks I've been trying to run PF2e adventures (the two that I have) while converting it on the run to PF1e. It is a LOT harder than I thought it would be to convert between the two, especially backwards from PF2e to PF1e. Overall, it's taking more time to do so with prep than I have. I really don't want to continue the experience (it's actually made it very unfun to a degree, especially after around level 2). Instead I'm looking at running more PF1e adventures (already compatible, and I have a lot of them I've never run thus far, just about everything after Mummy's Mask). So, my dilemma. With me going with this, I cannot see myself ever running any of the PF2e adventures in the future. It's just too much work with the current group. This means anything I'm getting with PF2e are things I'll never use. This has me debating on my subscriptions on what I should do. I know there are many pro-PF2e and Pro-Paizo people here, and I'm looking to see that viewpoint in trying to make my decision. I don't want to jump to a hasty decision, but as I said, I simply cannot see myself making use of any of the stuff I'm going to be getting from the subscriptions here on out. I do support how Paizo supports diversity, and how it tries to make a welcoming environment. This is why it is a dilemma. Right now I'm thinking of getting rid of the subscriptions, but the thought also makes me cringe as well. It feels like I'd be letting them down if I did that, and I don't want to do that. So...as the forum says, even if not about the rules...looking for advice on what I should do and the reasons why.
At 1st level it is basically viable up until about CR 2. After that, things got wonky. The biggest issue is hitting creatures and the amount of hitpoints they have. For example, we used the Standard array. Going into the final dungeon they were still only 2nd level...at which point I switched the XP up to fast advancement so they got to 3rd level. At that point, the Cleric had a +4 to hit in melee (only a +3 with ranged). The Sorcerer had a +3 to hit, though they relied more on spells, and the Rogue had a +5 to hit. Many of the Boss creatures (more than one in the final dungeon) had an AC of 21...and the final boss had an AC of 22. That meant respectively, those characters needed a 17, 18, and 19 just to hit the final boss. The Final Boss also had 68 hitpoints. It WAS a CR 5 creature, so somewhat understandable. At the same time they are facing an easier creature to hit with a 17 AC, and only 60 HP, but some other rather crazy factors. Luckily, we used the Unchained Monk and the Ranger was Ranged so we had two that had +6 to hit. If it weren't for those two, combat would have slaughtered the party outright. Ranger had Rapid Shot so that also helped a great deal. The other difficulty is the high percentage that the enemies hit with...in the final confrontation the easier creature had a +12 to hit, the other +13. There's NOT a ton of treasure available for AC boosting in the adventure, so the highest AC's were around 18. Of course, that's just the boss of the dungeon. Prior to that they had faced sub bosses both with AC's of 21 and one with an HP of 47 and the other with an HP of 68. One had a +11 to hit, the other a massive +14 to hit. Against an AC of 18 tops (14 to 16 otherwise). This means the enemies REALLY hit hard on the party. Each battle was almost a slog to the death. Basically, the PC's couldn't hit the enemies while the enemies had an almost laughably easy time hitting the PC's. I'd probably tweak that if we played it through the next time. In addition, the DC's for skills sometimes were a little high later on in the adventure, though overall the normally kept up. One that was a little crazy was a Thievery check with a DC of 20...three times in a row. Most of the time, the roll needed hovered around a 10 to be successful, so very doable...but that also means about a 50% fail rate. To succeed on that check one would need a little bit more luck than normal. Saves against magic also need to be tweaked. The Sorcerer had all sorts of problems when the creatures had saves anywhere from +8 to +11 at 2nd and 3rd levels/CRs. The enemies made almost all the saves. So, at first the CR's are somewhat viable though tough (even CR 0 and CR 1 have better abilities to hit and more hitpoints overall), but as you get higher it becomes evident, even by CR 4 that PC's from P1E are probably going to be a little outclassed without some tweaking of the stats...at least from my meager experience of it thus far.
Played all night last night. Finished it. As you get further along in the adventure conversion gets harder. It got REALLY hard near the end. Some notes in regards to conversion... P2E advances levels rapidly. I had to change midcourse from a middle level of advancement to fast advancement for P1e. To keep up with P2e, at least at the lower levels, it appears the best adaption for it is to use the fast advancement rate for P1e. Everything goes up +1 each level...which makes it MUCH HARDER for certain things from P1E to occur. Things like certain classes being able to hit melee or otherwise. We constantly needed to roll 16+ to hit on characters with the normal spread of ability scores. Sometimes more than that. Very Tough. Makes it hard to do conversion on the fly with the numbers presented. It turned out a LOT harder to convert than I originally thought it would be. DC's need to be tweaked, enemies should be tweaked a little (or expect a LOT of TPKs), Experience is harder to convert than I thought originally. I'm not sure if I want to try anymore P2e to P1e Conversions. Probably is going to be easier to go P1e to P2e...but we aren't going P2e anytime soon...so pondering options. Anyways, it is finished. Adventure itself was interesting. It took longer than expected and has a lot more investigation and roleplaying than many others.
I'm not sure if I'm answering the question right... But I use a vinyl mat with squares already marked on them. I think I got it in the Beginner Box? sometime ago. I use dry erase and can draw the terrain or area quickly before we start the encounter. You could use something like that, quickly sketch it up and utilize it to run various encounters. I'm not sure that answers what you asked or not? Hopefully?
This module can actually take quite a while. There is a lot of mystery and other items so it's actually taking a lot longer than I thought it would. We did not finish it last weekend, but we are meeting up this weekend in an another monster marathon attempt to finish it. It is getting harder in the conversion process and I feel that the official P2E is probably harder on impromptu conversion than the playtest was. Could be a dissuader from trying it in the future. That said, it's still possible (I've been doing it thus far), just a tad harder than previously. We'll see how it goes this next weekend.
So, well into the adventure at this point. It seems that overall you can almost do a straight shot and use the creatures as written at low level. I can see that this won't work as well at higher levels (probably those over mid level so starting around level 6 or 7 it might start getting harder in conversion). Mostly, it can be converted on the fly though with a little knowledge of 2e and well versed with P1e rules. The biggest obstacles right now in the conversion on the fly for me thus far have been money and figuring out creatures XP worth in regards to how the different XP and leveling schemes work. Almost had a problem which I think would happen to those playing 2e as well (srd has the same spell listed) where, for some reason the Cleric decided to bless the food before they ate at dinner...with a Purify Food and Drink. The adventure has it so the entire plot hinges on the event at dinner, but luckily the dish comes out afterwards rather than on the table at the start...could have been interesting trying to modify a mystery module if the main mystery didn't happen or unfold as it did. Other than that, we're about halfway through and will continue play today.
Well, we have a total of 6 players (well, 5 + 1 GM, which is me). They created their characters. It looks like we'll be tackling the adventure with a weird assortment...right now it appears we have a Cleric
Almost was a Dwarf Monk, but they changed their mind at the last minute. We'll start up the play tonight and try to go all weekend!!!
So, it appears we will not be converting to 2e presently, but I am still getting the adventures and APs. This will be our initial test into how easily or well it is to convert APs and Adventures to 1e. I plan on creating characters soon and trying to get people together to run a marathon game while I have some time to do so. I'll update this with what we run it with and how it goes.
I tried to update the payment method with a temporary CC for now until I get my card stuff cleared up. Both are on the account but it indicates the old CC (one in difficulties) is the one that is default rather than the new one I just put in (Temporary CC). Unsure if this is because it's one of those temporary ones or not, but trying to make sure next month is paid incase the CC has problems.
I just got a copy of the SFBB today. Haven't really gotten into Starfinder, but I am exploring the box and it's contents. I prepped also by getting the first portions of two adventure paths so if we get beyond the first adventure in the box, we have other adventures to try out. I am looking up some of the rules online to figure out what some terms in the AP volumes mean vs. those in the BB. I know they are REALLY busy right now, but something in the future that might help is an online supplement to aid in understanding how to convert between BB and standard SF rules.
I'm not sure why it is a do or don't, black and white type issue. For me, at least when PF2e comes out will probably continue my subscriptions (that's the plan currently). I'm leaning more towards staying with PF1e, but trying to play the new PF2e APs with PF1e rules. Right now it looks like it is doable. Unlike what some say, it takes a minimal amount of conversion, at least with the playtest materials. PF2e MAY be something we play, but right now it just seems too overwhelming for the group (yes, I said it, I play PF1e and the PF2e just seems a too overwhelming for them to adapt to right now) when they do let me GM PF. [So people can understand my statement more, we didn't have many problems at first, but once we hit around the 10th level range there were a lot of things we just had difficulty remembering and/or implementing. It wasn't that the rules were bad, but we just couldn't keep up, which is why I say it was overwhelming for us]. Thus, I plan on staying with PF1e, but do not see why (as long as it remains somewhat compatible, as it has with the Playtest) that would prevent me from using the PF2e material. In addition, if we do get new players, as PF1e is in print (at least currently) and will be for the foreseeable future, if they want copies they can always buy hardcopy or come here and buy the PDFs.
I love using modules, but normally my focus are on newer groups (If it is going to be a longer campaign we'd use an AP). So, mostly I enjoy modules that are levels 1-6, with maybe a level 7 in there. Anything higher and normally we'd have a campaign going on already. I enjoy modules, but if they do get dropped I'd probably just stick more with playing the first two entries to APs and modifying them to be able to end with a final conclusion rather than leading to another chapter of the AP.
I went with Aasimar (loved these guys all along)
and...yes...I chose Dhampyr. I thought they'd be more popular, but apparently not?
Pre-ordered this game and it is AWESOME. It is everything that I would have wanted out of a PF PC game. Sorry if others are having difficulty running it. Runs well on Win10 for me thus far.
Over the years, there has been consensus that every point of intelligence is worth about 10 IQ points.That's a really weird way to phrase "One time there was a magazine article or something that said IQ translated to INT score in that way, but in genuinely never made any sense at all to treat it that way and has not once been actually supported by, or even accidentally emulated by, the game rules." That's cool, that means I have a character with an IQ of 250! He's above the max IQ level!
Okay, there are some older people in this thread. I think they are referring to Atari's one button controller (you can find them on the retro Atari machines today even). They had a stiff type joystick and one button. I'm not sure what the pong controllers looked like, but I think maybe one button total or a rotator dial only? I have fond memories of two buttons though...the Nintendo game system with the games Super Mario Bros, Commando, and Legend of Zelda.
I'll be the odd one out... the Gunslinger!!! Okay... Maybe...the Inquisitor.
Our group took several sessions to get through this and had it end with a TPK. Luckily they made NEW characters for this part rather than the ones they used in the first portion. Everyone died. The killer of the keg was the Night Heralds. They wrecked us BADLY. I do not know if it is comforting to know that other groups have had this same difficulty or see the same problems with them that ours dealt with.
I just want to make sure I understand what you are saying... 1. From what I hear you are saying that you are unhappy that RPGs are not allowing you to play people who have disadvantages/disabilities. I think that may be what some are addressing (As PF2e Playtest explicitly states that you can do this if one wants with their ability scores). However, from what you describe it sounds as if you are stating something different. 2. It sounds that you are unhappy with the trend in RPGs to try to balance everyone out to similar levels. (Hence, like 4e where people claimed classes were very similar just with different names on the powers...or with 5e where everyone advances at the same rate of proficiency but NOT too high so everything can always be a threat...to the PF2e playtest where everyone advances the same with their bonuses per level overall). It's not that people have disabilities per se, but that everyone seems on the surface to be equal to everyone else. It's the trend that no one is special and everyone is the same in ability? That you prefer it when Martials get a better advancement in getting to hit creatures than wizards or other characters. That these Martials are not going to be world changing monsters with their magic. That you prefer when Wizards gain a ton of spells and magic so, even if they are weak to begin with, the entire world shakes and trembles when they achieve high level. Is this what you are referring to in regards to ability/disability? Just trying to clarify. I THINK the latter is what you are talking about.
From all the discussions about this, I think I agree with this statement.
AC was anot actually BOUND in 2e. That is a lie that MANY defenders of 5e try to spread around, but 2e wasn't bound by any means. Sometimes they try to quote AC -10 as the max, but even the very monster's they try to quote as break that with a creature that has a -12 AC (and there were others that had AC better). The AC was NEVER kept to that though. IN fact, AD&D 2e material has stuff released almost immediately after which has AC FAR below AC -10. It was similar to saying that the attributes go from 3-18. OBVIOUSLY, to ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY PLAYED knows that this is specific to a certain arena of the rules. There were many ways to exceed that 3-18 and was done in play regularly. To try to claim stats were "bounded" is an inerrancy at best made out of ignorance, a flat out lie by those who know. The same applies to AC, THACO, and most of the other things people try to claim were "bounded." Bounded accuracy did NOT exist in 2e. On the otherhand, in 4e, levels 1-20 WERE bounded to +10 in the same way that the proficiency bonus in 5e is bound to +6. That's a mere +4 difference. In the same way, 5e tries to keep creatures within that +6 accuracy range with creatures AC and to hit creeping up just as slowly...same as it did with 4e. 4e was where this originally came up with the idea (and there's a LOT of 4e in 5e, it is just presented differently), 5e just took the idea to the extremes and ran with it. In both versions there are many ways to bypass the "bounded" accuracy as it is...but the concept started in 4e, and was DEFINED and became an actual thing in RPG game design with 5e.
I have the first volume. Arrived in the mail today. Haven't had the time to read through it yet (and won't until probably tomorrow or Friday at the earliest, saying I don't do more of he playtest first.
I think much of the discussion (abstractly) boils down to two sides. Those who want more flavor and that the game centers AROUND that flavor in regards to Clerics; and those who want MORE freedom of choice in the design of those Clerics. Those who want more freedom of game and design probably WANT less restrictive choices on alignments, at least that would be what I surmise from this and other threads on the topic.
I like the change, though in the FINAL core rules releases I'd probably add a little more flavor text to the spell.
Well, if it's like our group, there's always one. At least one of our players wanted to try out the goblin race, even if it wasn't popular with the rest of us.
......However, most of those pushing against the +1/level are JUST as unrealistic, if not moreso about how the world works, thinking a world class neurosurgeon only is 20% better at brain surgery than the guy off the street. Their training has only made them 20% better at it rather than years of experience and training...... Many of those who are wanting skills to not advance are coming from a 5e viewpoint, and this is what 5e does. So yes, this is the 5e comparison and why I personally cannot stand 5e to a degree. In the playtest, if they gated skills more, than they would make it so that EMT stuff was gated behind being trained, General Doctor stuff and General Practitioner behind an even higher level and Brain surgery would be a skill feat only someone with Legendary could get. So though the Surgeon and Ballerina would advance equally in putting a bandaid on your cut, or being able to put pressure on your arterial bleed until the bleeding hopefully stopped...only someone trained in medicine would be able to even try to do a skill check in Brain surgery. 5e does try to say for DM's to do something like this, but as it really doesn't define it to the degree it needs to, no one at the tables really adheres to this idea. This then is played typically as meaning that the High School Student stands just as good a chance (well +2 proficiency modifier instead of the +6 the Brain Surgeon gets) as the Brain Surgeon, or at least decently close, to succeeding at the same task. PF2e has as similar problem currently (which is probably a bigger problem than the +1/level), but a solution is in place already for PF2e if they decide to use it, which is to gate a LOT more of the greater stuff behind skill feats and mastery of various skills.
I like this idea, but I'd still gate it behind Battle Medic. In addition, I'd ALSO lower the DC. Perhaps make it so that if they are healing 1 HD of damage it is DC 10...and if it is 2 HD than it is DC 15...3 HD it is DC 20...4 HD it is DC 25...etc...and so forth.
I don't like the +level system. A 1st level rogue should be better at picking pockets than 10th level fighter, cleric, or sorceror. A wizard, even high level, should not be able to go into melee combat with the town guards and expect good things to happen.Though of course back in PF1 (or earlier D&D versions) a high enough level wizard could just go into melee with the town guards - even without buffs up. This is one thing I do prefer in my RPGs...that those people who train in weapons do better at hitting with those weapons than those who sit back and do other things. In PF2e they DO this...but the difference is really only +5 between them and others. Is this enough to represent training with a weapon rather than casting spells. On top of that, the wizard can narrow that gap to a mere +2 with a simple weapon. I'd prefer the gap to be greater than that myself. Given the option of a 5e bounded accuracy way of doing it or the PF2e way though...I'll choose the PF2e way any day over the 5e method. But then, speaking for myself, I really don't understand WHY people are so crazy about Bounded accuracy. In fact, the biggest complaint I hear about 5e IS normally about the bounded accuracy, but that people put up with it because 5e is easy to learn and easy to run. A great majority that I've seen talk about 5e, it is not about the bounded accuracy, but the ease and free form of it. Typically (and survey's seem to back this up) it seems most do not think 5e is all that great, but it is not terrible either. It is good enough to get the job done for RPGing...and as it is right there in the middle, that's good enough to get the masses to play it. Ease, not bad even if not great, and simplicity are 5e's bonuses. Rarely do I hear the praise of bounded accuracy some on these boards are pushing very strongly. Pathfinder 2e doesn't appear to be getting the simplicity of 5e, nor the Ease...so taking the bad of 5e (bounded accuracy) does NOT particularly seem like a wise decision. And...on top of that, though I WOULD prefer a greater distance between the rate the Fighters and Warriors advance in the ability to hit with weapons above Wizards and Sorcerers and such...if given the choice between what PF2e does and 5e does with bounded accuracy, I'd choose PF2e's method any day of the week. Though, ultimately I STILL prefer the greater differences between fighters and wizards in combat to be more pronounced in their specific areas (ala fighters hit more often and better with weapons...while wizards do better with their spells...etc...etc).
Not many have proposed much better to be honest than the PF2e +1/level. MOST who are against this are merely those shading in 5e ideas and are 5e fans. Unfortunately, 5e has the EXACT same problem to a degree (even if the bounded accuracy is lower, it still IS THE EXACT same thing)...WITH the exception that you really never actually get good. You are always either just normal, or slightly above normal. Thus even your world's greatest swordsman can be brought down by 4 or 5 others. Miyamoto NEVER actually survived his multiman fight, being killed in the middle of it...and other fights where it was two or three vs. him all ended up with him being mortally wounded... At least in most of the alternate ideas tossed around by the 5e fans who hate the idea that some people after training actually get a LOT better (and in fact, in combat at times, nigh untouchable) by those who have not had the experience in doing so. With that as really the sole differentiation between the proposed 5e ideas and what PF2e is doing, I'd rather go with the thing where some guy who has had 10 years of experience can take down the entire squad of greenie soldiers. On the otherhand, I am not entirely sold on the way +1 level works with skills. I'd prefer a better way of explanation, or some other options. In addition, I do prefer how PF1e, 3e, 2e, 1e, and OD&D had it so that those who practice with swords are better at hitting with those swords (or other weapons) than those who merely cast spells all day...and it's NOT like how 5e does it where it's just due to natural ability (ability scores differentiate), but rather due to actual EXPERIENCE and proficiency with those weapons being better (ala...the fighter gets a HIGHER proficiency bonus than the wizard). However, most of those pushing against the +1/level are JUST as unrealistic, if not moreso about how the world works, thinking a world class neurosurgeon only is 20% better at brain surgery than the guy off the street. Their training has only made them 20% better at it rather than years of experience and training. So, yes, I'd rather a better explanation of how skills work, more abilities gated behind the master and legendary skill levels, or some other option than what seems to be done in PF2e right now... But NOT at the expense of ludicrous ideas that a new guy who has barely held a gun is going to take out that sniper a mile way who has 50 kills and 5 years experience under his belt...even if that new guy has 20 of his best friends. In reality, if the sniper is told to take them out at a mile away...all 20 of those friends are probably dead...with 0% chance of taking out the experience sniper. Perhaps in time WITH experience they might be able to do that...but that's because our world isn't bounded and restricted like some want it to be...and I prefer RPGs that actually allow characters to be FAR more powerful than others than those that say everyone is the same in power from the lowest...to the highest with a mere 20% difference.
Go to this url There you will see links at the top where you can download the playtest rulebook. However, what you want is the Bestiary. You can hit the download all button to download ALL the documents (suggested) associated with the playtest, or you can go to the bottom of the page. At the bottom of the page is a link that is specific to the Playtest Bestiary. Once you hit the link, it will reload for about 5-60 seconds. After that, hit the link again and the download should start. Hope that helps.
Sandbox play has been around since OD&D. In AD&D, you may end up suddenly stumbling across that Hill Giant while you are Level 1 (ToEE anyone) and you would be absolutely and totally destroyed if you decided to face it. It was all a matter of knowing what you could or could not face and how you dealt with things. Sandbox does not mean everything is killable, but that you can go where you want and try to do what you want...not necessarily that you can kill anything you want, or that everything has a chance to kill you. It didn't "LIMIT" sandbox play then, and wouldn't now. To Be HONEST...I saw a LOT MORE Sandbox type games under AD&D 1e and 2e than I ever see in 5e. 5e is more about facing challenges equivalent of party level (and it shares that a LOT with Pathfinder these days) than just exploring the world and the huge variations within it which may be things which you can easily trounce, or things that you should tread very carefully around, to things that will kill you outright if you aren't excessively smart about getting away from it.
I don't like the new XP system, but that's due to personal feelings of it. I like things more standard and mapped out. 1000 XP per level is fine, but having XP variable depending on the level of the characters vs. the CR of the challenge complicates things to a degree that I find myself just not wanting to even deal with it. This is more complex in some ways than 3e/3.5's way of doing XP. When PF1e came around with a more set and solid XP system for advancement and determining of XP for encounters it was like a breath of relief and fresh air. The new way that PF2e does it seems to be going to something far worse and more complicated than 3e/3.5e. For me, with it, it's just something I don't want to really deal with in game. It's going to be more arbitrary leveling in PF2e than actually figuring the XP each time you create an encounter. However, this is more a PERSONAL opinion than something objective.
My group must be very quick. It took us about 3 to 3.5 hours to complete it. (that does NOT include the time to prep or the time it took players to get all prepped and ready to play. That's from where they actually started out right after getting the quest in the adventure).
Everyone cannot take 10 as a choice if they want to out of combat. AC scales now.
|
