My opinion as a 15 years gamer, after around 20 hours of PF2.


General Discussion

51 to 68 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
AndIMustMask wrote:
I'd say less dunked on and more met with "have you actually *played* the game?"

That, for example. I really am not feeling like going through dozens of posts now and look for specific examples, which of course will then be disputed with "But this isn't dunking on, this is...". Let's just keep it at "difference of perception" and strive to do better from both sides.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Oh, and btw., since I'm German, too, I want to dispel any notion that we all only enjoy gritty games where you are dragging yourself by the gum of your teeth to the finish line. Then again, I never played Das Schwarze Auge, but went instead directly in AD&D 2nd Ed.

Well, I said "most", not "all", and I'm also aware of the fact that not everyone loves DSA just because they grew up with it.

Also, my point wasn't necessarily that DSA is more gritty than D&D (I never thaught that DSA was), but that the fantasy it presents is way more down to earth and that the characters you play aren't already totally superhuman from the very start. Most if not all of them never become superhuman even at high levels.

Maybe I'll better try to explain it without comparisons: I love playing in highly magical, high fantasy worlds as a low magic, low fantasy person. What I don't like so much is playing Super-Heroes and their fantasy equivalents. And while over the years, D&D/PF has been pretty specatcularly delivering on the setting front, to me it seems that it has become increasingly more difficult to play the characters I prefer to play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I personally would love androids and laser guns in the core game. :-)

Paizo published the game with that core. It's called Starfinder.


AndIMustMask wrote:
I'd say less dunked on and more met with "have you actually *played* the game?"

But then that would not be a post like the OP, because the OP has already played the game.

So someone who got that answer might feel it was unwarranted, or whatever, and he might very well be right, BUT he can't say he was treated with a different reaction under the same circumstances than the OP, when he was not under the same circumstances than the OP.

Grand Lodge

magnuskn wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
I'd say less dunked on and more met with "have you actually *played* the game?"
That, for example. I really am not feeling like going through dozens of posts now and look for specific examples, which of course will then be disputed with "But this isn't dunking on, this is...". Let's just keep it at "difference of perception" and strive to do better from both sides.

I'd let Eric Mona dunk on me, but he's not tall enough. Jason on the other hand...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shinigami02 wrote:
Maybe we were reading different Tolkien, but I don't remember Aliens (Golarion's Elves are aliens)

That's not "core" rulebook. That's a very far a field campaign setting detail, and it's far from clear that that is cannon or even a correct interpretation of what has been published.

Shinigami02 wrote:
Gnomes

Gnomes were Tolkien's The Book of Lost Tales. Gnomes are very common characters in classic fantasy settings, and gnomes are really an amalgamation of smaller sylvan characters like shorter versions of elves, dwarves, brownies, and non-evil shorter Scandinavian trolls that exist throughout folklore and mythology. They're a way of having those very common fantasy shorter characters along side more Tolkienesque taller elves, dwarves, and trolls without having races with the same name and without having to explain the size mismatch.

Shinigami02 wrote:
or much of any Half-bloods (Orc or Elf) in Middle Earth.

Half-elves were not just a part of Tolkien, but some of the core characters of the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are a part of human and elf pairings that produce children, and entire prominent lineages in Tolkien are descended from human and elf pairings.

Orcs in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are mostly just brutal violent antagonists, but elsewhere in Tolkien they have more significant interactions with characters. They are depicted in a variety of sizes. Half-Orcs aren't depicted, but given that there are half-elves that are the result of two races producing children together, it's not at all absurd to think that they would exist. They likely wouldn't advertise their ancestry.


WormysQueue wrote:


Also, my point wasn't necessarily that DSA is more gritty than D&D (I never thaught that DSA was), but that the fantasy it presents is way more down to earth and that the characters you play aren't already totally superhuman from the very start. Most if not all of them never become superhuman even at high levels.

they maybe might become superheroes, but if you have to make three different checks for a single action, they probably don't bother doing superheroic stuff out of fear of making even more checks


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Madame Endor wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
I personally would love androids and laser guns in the core game. :-)
Paizo published the game with that core. It's called Starfinder.

Oh I know, I have every book, but one isn't enough. :-)

The Exchange

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Madame Endor wrote:
Even outside of Tolkien, there are fairly common core races and types of characters in fantasy books, movies, and other media

You're making a pretty good point here for including Tauren, Pandaren, Worgen and Draenai into PF 2.* I'm glad that they stayed a bit more traditional and went with goblins.

*I'm only half-joking, by the way. My oldest son gets 14 this year and while he was too young to watch the LotR movies in cinema, he's totally into WoW. He has read Tolkien in the meantime, but I don't think that it is one of his main influences when it comes to fantasy. This would be WoW, Star Wars, Harry Potter, the Rick Riordan books, and in recent times ancient mythology and the books by Trudi Canavan. Oh, and I forgot a lot of anime stuff.

additional edit: Also forgot the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

So it's not that I'm against respecting traditions per se, but in the long run, RPG designers might be better off taking into account that newer generations are mainly influenced by totally different things than we were grewing up.

I'm running ROTR for my kids and my brother's family. They love goblins, so having those as a playable race in the PF2 playtest might be my best argument to get them to give the new version a try and help me playtest PF 2. I might probably even end with an all-goblin group. To me that's a win. And I applaud Paizo to give that experiment a try.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Hythlodeus wrote:
they maybe might become superheroes, but if you have to make three different checks for a single action, they probably don't bother doing superheroic stuff out of fear of making even more checks

Hehe, you might be right about that. :D I have to admit that when we used to play DSA, we never had much problems with the rules but that was mostly because we were ignoring them anyways pretty much all the time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Love how the most important thing in this thread now is Khajiit.


Thanks for all your opinions guys. There are a lots of good disagreements here but everyone stay polite so I think that is the best way to do th8ngs in the playtest.

I believe there were a few good other good posts too in this forum, but I tend to think that everyone is tensed because they can are about the game. Just chill and try to keep things clear polite and precise and we will all got a better game in the end.

As this post proves something is that Paizo is more than willing to listen to the community so it is good. And a lots of folks around here make some good points, different from my experience and I think that is what Paizo is looking for. So keep talking!

There are a lots of personal feeling in my post, around how our group like to play RPGs so yeah of course it is different table from table. This post is not only my opinion but the one of the group. We made a list before I posted that to be sure to have everyone opinion. To be honest we agreed on almost everything.

However please don’t go on a topic on Races here if you can but somewhere else. I hesitated to be honest to add the Goblin/Paladin things in the list for that very reason. But we had to be as sincere as possible about the game if we want to make any kind of difference.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
erik542 wrote:
Love how the most important thing in this thread now is Khajiit.

Khajiit has wares if you let him in game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
WormysQueue wrote:

*I'm only half-joking, by the way. My oldest son gets 14 this year and while he was too young to watch the LotR movies in cinema, he's totally into WoW. He has read Tolkien in the meantime, but I don't think that it is one of his main influences when it comes to fantasy. This would be WoW, Star Wars, Harry Potter, the Rick Riordan books, and in recent times ancient mythology and the books by Trudi Canavan. Oh, and I forgot a lot of anime stuff.

additional edit: Also forgot the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

I still love the original TSR Marvel Superheroes RPG, really captures the comic-book vibe. I never played the original West End Games d6 Star Wars RPG, but I hear it's fantastic.


John Heinlein wrote:
Erwo the Elder wrote:

I agree with most of what you say, especially the Attack of Opportunity part. It felt like it was given to the Fighter class to give them a special ability like the other classes have and completely unbalanced the game. The Attack of Opportunity from PF1 and D&D 3 has become in my book one of the most brilliant additions to the game. It forces players to be shrewd action takers. Because no one wants to give someone a free swing.

I love Perception becoming your Initiative multiplier. And taking it out of the skill...

As an OG AD&D player, I respectfully disagree re Attacks of Opportunity. It is one of the mechanics I liked least when I made the switch to d20. I feel it slows the game down and doesn’t fit thematically for many characters (is a Wizard really going stop doing cool wizardry things to shank someone as they pass by?). One of the things I love about Starfinder is the downsize of AoO. And I like that the playtest 2E makes it even less prominant. I can see the point that, if it exists at all, maybe other martial characters should have access to it. But I won’t miss it if the current rules stand.

On the other hand, I totally agree re Perception as the Inititative stat. And I also love that the GM could change that based on circumstances (you snuck into battle? Use your Stealth modifier instead).

Using AoO is optional, a player does not HAVE to take it. That said, if it's a long combat and I'm out of spells, you bet I'll take the AoO if it's there.


UncleG wrote:
John Heinlein wrote:
Erwo the Elder wrote:

I agree with most of what you say, especially the Attack of Opportunity part. It felt like it was given to the Fighter class to give them a special ability like the other classes have and completely unbalanced the game. The Attack of Opportunity from PF1 and D&D 3 has become in my book one of the most brilliant additions to the game. It forces players to be shrewd action takers. Because no one wants to give someone a free swing.

I love Perception becoming your Initiative multiplier. And taking it out of the skill...

As an OG AD&D player, I respectfully disagree re Attacks of Opportunity. It is one of the mechanics I liked least when I made the switch to d20. I feel it slows the game down and doesn’t fit thematically for many characters (is a Wizard really going stop doing cool wizardry things to shank someone as they pass by?). One of the things I love about Starfinder is the downsize of AoO. And I like that the playtest 2E makes it even less prominant. I can see the point that, if it exists at all, maybe other martial characters should have access to it. But I won’t miss it if the current rules stand.

On the other hand, I totally agree re Perception as the Inititative stat. And I also love that the GM could change that based on circumstances (you snuck into battle? Use your Stealth modifier instead).

Using AoO is optional, a player does not HAVE to take it. That said, if it's a long combat and I'm out of spells, you bet I'll take the AoO if it's there.

I'll take them through like level 3. After that my 1d6 isn't gonna matter the 15% of the time that it hits.


I am all for new, exciting reactions, but they should have left some Basic ones in. I would even love if "Grab" and Trip was a Standard reaction - if someone wants to run away from me, I sure as hell would try to get hold of him or annoy him. Give People more Options, not less.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just a comment on something mentioned in the beginning of the thread... The original poster is correct that in 5e that you can cast a bonus action spell, a regular action spell (cantrip only though), and a reaction spell in the same round. You can’t cast all three in the same turn but can in the same round.

51 to 68 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / My opinion as a 15 years gamer, after around 20 hours of PF2. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion