Pitfalls for a PF1 player in PF2?

[Shisumo]

glass wrote:

If I could ask a specific question, what would be a reasonable example of a mix of encounter to get from first level to second (in terms of X creatires of Y level, etc)?

1st level in particular is a bit tricky as a far as monsters go, because PF2 characters are uniquely fragile in a way that doesn't really apply to any other levels, even 2nd. So I really encourage keeping the enemies at level 1 or lower. I'd go with a mix of encounters following one of these templates: four level -1 monsters; three level 0 monsters; one level 1 monster with two level -1 mooks; two level 1 monsters. For a more challenging "swarm" style encounter, you could go with six level -1 monsters or three level -1 monsters and two level 0 monsters. A miniboss encounter could be, for example, a level 2 caster-type enemy (like a kobold dragon mage) with three level -1 or two level 0 minions - I would encourage you to choose a caster over a brute-type monster because they are less likely to just straight-up murder a PC through bad dice rolls.

One thing I noticed that Menace Under Otari (the adventure in the Beginner Box) does that I think is a very very good idea is to have the dungeon adventure run slightly longer than first level; the PCs are expected to level to 2 before they reach the boss fight. This is, in my opinion, a very good idea. A level 2 party against a level 4 boss will find the fight hard and challenging but almost certainly will prevail in the end; a level 1 party against a level 3 boss might well see a PC dead. It has taken Paizo a while to realize that level one bosses who are level 3 are a bad idea, but they seem to have figured it out now. I would encourage you to learn from their experiences here.

[Arcaian]

Claxon wrote:

PF2 does not at all have the same feel as PF1. In PF1 you were a BigDamnHero after about level 5, and almost nothing could touch you unless your GM modified it to make it a more credible threat.

I think this is quite an interesting point. I'm not sure how universal my experience is, but between PFS and APs not finishing, the majority of my PF1 experience is below 10th level - I'd say close to a majority of it is below level 7, even. On top of that, when I'm running or playing in an AP, a challenge is desired - it's difficult to do that by the time you get to high levels in PF1, but it's certainly a goal. I'll modify encounters with the intent of making them an interesting challenge where possible, including rebuilding an encounter from the ground up if I have the time to do so. Most of my GMs do the same thing, and I think this definitely affects my perception of PF1's difficulty. It's definitely an easier game than PF2 is, no doubt about that, but I find the difference between the two isn't as significant as most of the talk I see here on the forums. I wonder how much of the difference in this perspective on the forums is caused by how we experienced PF1?

[Arakasius]

Arcaian wrote:

Claxon wrote:

PF2 does not at all have the same feel as PF1. In PF1 you were a BigDamnHero after about level 5, and almost nothing could touch you unless your GM modified it to make it a more credible threat.

I think this is quite an interesting point. I'm not sure how universal my experience is, but between PFS and APs not finishing, the majority of my PF1 experience is below 10th level - I'd say close to a majority of it is below level 7, even. On top of that, when I'm running or playing in an AP, a challenge is desired - it's difficult to do that by the time you get to high levels in PF1, but it's certainly a goal. I'll modify encounters with the intent of making them an interesting challenge where possible, including rebuilding an encounter from the ground up if I have the time to do so. Most of my GMs do the same thing, and I think this definitely affects my perception of PF1's difficulty. It's definitely an easier game than PF2 is, no doubt about that, but I find the difference between the two isn't as significant as most of the talk I see here on the forums. I wonder how much of the difference in this perspective on the forums is caused by how we experienced PF1?

It really depends how much you lean into options that are available. About 90% of feats are non combat or don’t help in combat (either being just pure flavor or in some cases leading you into suboptimal strategies.) another 5-7% are solid feats that are good. That last 3% are gold and lead to very strong characters, especially when paired with archetypes. For example my optimized sacred huntmaster inquisitor who out damaged our party while being the skill monkey/face. And inquisitors are not even considered that strong. When you bust out ninth level casters that gets crazy. So a party of optimizers (class guide readers) can do some super powerful things like killing monsters 5-6 levels higher than them. And that like others have said just turns into rocket tag where the GM has to escalate to keep the game a challenge at all. Or give monsters massive defense/hit points but don’t pump up the power which is what 5e does with bags of hit points.

[glass]

Thanks again everybody, and especially thanks Shisumo that is exactly the sort of guidance I was hoping for (and rather more than I was really expecting).

By my count those done once each add up to 810 XP so if I repeated a couple (and mixed them up) I would have a decent run from first to second level (before, as you say, getting to the adventure's level 2 big bad).

_
glass.

[glass]

glass wrote:

By my count those done once each add up to 810 XP so if I repeated a couple (and mixed them up) I would have a decent run from first to second level (before, as you say, getting to the adventure's level 2 big bad).

Quoting myself because the edit window has closed: I should remember hazards and achievements when planning an adventure (not that any plan survives contact with the players, but you know what I mean).

_
glass.

[Albatoonoe]

With the stability of the system's math, it is really easy to adjust them up levels without breaking things. It's not too difficult to give a more heroic feeling game.

[Perpdepog]

Also, something helpful to remember is that, since the amount of experience to go to the next level doesn't change, and neither do the experience values of relative-strength encounters, the amount of time your party should spend at any given level will be pretty similar across the board.

Something to keep in mind if you're used to PF1E's experience system, where you would probably rocket up through the first few levels and then things tended to plateau.

[Darksyde]

One last minor point to add that i've noticed is pointed out better in pf2 is that xp is per encounter no matter how that encounter is overcome. So an entrepid group of players manages to talk/bluff/bribe their way by your 300xp budgeted combat they still get 300 xp. There is no mechanical reason to put everything to the sword.

[FowlJ]

That's been true since before any edition of pathfinder existed, even old D&D versions recommended that defusing fights was worth the same as fighting them.

[melmel80]

Another thing with 2e is that most of the math is all on the same scale. Skills, saves, attacks and even AC may not increase exactly the same, but they do all stay reasonably close. So I think a GM has a little more freedom when responding to players' off-the-wall ideas. For example, if the wizard wants to disable a hostile golem without destroying it, you might have them attempt one or two arcana or crafting checks versus the golem's reflex DC.

[Darksyde]

FowlJ wrote:

That's been true since before any edition of pathfinder existed, even old D&D versions recommended that defusing fights was worth the same as fighting them.

True it has always been a thing it isn't always clear or obvious to new players. Especially coming from a video game background. Most of us have also been in games where if 5 of those 10 goblins runs the gm only gave you half xp which is a bummer, you should get full reward for the entire encounter which I felt PF2e has done a better job of making clear in the core book and adventure paths.