Second Ed vs First Ed.


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1,001 to 1,021 of 1,021 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I really enjoyed playing the Plaugestone adventure and most of the first 2 books of the Age of Ashes AP. They have been refreshingly different and challenging that anything I played or GM'ed in PF1. I am running Extinction Curse and a PbB of Abomination Vaults as well. I am not in love with extinction curse overall, but I am playing with a group of old friends that want a lighthearted romp of a campaign and that is pretty much exactly what has been delivered.

Consider running Abomination Vaults with your new group. It will really highlight the great new features of PF2 for you as a GM and it isn't a level 20 commitment. There is a lot of cool, weird stuff down there too that the players can get access to as well.


Deriven Firelion wrote:
Temperans wrote:

Gunslinger shooting a weapon back to your hand is still one of the worst ideas I have heard. Its over the top for the sake of being over the top. When there are so many other ways to handle gun + weapon that don't involve literally breaking all laws of physics.

Also all this talk about Gonzo, and relating it to high power. But Gonzo has nothing to do with high power. Heck it has nothing to do with fantasy. Its all about weirdness.

Necromancer was not a Gonzo thing. Alchemist construct crafter was not a Gonzo thing. Divination Wizard was not a Gonzo thing. Shield Master Ranger was not Gonzo. Throwing weapons were not Gonzo (returning and similar abilities are a matter of convenience to maintain money balance).

Gonzo is literally, "let me described what just happened in the weirdest way possible."

This shows a total lack of knowledge about PF2. You can do all this in PF2, but you won't have the power you had in PF1.

So if you aren't interested in super power ups, but can still make most of these types, then what are you asking for?

I value playability more than super powers. My goal is not to break the system, but to be able to make a character work. In PF1, I did not for go for the super broken characters, I went for the concepts. In PF2 I try to do the same, but too often I am stopped because it is just not supported what so ever.

Take for example throwing builds, I really liked those in PF1 because you could create something that works both at ranged and in melee. PF2 largely has no support for Ranged builds the closest thing being doubling rings.

I liked Divination not because you could attack the enemy when they least expected. But because you could play as a Seer or Spy. Again not well supported in PF2.

I liked construct crafter because I could make cool constructs/robots. I liked Achemist construct crafter because it was able to make them even if they had no spells. To me Promethean alchemist is one of the best archetypes, even though it loses both Bombs and Mutagens: while most people put it down exactly because it loses bombs and mutagens.


Unicore wrote:

I really enjoyed playing the Plaugestone adventure and most of the first 2 books of the Age of Ashes AP. They have been refreshingly different and challenging that anything I played or GM'ed in PF1. I am running Extinction Curse and a PbB of Abomination Vaults as well. I am not in love with extinction curse overall, but I am playing with a group of old friends that want a lighthearted romp of a campaign and that is pretty much exactly what has been delivered.

Consider running Abomination Vaults with your new group. It will really highlight the great new features of PF2 for you as a GM and it isn't a level 20 commitment. There is a lot of cool, weird stuff down there too that the players can get access to as well.

I think our next gaming sessions (whenever that might be) will the something Shonen anime-inspired run by my roommate, my Cyberpunk RED campaign, with an outside shot that one of our other players might want to run something in D&D 5e. I'd have trouble working in PF2 with that group and I had no fun running it via Roll20 and Foundry seems like a big investment for something I might never use.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:


Take for example throwing builds, I really liked those in PF1 because you could create something that works both at ranged and in melee. PF2 largely has no support for Ranged builds the closest thing being doubling rings.

Pick up weapon with thrown quality.

Add returning.
Profit.

If you're talking about "doesn't have enough variety in ranged-specific property runes", yes, but you definitely can't say there's no support.


Thrown weapon builds are better in PF2 than they were at this time in PF1, frankly... Returning and the Blinkback Belt were Ultimate Equipment additions, and the feats that made throwing builds actually good wouldn't come until even later than that.


That I can't deny throwing is one of the easiest to fix by just adding more feats and properties.

Customer Service Lead

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed a lot more posts. Since it is clear this discussion can’t be had without bickering, attacking, and baseless assumptions I am locking it.

1,001 to 1,021 of 1,021 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Second Ed vs First Ed. All Messageboards