My 1e campaigns are wrapping up, and I'm finally preparing to jump into Society and figure out how this 2e thing works. All the cool kids are talking about it, and I'm ready to get a piece.
Help me out though: I don't want to be the guy at the table saying "that's not how it worked in 1e" every five seconds. What are the biggest confusions you've seen for people moving into the new edition? What should I study up on first?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's actually a thread here in general somewhere about the biggest things you didn't know worked differently in 2E.
Lesson #1. Forget everything.
No free 5 foot steps. Sneak attack & precision doubles on crits. No surprise rounds (in the way that you would think of them). Attacks of opportunity are uncommon. Everything is based off of proficiency.
Not every creature has the blanket immunities they did in PF1. e.g. Undead are not automatically immune to mind-affecting (their description has to say they are). Swarms can be hit by weapons.
So much is different. Just, for real, try to forget everything and start over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the best advice is just to forget PF1 ever existed. PF2 only bears a resemblance to PF1.
Mechanically they're about as similar as PF1 and 4th Ed D&D.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some of our group were frustrated at the lack of PF1-style static bonuses they could stack up. I'm slowly convincing them that those bonuses are still there, just not in the form of must-have feats. Intimidate, flanking, feinting, aid, tripping, etc. now swings the math of the game on a round-by-round basis, making combat more fluid & dynamic. They might not be PF1's guaranteed bonuses each and every time, but they pay off often enough to make things exciting. And since they're part of combat mechanics, picking a feat just because it sounds cool isn't a sub-optimal, wasted choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of our group were frustrated at the lack of PF1-style static bonuses they could stack up. I'm slowly convincing them that those bonuses are still there, just not in the form of must-have feats. Intimidate, flanking, feinting, aid, tripping, etc. now swings the math of the game on a round-by-round basis, making combat more fluid & dynamic. They might not be PF1's guaranteed bonuses each and every time, but they pay off often enough to make things exciting. And since they're part of combat mechanics, picking a feat just because it sounds cool isn't a sub-optimal, wasted choice.
Yeah i have had that brought up a few times "but if I don't get a to hit bonus why would I go anything other than fighter" kinda argument.
But yeah as others said, essentially an entirely different system. Be wary of players who whiteboard comparing themselves to level equal foes as if it was CR.
I have had to explain a couple of times that no, the bulk of your foes aren't going to be equal to your level and when they are they won't be throwaway mooks.
No contested rolls and the way perception and knowledges work now is also something that came up a lot. Secret rolls are AWESOME though, every game I run uses them now. Even gm no rolling systems for the most part.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Subtle things that have tripped me up:
*Alchemical bombs (alchemist's fire, etc) are martial weapons, so not all characters are proficient with them
*Penalties of the same type no longer stack (if you are frightened 1 and sickened 1, you only suffer a -1 penalty to most things not -2)
*Assurance, on paper, doesn't sound like an exciting feat. It is. It is one of the best feats in the game. Assurance(Medicine) is particularly incredible. Remember that you ignore all penalties when using Assurance.
*Keep an eye out for the Incapacitation trait and make sure you understand how it works. It shows up in unexpected places sometimes (Color Spray, for example).
*When building a martial character, specifically look for "third action" abilities for when you are "full attacking" (starting your turn next to an enemy). Attacking three times is usually a waste compared to feinting, demoralizing, raising a shield, etc. If you use a two-handed weapon, remember that the shield cantrip doesn't have somatic components so it works really well in combination.
Persistent damage can double (and usually doubles) on a crit.
So stuff like an alchemist's Acid flasks can become rather amusing vs weaker foes :)
(the exception is when it is a crit effect, then it doesn't double)
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Help me out though: I don't want to be the guy at the table saying "that's not how it worked in 1e" every five seconds. What are the biggest confusions you've seen for people moving into the new edition? What should I study up on first?
Not precisely a rules confusion, but more a confusion about how to play with the new rules;
Pathfinder 2 embraces risk In PF1 you could often become so good at something that the chances of failing a check were negligible. But if something went wrong it went south fast. Pathfinder 2 on the other hand doesn't usually allow you to trivialize a check, but it's more okay to fail some checks. Failing one or two checks won't kill you or fail you the adventure. (Failing a whole series is still bad of course.)
You see some of this in the hero point mechanic, that provides a sort of cushion against bad luck. You also see it in the removal of Take 10/Take 20 mechanics. And you see it in the Dying rules; it's almost impossible to die from a single hit, even at low HP. That's quite different from PF1 where at higher levels the "negative con" wasn't nearly enough to save you. The flip side of this is that monsters will hit a lot more often because you can't escalate AC to the point where monsters just fail all the time.
Embrace the new mobility There are thee big changes to movement. 5ft steps are no longer free. You get three actions per turn so you can move in, attack, and move back out. And attacks of opportunity are now a special ability that most enemies don't have, so you can in fact move in, attack, and move out without it being a disaster.
More subtly, almost every enemy has special abilities that are a bit more interesting than simple attacks. But these tend to take multiple actions. For example, a zombie can spend an action to automatically grab you after it hits you. But it can of course only do that if it still has an action left. Also, it is always Slowed 1 so it only gets two actions per turn.
This leads to a new play style: if you're fighting zombies, you want to strike, then fall back, so that even if they hit you, they can't use their grab ability. So these game mechanics encourage the zombie movie effect where you're continuously trying to run away from the zombie horde because if they ever get you pinned down, things get bad.
As a general rule, it means that it's better to spend your last action to move, than to try one last attack hoping for a 20. By backing away, you force them to use an action to keep up, and that's an action they can't use on a special ability. Usually that special ability would have been better than your desperate last attack.
Isn't there massive damage death rule though? I mean its super unlikely to die in one hit at max hp but teeechnically
It is impossible in most cases, we are talking a creatures more than four levels higher with a crit and multiple high damage rolls.
Two times your maximum hp is nuts in a system with such a high base hp :p
Isn't there massive damage death rule though? I mean its super unlikely to die in one hit at max hp but teeechnicallyIt is impossible in most cases, we are talking a creatures more than four levels higher with a crit and multiple high damage rolls.
Two times your maximum hp is nuts in a system with such a high base hp :p
Some level 2 monsters can one shot a level 1 wizard with a 6 hp ancestry on a crit, but aside from that edge case there's hardly anything that can one shot a PC in a fair fight.
|
|
Isn't there massive damage death rule though? I mean its super unlikely to die in one hit at max hp but teeechnically
You have to pretty much build your level 1 character for minimum HP and dive into the mouth of a too big for your level monster for that to happen.
It's more of a last resort rule for in case truly stupendously bad things happen to you, like getting hit by a falling castle.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've nearly perished due to massive damage a couple of times in my two levels as a 10 Constitution monk.
It took a beast a level higher than the party to crit and deal nearly max damage (the "nearly" part being the only thing that spared me) to do it though.
It certainly is within the realm of possibility at low levels, and when there is a huge power gap between adversaries.
Assurance, on paper, doesn't sound like an exciting feat. It is. It is one of the best feats in the game. Assurance(Medicine) is particularly incredible. Remember that you ignore all penalties when using Assurance.I have to admit, I don't quite get Assurance. It seems like most DCs would scale faster than just the proficiency modifier, or am I wrong? What penalties would be ignored?
Here are only a few of the common penalties it would allow you to ignore.
Absence of appropriate tools penalty
Broken condition (skill checks relying on the broken item)
Clumsy condition (Dex-based checks)
Enfeebled condition (Str-based checks)
Environmental penalties
Frightened condition (all skill checks)
Multi-attack penalty (athletics checks to perform a combat maneuver)
Mutagen-based penalties
Shoddy tools penalty
Sickened condition (all skill checks)
Stupified condition (Int-, Wis-, and Cha-based checks)
Wind and weather related penalties
On the topic of Assurance too, you can't Take 10 or Take 20 anymore. It's also pretty good for classes like Rogue that can boost up their proficiency bonus early and often.
And because proficiency adds level, at a certain point things that were maybe somewhat difficult become trivial with Assurance.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mastery of PF2 happens in both the character building part AND the tactical choices in combat.
Using PF1 tactics and metagame in PF2 is a good way to TPK.
Getting opponents to lose even one of their actions is great.
Hero points are a necessity.
Several spells do interesting things even on an opponent's successful save.
Level has a HUGE impact on a character's power.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, if you look at the DCs-by-level, they mostly go up at a one-for-one rate, and the increases to proficiency from getting to Expert, Master, and Legendary basically keep up along the way. From a level 1 DC (DC 15) to a level 20 DC (DC 40), the DCs increase by 25, while a proficiency that stays at max (raised to expert, master, and legendary when available) goes up by that same 25 over that same range, from +3 to +28.
This does mean that, with Assurance, you'll be fairly steadily about 2 points behind an on-level DC, but not nearly every DC you encounter will be exactly on-level. Even on-level monsters will often have a lower DC you might be able to target, if you know or can guess which one to go after.
Yeah, since so much scales on a 1-for-1, the only things that really get you ahead is your level of proficiency training, and your ability score modifier. Don't skimp on those if you intend to specialize in something! Circumstance, item, and status bonuses also help, but most are temporary.
Enemies equal to your level will curb stomp you in 1-on-1 more often than not. Enemies even one level higher than you are likely to crit you one quarter of the time. Be ready for that.
Getting opponents to lose even one of their actions is great.
Hero points are a necessity.
(Those last two are important enough to be worth repeating.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No penalty for firing into combat (other than if you don't have a clear shot, then the enemy gains +1 lesser cover bonus to AC).
AC is a type of DC. So you can actually debuff enemies by making them Frightened or Sickened.
Intimidate is great for this.
Every weapon has traits to know (volley comes to mind).
There is no ability damage anymore. Penalties from poison come from conditions like enfeebled.
I've nearly perished due to massive damage a couple of times in my two levels as a 10 Constitution monk.
You are playing age of ashes right?
At level 2 that is 52-56 damage in one hit at level 2 for a monk. (52 being if you are an elf, gobbo or halfling)
I cannot think of a single foe at level 2 that can make massive damage occur for your character in the adventure.
At level 1 vs 32 or 36
The only one capable of doing the damage for massive damage is calmont with the shortbow and only if he can get a target flatfooted some how. And rolls near max damage on the 2d6 and 1d10 with a crit. (32-34 total needed)
There is an infamous creature later on that can do it if someone crit fails a save and it gets most of its dice as a maxed roll.
I have a feeling that your GM made modifications to the foes :p
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To give another example on Assurance, consider Assurance (Medicine). If you keep your Medicine maxed, then:
-Starting at level 3 you never fail the check to Treat Wounds
-At level 6 you never fail the Expert check to Treat Wounds
-At level 14 you never fail the Master check to Treat Wounds
And all of this remains true even if you have a Wisdom of 8, meaning a character with an otherwise poor Medicine check can be a reliable healer.
This also means that feats like Battle Medicine become completely reliable sources of healing that you can always count on. My party's Monk absolutely loves Assurance, because it means that if someone is dying there's not even that 5% nat 1 chance that she will fail to save them.
The party Swashbuckler is also loving that he took Assurance (Deception) - against enemies lower level than him, it means he can recover his panache without a roll. PLUS if he tries to bluff someone and rolls really poorly, he can then retry with Assurance and ignore the penalty for trying to cover a lie.
Is there max falling damage in this game? (I always felt that falling damage should not cap. Or at least not cap at 20d6. Maybe 100d6).
A fall could do it.
Is there max falling damage in this game? (I always felt that falling damage should not cap. Or at least not cap at 20d6. Maybe 100d6).
A fall could do it.
Yes: 750 bludgeoning damage .
(A 2nd level monk next to a wall can negate this entirely, however!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
750 falling damage. That's awesome. I think the max used to be 20d6 or some chump number like that. If I have characters fighting on the side of a cliff, I want creatures and PCs who fall to splat like bugs on a windshield.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
750 falling damage. That's awesome. I think the max used to be 20d6 or some chump number like that. If I have characters fighting on the side of a cliff, I want creatures and PCs who fall to splat like bugs on a windshield.
Falling damage is now half distance fallen for all falls of 6ft and higher.
So no more dice rolls.
I still remember one time in my old Dark Sun campaign..
I used to love Dark Sun. I haven't played it since 2E AD&D.
AD&D 2E is almost as different from 3E as PF1 is from PF2.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance was one rule I was totally wrong about during the playtest. I thought it was dumb and weak, but it's actually super elegant.
It cleanly and unassumingly sidesteps the whole "can you really take 10/20 here?" discussion and goes right to the heart of what taking 10 or 20 was meant to emulate: performing a task you're sure you can do under normal circumstances.
Some of our group were frustrated at the lack of PF1-style static bonuses they could stack up. I'm slowly convincing them that those bonuses are still there, just not in the form of must-have feats. Intimidate, flanking, feinting, aid, tripping, etc. now swings the math of the game on a round-by-round basis, making combat more fluid & dynamic. They might not be PF1's guaranteed bonuses each and every time, but they pay off often enough to make things exciting. And since they're part of combat mechanics, picking a feat just because it sounds cool isn't a sub-optimal, wasted choice.
There are also the weapon damage dice. Take a long sword. At max enhancement, you are hitting with 4d8, or an extra 3d8. d8's roll 4.5 on average, so 3d8 is 13.5... which is the majority of power attack.
This does mean that smaller weapons deal less damage. But... they are also easier to use on classes with the right bonuses to hit with 'must have feats' (see: flurry ranger with twin takedown).
But tell them this- action economy is still king. You are looking for things like flurry and pounce to get in attacks and movements while doing other actions. And if you can do a build that consistently pull off an AoOs (hello trip), then do so. Full BAB attacks during someone else's turn are still highly valued.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still remember one time in my old Dark Sun campaign..I used to love Dark Sun. I haven't played it since 2E AD&D.
AD&D 2E is almost as different from 3E as PF1 is from PF2.
Almost as different? What? AD&D2e is definitely more different from 3e than 3e is from PF2e.
And I wish I could bring myself to homebrew a wholebunch of Dark Sun stuff to run a game in the setting, but every time I try I set the bar too high, and end up giving up once I try to figure out defiling, and class changes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I wish I could bring myself to homebrew a wholebunch of Dark Sun stuff to run a game in the setting, but every time I try I set the bar too high, and end up giving up once I try to figure out defiling, and class changes.
So correct me if I'm wrong, which I might well be since it has been a couple of years since I've looked at the Dark Sun setting, but would it be that difficult?
Sprinkle in a couple of new ancestries (Thri Keen, Genasi, Half-Giants), tweak (Halflings, Elves) and remove some others (Golbins, Gnomes), remove all classes that get their powers from divine entities or are related to them (Clerics, Paladins, Sorcerers) and rebrand sorcerers to Psionics if you don't want to design a new class.
I know that's probably not all but to me that would be a good approximation to get started with. You don't need to recreate everything to tell engaging and compelling stories, within that setting, that are vastly distinct from Golarion. Removing the divine aspect by itself goes a long way to differentiate these two because the Gods are such an integral part to Golarion.
|
Assurance was one rule I was totally wrong about during the playtest. I thought it was dumb and weak, but it's actually super elegant.
It cleanly and unassumingly sidesteps the whole "can you really take 10/20 here?" discussion and goes right to the heart of what taking 10 or 20 was meant to emulate: performing a task you're sure you can do under normal circumstances.
I wouldn't say you were wrong. The playtest version of assurance was different, and somewhat weaker.
But yeah, Assurance is amazing in PF2!| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance (medicine) is the skill to take, it seems like.
I feel like any skill vs. a set DC, rather than an opposed skill (or an unknown DC) is a great one for assurance.
D@mn... I am loving this edition. It's been out 6 months, and I'm still learning things about it. And yet it was super easy to learn enough about it to jump right in and play.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance (medicine) is the skill to take, it seems like.
I feel like any skill vs. a set DC, rather than an opposed skill (or an unknown DC) is a great one for assurance.D@mn... I am loving this edition. It's been out 6 months, and I'm still learning things about it. And yet it was super easy to learn enough about it to jump right in and play.
Assurance (Athletics) is another amazing option.
|
Assurance (Athletics) is another amazing option.Assurance (medicine) is the skill to take, it seems like.
I feel like any skill vs. a set DC, rather than an opposed skill (or an unknown DC) is a great one for assurance.D@mn... I am loving this edition. It's been out 6 months, and I'm still learning things about it. And yet it was super easy to learn enough about it to jump right in and play.
I'd say its decent rather than amazing. Its pretty rare for you to be able to assuredly trip an enemy that is worth tripping, for example.
It IS very useful for the Str 8 character to climb, leap over small streams, etc.
The very counter intuitive thing about assurance is that the better your stat in a skill the worse a deal it is. It is mostly (at least in my experience) used for low stat characters to still be able to handle fairly simple tasks.
At anything that is intended to be difficult it is pretty much "assuredly fail".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Blocks natural 1's and other crit fails!
At anything that is intended to be difficult it is pretty much "assuredly fail".
If you're only trained, this is true. If you actually climb the proficiency tree I think you end up okay.
Assurance (Athletics) is another amazing option.Assurance (medicine) is the skill to take, it seems like.
I feel like any skill vs. a set DC, rather than an opposed skill (or an unknown DC) is a great one for assurance.D@mn... I am loving this edition. It's been out 6 months, and I'm still learning things about it. And yet it was super easy to learn enough about it to jump right in and play.
I'd say its decent rather than amazing. Its pretty rare for you to be able to assuredly trip an enemy that is worth tripping, for example.
It IS very useful for the Str 8 character to climb, leap over small streams, etc.
The very counter intuitive thing about assurance is that the better your stat in a skill the worse a deal it is. It is mostly (at least in my experience) used for low stat characters to still be able to handle fairly simple tasks.
At anything that is intended to be difficult it is pretty much "assuredly fail".
You can pretty reliably trip foes that are -2 levels below you, by level 10 they are decent threats that shouldn't be ignored just because they are weaker.
When you get assurance you can auto succeed untrained simple DCs, when you get expert you can auto succeed trained DCs, one level before getting master you can auto succeed expert DCs.
The progression is actually quite sensible as simple DCs should not be scaling throughout the adventure. (on a side note, I still hate the +level system and really wish they had gone for a 5e style bounded accuracy, it screws with the +10/-10 crits but still)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(on a side note, I still hate the +level system and really wish they had gone for a 5e style bounded accuracy, it screws with the +10/-10 crits but still)
I'm glad they didn't. I don't want another 10 years of a copied game system.
I loved 3.5 and PF1, but it's time to move on.
(on a side note, I still hate the +level system and really wish they had gone for a 5e style bounded accuracy, it screws with the +10/-10 crits but still)I'm glad they didn't. I don't want another 10 years of a copied game system.
I loved 3.5 and PF1, but it's time to move on.
I didn't say I wanted them to copy 5e, I said I wished they had used a bounded accuracy like system. There is a big difference, for tje record I used 5e as an example but it didn't birth the concept of bounded accuracy.
I just hate the idea that "oh, you are a level 13 str 8 wizard, cool you can now fight an army of peasants and orcs naked and with your fists andno magic, literally being in no danger"
Jokey scenarios aside it makes me sad to see iconic foes so quickly outgrown. It makes for weird world building.
How quickly are threats actually out grown though? If they are the lowest level threats, 4 levels or so. Realistically more than 50% of most games. Enemies of levels 5 or higher? They can last for a span of 9 levels. That is a long time to use a single type of foe.
And this before we get to advancing a chassis. Orcs can do those whole nine levels just fine because it totally makes sense from a world building point of view that once the pcs become a significant threat warlords begin devoting large resources to defeating them. And lets not forget the gods. Gorum is thrilled at the bloodshed and wants to see it continue, now you have divinely imbued fanatical orcs to fight against.
They don't really last that span in a similar role though, by the time you are four levels higher than a monster you can slaughter them in droves and even by the time you are 2 levels higher they have stopped being a reasonable threat outside of in mini hordes.
3.5 had similar issues imo, so I am not levelling this just at PF2e.
I suppose it is the difference between people liking "my character is now a god" feel of WoW and mmos and people who enjoy the Darksouls feeling of "I am stronger, but I still need to be careful because a bear can still rip my throat out if I am not cautious."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember playing Everquest with my level 100 dark elf necromancer. Sometimes I'd leave him in an old world zone and go afk for the afternoon. Not even feign death or anything.
I'd come home to him surrounded by 13 orc and 6 bears. My chat screen would be filled with "A bear bites you and MISSES"
"A bear bites you and MISSES"
"A bear bites you and MISSES"
"An orc swings at you and MISSES"
Haha. Good times.
There's actually a thread here in general somewhere about the biggest things you didn't know worked differently in 2E.
My google-fu is weak today. Do you have a link for a fellow seeker?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get where you are coming from, Gleeful Grognard. For me the "superhero" feel of 2e is a point in its favor, since if I want a more "down to earth" system I can always run 5e.
I suspect, though, that the GMG will make running 2e with something like bounded accuracy a breeze. It feels like in a lot of places the devs went with "which rule is easiest to house rule into other rules?" as a metric for deciding what rules to go with in the final system, and I think proficiency is one of those places.
It's much easier to build the system around +1/level proficiency and then house rule that to +0/level proficiency than it is to do the other way around.
I get where you are coming from, Gleeful Grognard. For me the "superhero" feel of 2e is a point in its favor, since if I want a more "down to earth" system I can always run 5e.
I suspect, though, that the GMG will make running 2e with something like bounded accuracy a breeze. It feels like in a lot of places the devs went with "which rule is easiest to house rule into other rules?" as a metric for deciding what rules to go with in the final system, and I think proficiency is one of those places.
It's much easier to build the system around +1/level proficiency and then house rule that to +0/level proficiency than it is to do the other way around.
It is quite difficult to implement bounded accuracy without messing up a lot of mechanics and math sadly. I am not confident that the gmg version will be robust enough outside of a base competency. (I worked extensively on it after launch and went deep down the excel sheet calculation rabbit hole)
I will still be happy with pf2e, it is filling a niche that none of my other fantasy rpgs fill.
I also get why they did it, I just kinda wish it were different -laughs- but maybe that is why the ogl is a good thing and I should just get off my ass and do something about it for myself lol.
We tried a patchwork PF2 oneshot thing once and one of the players started to complain how numbers aren't big enough and we're gonna be weak etc. Ironically this dude never played PF2 and was three sessions into PF1, then they went ham on the starting trash mobs.
Anyone else got any experience where people start seeing the future and claim how things work before actually testing them?
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
We tried a patchwork PF2 oneshot thing once and one of the players started to complain how numbers aren't big enough and we're gonna be weak etc. Ironically this dude never played PF2 and was three sessions into PF1, then they went ham on the starting trash mobs.
Anyone else got any experience where people start seeing the future and claim how things work before actually testing them?
Pretty much every day on this forum brings a new form of some armchair rocking theorycraft and passing judgment on how X works without ever seeing it in action. There are even people who have developed extensive houserule documents aimed at "fixing grave issues" with PF2 without having played a single session of the game.
So, yes.