Having more experience can be worse, actually; just ran my group through a fight with a lamia matriarch and had to bash them over the head with "HER FORT IS BAD YOU CAN GRAPPLE HER" because they were so used to combat maneuvers being terrible from PF1 experience even though two of them were expert in Athletics.Yeah a lot of people don't realize how good teamwork can be in any edition. While few games requiring so much strategy outside wargames and tactical RPGs. It all combines to make low level fights in PF2 really deadly for unsuspecting people.
Also remember that what an advanced group does or thinks is not the same as what a new group might do or think. It sometimes can be better to side with the "lets make things slightly easier" group and let the advanced players customize the game to make it harder. cough no level to proficiency cough
One of my players in my above mentioned group has literally never touched a TTRPG before, one has only ever played 5e, and one has played a decent amount of PF1. I ran them through the beginner box for level 1.
I don't think that counts as an advanced group in any way.
I had a PF1 gnome ranger monk grapple two different lamia matriarchs in the D&D 3.5 version of Rise of the Runelords converted to PF1. He had Improved Grapple from a monk archetype, but since grapple is escaped via Strength in PF1, he had no way of holding onto a lamia matriarch for more than a round. Instead, both lamia used two-handed weapons and the one round of grappling let the party surround the lamia without risking an Attack of Opportunity. He grappled for the teamwork. (What to do with a Gnome Ranger Monk? March 27, 2011)
Of my current 7 players, two never played any tabletop roleplaying game before. One of the two was familiar with MMORPGs, but the totally inexperienced one was one of the 5 original players who defeated groups of 1st-level hobgoblin soldiers at 1st level due to teamwork. She saw how the other players cooperated and caught on quickly.
I was talking about experience with PF2. People who actually read the rules and/or have GMs who know the rules well.
My experienced players learned the teamwork for PF2 from playing Dungeons & Dragons and PF1. The three-action system of PF2 opens up more opportunity for cooperation between teammates, but the basic ideas of flanking, tripping, grappling, and other battlefield control are in the earlier games, too.
That PF2 essentially requires teamwork for Moderate-threat encounters to be moderate rather than grueling I consider a feature rather than a flaw. However, PF2 does have a closely-related flaw: the advantage of teamwork is not obvious. Players automatically notice the advantage of powergaming, "If I hit harder, I will win more." They do not automatically notice the advantage of teamwork, "If I give the rogue a flank, her sneak attack damage will let us win more." Some teamwork abilities, such as Champion's cause-based reactions, are built in, so I don't know what Paizo can do to make teamwork more obvious. I ought to find the time to write a Pathfinder 2nd Edition Guide to Teamwork.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I propose the return of Teamwork feats.
Except instead of "your entire party must have this feat", they instead are all feats that allow you to ready specific actions using 1 action instead of 2, triggered by your ally's actions. For instance, you can turn the PF1 feat Concentrated Fire into the following.
feat 3
{general}{teamwork}
Requirement You are holding a loaded ranged weapon, thrown weapon, or ranged weapon with reload 0.
You ready an action to strike with your held weapon with the trigger that an ally of yours fires their ranged weapon at the same target. If both strikes hit, combine the damage from both Strikes and apply resistances and weaknesses only once.
Should fly balance wise. Reducing action cost is a common enough use of a feat, and this would make readying an action more economical while simultaneously rewarding (and possibly teaching) teamwork actions. Another might be to Step into flanking position with an NPC when your ally moves into flank on their other side.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, usually when you want to get better at something, that happens through learning and practice.
Its certainly possible to pull punches in terms of the stated guidelines, and it even looks like future official adcentures will be lighter at low levels
So whats the problem with the game having distinct skill floors and ceilings?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are some players getting frustrated because they hear that an enemy is the same Level as they are? I only see their complaint having any merit if they find out that X goblin was a also a Level 1 creature. When I GM, I never tell my players what level a creature is.
And when they see something with an attack bonus of +12 against them and they are still Level 1? They sit up and pay attention!
I like it because it makes the fight tense and exciting. If my players find it to be a grind and everything is stronger than them, there are different things the GM can do:
1. Use higher numbers of lower level creatures. They will feel like badasses against lower-level creatures. Perhaps the kind of the encounter they'll just enjoy more.
2. Lower the total XP budget of encounters. No reason to be ashamed about this, and there's no need to tell the players unless they insist. The goal is to have fun.
3. The GM if they have more experience or knowledge of the system, can give helpful suggestions on what to do during combat.
Nothing in the OP's complaint is a "flaw" in the system. To the extent there is a "problem," it can be addressed by the GM. And a good thing about PF2 is that you can make adjustments to the encounters with confidence.
I just ran my first session of PF2e now that my entire play group is vaccinated. We ran three combats in our first session:
Party:
Human Fighter, 2nd Level
Elf Wizard, 2nd Level
Half-Elf Rogue, 2nd Level
Catfolk Bard, 2nd Level
Encounter 1:
Goblin Warrior x4 (3 Melee, 2 Ranged with high ground)
Goblin Warchanter x1 (Behind/Supporting Melee Goblins)
Encounter 2:
Goblin Warrior x3 (2 Melee, 1 Ranged behind cover)
Goblin Warchanter x1 (Behind/Supporting Melee Goblins)
Goblin Pyro x1 (On high ground)
Encounter 3:
Animated Broom x1
Animated Silverware Swarm x1
"Animated Rug" x 1 (A reflavored/reskinned Ittan-Momen)
Play Report:
PCs went HAM in every encounter. While they did take hits, only the Wizard ever got even slightly close to 0HP, since he doesn't have much to begin with.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are some players getting frustrated because they hear that an enemy is the same Level as they are? I only see their complaint having any merit if they find out that X goblin was a also a Level 1 creature. When I GM, I never tell my players what level a creature is.
And when they see something with an attack bonus of +12 against them and they are still Level 1? They sit up and pay attention!
<snip>
Nothing in the OP's complaint is a "flaw" in the system. To the extent there is a "problem," it can be addressed by the GM. And a good thing about PF2 is that you can make adjustments to the encounters with confidence.
The orginal post by Arrow17 said, "I am surprised with the absolute ease monsters hit players, especially at the lower levels." This was in September 2020 when players were often surprised by the difference between PF1 and PF2.
He was complaining about a +9 to hit with horsechopper and shortbow by the Goblin Commando, creature 1. That was the wrong number, since the goblin commando has a +8 to hit. Since the goblin commando has Str +3 and is level 1, to get +8 by PC rules, it would have expert proficiency in its weapons. In short, the goblin commando is built like a 1st-level fighter. As The Rot Grub said, this is a feature not a flaw. It lets us GMs know that the goblin commando is an even match for the 1st-level fighter in the party. The other three PCs provide the advantage in the fight.
In comment #17 The Gleeful Grognard recommended Goblin Warriors, creature -1. Oddly, the goblin warrior also has +8 to hit with dogslicer and shortbow. With Dex +3 with a finesse weapon and level negative 1, that means it has a +6 to hit from its proficiency rank, master proficiency. It was not built by PC rules. Instead, the goblin warrior is a goblin commando with less strength, finesse weapons, slightly lower AC, and only one third the hit points. It was designed as easy-to-kill fodder that feels like a warrior.
This thread was revived by a post by Heather F, Customer Service Representative, or some new posts that Heather F removed. Zapp continued the discussion with a theory that the encounter budget rules don't work at 1st level.
Zapp's theory does not fit my experience at low levels in PF2, but I am an experienced GM accustomed to the D&D/PF1 Challenge Rating system being flawed and knowing how to eyeball an encounter to make sure my players' characters can handle it. And my players mastered PF2 tactics immediately. Thus, the question remains, how to handle the encounter budget for inexperienced GM and players at 1st level?
And I also like the question of how to teach useful tactics, such as teamwork, to these inexperienced players. The +8 to hit on a goblin commando gives a harsh warning, but does that warning serve as a lesson?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My experience with the PF2 encounter guidelines is that encounters only have the difficulty they are advertised as having (as per the description of each difficulty level in the Encounter Building rules) if you have a group of reasonably experienced players. Or at least tactically gifted, if new. For a new GM running for a party of newbies, I've both experienced (when I was newer) and watched games turning into grindfests, and multiple people straight giving up on the system because they weren't having fun being destroyed.
Experiences differ, but in my opinion and looking from the point of view of what I witnessed, this is, yes, a flaw of the system. New GMs with new parties are the people who need those guidelines the most in the first place, so them being balanced not around them but around people who have a much better idea of what they're doing seems like a mistake to me.
I also have to echo the feeling that fights against solo enemies are much more dangerous than advertised at low levels, and fights against armies of mooks have the same issue at high levels. Both issues are mostly due to the logical consequences of linear HP/damage scaling, but they also have to do with the tools that PCs and NPCs are given throughout the levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I actually think the goblin warriors are scarier than the commandos. They're two levels lower, so you can fit two warriors in an encounter for every commando, but they're just as accurate, and deadly d10 is pretty brutal at level 1 when HP values are so small.
It really doesn't take much for them to just start dropping characters. Tactics and coordination are essential in PF2 and make a huge difference in how easy combats are, but there's only so much you can do when you're dropped to dying in the first round of combat because someone rolled a little bit high.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having more experience can be worse, actually; just ran my group through a fight with a lamia matriarch and had to bash them over the head with "HER FORT IS BAD YOU CAN GRAPPLE HER" because they were so used to combat maneuvers being terrible from PF1 experience even though two of them were expert in Athletics.Yeah a lot of people don't realize how good teamwork can be in any edition. While few games requiring so much strategy outside wargames and tactical RPGs. It all combines to make low level fights in PF2 really deadly for unsuspecting people.
Also remember that what an advanced group does or thinks is not the same as what a new group might do or think. It sometimes can be better to side with the "lets make things slightly easier" group and let the advanced players customize the game to make it harder. cough no level to proficiency cough
One of my players in my above mentioned group has literally never touched a TTRPG before, one has only ever played 5e, and one has played a decent amount of PF1. I ran them through the beginner box for level 1.
I don't think that counts as an advanced group in any way.
"You want us to constrict snek? Explain >_>"
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
My experience with the PF2 encounter guidelines is that encounters only have the difficulty they are advertised as having (as per the description of each difficulty level in the Encounter Building rules) if you have a group of reasonably experienced players. Or at least tactically gifted, if new.
To be fair, that's exactly what the Encounter Building rules say. They mention tactics in every category of difficulty (expected to see regular use at least) as something that will make determine how the battle goes.
Low-threat encounters present a veneer of difficulty and typically use some of the party’s resources. However, it would be rare or the result of very poor tactics for the entire party to be seriously threatened.
Moderate-threat encounters are a serious challenge to the characters, though unlikely to overpower them completely. Characters usually need to use sound tactics and manage their resources wisely to come out of a moderate-threat encounter ready to continue on and face a harder challenge without resting.
Severe-threat encounters are the hardest encounters most groups of characters can consistently defeat. These encounters are most appropriate for important moments in your story, such as confronting a final boss. Bad luck, poor tactics, or a lack of resources due to prior encounters can easily turn a severe-threat encounter against the characters, and a wise group keeps the option to disengage open.
I think you can argue the balance point is wrong, especially in adventure design, but unless you're finding good tactics aren't sufficient to win low encounters or something then the rules are definitely working as advertised.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I actually think the goblin warriors are scarier than the commandos. They're two levels lower, so you can fit two warriors in an encounter for every commando, but they're just as accurate, and deadly d10 is pretty brutal at level 1 when HP values are so small.
It really doesn't take much for them to just start dropping characters. Tactics and coordination are essential in PF2 and make a huge difference in how easy combats are, but there's only so much you can do when you're dropped to dying in the first round of combat because someone rolled a little bit high.
Ya, agree on the goblin warriors. I was very surprised that the default first level enemies are given shortbows.
It is a huge culture shock for PF1 players already expecting to just run up and start slaughtering "a bunch of weak goblins". The goblin warriors start unleashing 3 attacks (2 that can hit you much easier than in PF1) AND deal out a bunch of extra damage on a crit. Definitely not a training wheels encounter to transition new players into the system.
It is a huge culture shock for PF1 players already expecting to just run up and start slaughtering "a bunch of weak goblins". The goblin warriors start unleashing 3 attacks (2 that can hit you much easier than in PF1) AND deal out a bunch of extra damage on a crit. Definitely not a training wheels encounter to transition new players into the system.
As I was trying to show with my play report, that was definitely not my experience. Our party's fighter was killing goblin warriors in a single shot, and usually a second with their second attack if one was near enough.
It is a huge culture shock for PF1 players already expecting to just run up and start slaughtering "a bunch of weak goblins". The goblin warriors start unleashing 3 attacks (2 that can hit you much easier than in PF1) AND deal out a bunch of extra damage on a crit. Definitely not a training wheels encounter to transition new players into the system.As I was trying to show with my play report, that was definitely not my experience. Our party's fighter was killing goblin warriors in a single shot, and usually a second with their second attack if one was near enough.
Didn't get that all from your post. It may be because I don't know what HAM means.
Didn't get that all from your post. It may be because I don't know what HAM means.HAM means "as hard as a [m-word that can't be typed on this forum - and no, this isn't me "trying to avoid the profanity filter" it's me respecting it, just like last time a post got deleted for not cursing]"
Thank you. However to Filthy Lucre, that's not really a play report. Going HAM doesn't really report the outcome or what occurred in the encounters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you. However to Filthy Lucre, that's not really a play report. Going HAM doesn't really report the outcome or what occurred in the encounters.Didn't get that all from your post. It may be because I don't know what HAM means.HAM means "as hard as a [m-word that can't be typed on this forum - and no, this isn't me "trying to avoid the profanity filter" it's me respecting it, just like last time a post got deleted for not cursing]"
The play report is that a level 2 fighter with an 18 strength wielding a two-handed weapon is going to kill a goblin they hit most of the time with a single hit, and that on their first attack they're usually going to hit.
The play report is that a level 2 fighter with an 18 strength wielding a two-handed weapon is going to kill a goblin they hit most of the time with a single hit, and that on their first attack they're usually going to hit.Thank you. However to Filthy Lucre, that's not really a play report. Going HAM doesn't really report the outcome or what occurred in the encounters.Didn't get that all from your post. It may be because I don't know what HAM means.HAM means "as hard as a [m-word that can't be typed on this forum - and no, this isn't me "trying to avoid the profanity filter" it's me respecting it, just like last time a post got deleted for not cursing]"
Is it though? A play report would be a report of the play. Not usually hit, but what indeed did happen. Turn by turn if you wanted a detailed play report for an encounter.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The play report is that a level 2 fighter with an 18 strength wielding a two-handed weapon is going to kill a goblin they hit most of the time with a single hit, and that on their first attack they're usually going to hit.
Hitting the goblins usually isn't the issue (especially for a fighter), the issue is usually the goblins are going to have quite a few shots hitting the party and there's some huge swinginess to the encounters based on a few high rolls for initiative and attacks (and how tactical the GM wants to play them).
For my first encounter with goblins in PF2 we were exploring a cave section.
Our rogue rounds the corner. Everyone roll initiative.
Quite a few of the goblins go first (they were stealthing with +5), 3 goblins shoot their shortbows at the rogue (the only one visible). One of the hits is a crit, he goes down.
The rest of the battle is now our cleric healing up a person/s, our melee trying to close with the goblins, getting peppered, and then going down. The healed person would spend nearly all their turn getting their weapons, getting up, and trying to close with the goblins again. Eventually it turned into a TPK.
The battle could have gone much differently if we went first, just didn't have quite so many crits against us, or just played safer as adventurers. But there are just a lot of chances for things to go bad.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I don't think "the goblins die really fast" and "shortbows on high-accuracy low level enemies are scary" are mutually exclusive at all. Arguably the two kind of go hand in hand as part of why they can feel problematic.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a design choice that many enemies, expecially low-level ones, are built as glass cannons of sort.
This way they can still be a threat when the party is higher level, but of course the swinginess of the fights is higher, expecially if players don't take the enemies seriously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I don't think "the goblins die really fast" and "shortbows on high-accuracy low level enemies are scary" are mutually exclusive at all. Arguably the two kind of go hand in hand as part of why they can feel problematic.
It's basically the same problem that the CR 1/3 orcs from PF1 had. An easy encounter if things go right, but if things go wrong oops a crit instantly killed someone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except PF2 has a profoundly-not-same problem than PF1.
This entire thread is about not reducing PF2 to "just about the same problems as in other games".
The part the feels unique to PF2 is that PF2 monsters at all levels hit harder than in other editions and variants of D&D/Pathfinder. This means that charging into battle and going toe-to-toe in melee is often a losing strategy. That is especially brutal at low levels, where such strategies seem the obvious choice.
Also, if goblin warriors have terrain advantage where PCs would take two turns to reach them, then the difficulty of the encounter is beyond the xp value of the goblins. If lucky, the party can respond with ranged attacks instead, so that the low hit points of the goblin warriors matter. However, the martial characters might have specialized in melee and the spellcasters might have selected damage spells with only a 30-foot range, leaving the party unlucky. Thus, the goblin-warrior design feels too swingy on a common 1st-level opponent.