|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was hoping for a streamlined Pathfinder but ended up with this overwhelming system that begs to be run with Apps and browser based rulebooks to be playable. Which, on the one hand it's really neat that we have such powerful tools that we can play a system so complex with relative ease.
I use Pathbuilder to make my character, takes about 1/2 an hour, then transfer it all to a paper character sheet. When I go to play a live, all I take is my paper character sheet, a 1-page printout of the conditions and actions, a pencil, and some dice, and I leave all my books at home.
The biggest reason I use Pathbuilder or Archive of Nethys is character options are spread out over many books and APs, not because the character creation process is too complex.
I found the best way for me to learn character creation quickly is first to use a tool like Pathbuilder, as it only shows you relative character options and makes for a good checklist. Then I make the same character on paper, using the books. Do that a few times, and the process becomes much easier, and you learn where to find things in the books faster.
"8) Direct Damage cantrips are just terrible early on."
Electric Arc: 1d4 plus your spellcasting ability modifier. It targets 1 or 2 creatures. If they crit fail their saving throw, it's double damage.
I agree that's a terrible spell. We just disagree on who it's terrible for.
Having gone from 3.5 -> pf1 -> 5e -> pf2 as a player, I think that that pf2 as a player is easier and more enjoyable than pf1 and 5e. In pf1 I needed excel to keep track of all the different bonuses which was a pain. 5e is just b*#%*$~s with multiclassing and options.
Pf2 has lots of numbers, but when you understand the system, it's actually easy to get to the final numbers. Level, stat, proficiency plus up to three separate bonuses: item, status and circumstance.
While we use foundry to play (huge help, even when actually sitting down together) and pathbuilder to create characters (easy to use, because of multiple books as sources of feats and classes) you could well do without for the actual numbers.
The fun part for me as a player: lots of optimization options, without making characters that can break the game (either too strong or to weak) if you follow some simple rules. All classes and races are viable, of course some are better than others, but nothing to break the system. Martials and casters are equally strong and useful from low to high.
The only thing which bothers me a bit, is that you can't build a class without the three save stats. You can't skip Wis on a char that otherwise wouldn't need it, because that will be surely cause issues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The drop in Player Enjoyment is unfortunate. :(PF2:
Player Enjoyment: 7
DM Enjoyment: 9
I think that that assessment is really subjective. I've played quite a bit of 5E before PF2e came out and I find 2e to be vastly more enjoyable. I've only played 1e via the Wrath of the Righteous game, but I found that to be boring as hell. The system not the rest of the game. Instead of interesting action economy, build paths and active abilities, all I could see was stacking numbers until you are just playing "my numbers are bigger than yours".
I too would like to be convinced. But, I only have a couple of problems:
1 - As a GM, I am not liking the current stories.
2 - Also, as a GM, I'd like PCs to be a bit stronger.These are my main reasons.
Also ...
3 - I am not a fan of how Summoning was broken up.
1 - I'd recommend taking another look. I'm "only" moderately progressive as well (compared to many people on this forum) and I honestly can't see much of a difference between the APs Paizo put out and other fantasy stories. Well, apart from Paizo's work being substantially better than that of pretty much everyone else I know. I find it to be mostly very subtle. If all else fails, homebrewing is always an option and substantially easier to do, as you have guidelines for building most things.
---
2 - There are plenty of tools for that. Your main stop would be the variant rules. The first one everyone will tell you about Free Archetype, but that might not be the best to with start due to the added complexity. A more limited variant - only choosing from a limited selection of archetypes - could work well, though.
Gradual Ability Boosts is one I can highly recommend - it subtly but very noticeably increases your strength without any added complexity. It is also just a much better system to handle ability boosts, rather than clumping them up.
Then there is Dual Classing. You basically get 2 classes with all the benefits of both that aren't a duplicate (e.g. you only get the highest amount of health not both). By far the most complex and completely overpowered in essentially any combination.
Ancestry paragon (basically double ancestry feats) is more about flavour than strictly increasing effectiveness, though it can do both.
Stamina is also a thing, but I haven't played with that.
Combine those variant rules as much as you want. I personally play with Gradual Ability Boosts, Free Archetype, Automatic Bonus Progression (plus full gold/level instead of reduced) and a second ancestry feat at level 1 (which we have decided was preferable over full Ancestry Paragon). But we've been playing since 2e released, so you might want to start slower.
If all of that isn't to your liking, just giving people an additional class feat or two early on will do the trick. Or anything else you can think of, but I'd advise to start tame and ramp up from there. In 2e, even seemingly small changes can have major effects.
---
3 - You and a lot of other people here ^^. I can't offer any help in this department, sadly. 2e isn't perfect and this is one area that shows it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Try playing it.
The only person who can convince you is yourself. The best way to do that is to join a game and see what it's actually like.
I can share what convinced me: the setting is much more considered now thanks to the diversity of staff, without losing any of the old Pathfinder theme park fun. You couldn’t pay me to engage with the Darkest Africa “cannibals and headhunters everywhere” 1e approach to the Mwangi, while the 2e book on it is one of the finest setting supplements in the d20 sphere.
The old Dragon Empires books have aged like milk in places. I’m excited to see how a bunch of awesome Asian talent tackles Tian Xia for 2e soon.
Yeah. 1e had a lot of problematic and racist things from what I’ve heard, such as the cannibalism everywhere thing in 1e. 2e’s version not only ditches racist stereotypes, but also the writers did actual research and now Mwangi is representative of real African culture and mythology.
My main reason for preferring pf2e:
I can't really make a broken character, no matter how hard I try.PF1 : so many ways/builds
Dark Heresy : sniping
FF Star Wars : pressure points
Shadow Run : Sniping
DnD 5e : dex focus, wild shaping druid (or bear barian)
Catalyst: reinforce
DnD 3.5-3.0 : Cleave shenanigans
Those are the systems I remember playing, and breaking.
“I can't really make a broken character, no matter how hard I try”
The opposite is true aswell. You can play anything and actually excel and do good still. You can make an inventor with champion archetype and still do amazing. Whereas 5e and 1e punishes you for not playing “good” options, like you wouldn’t be able to play a barbarian/bard/paladin without good stat rolls well.
In 1e and 5e, people expect you to play certain classes more and might try to drive you away from a really cool class because it’s not “optimal”. Not an issue in 2e
You keep changing what the complaint is.
The numbers are so high we need a calculator to play.
PF1 numbers are also really high.
Well, PF2 numbers are slightly higher.The official character sheet doesn't look good and doesn't help to build a character.
There are 3rd party sheets that look better, and apps that help build characters.
Well, I shouldn't have to use 3rd party stuff.There are so many options to choose from and the skill feat choices are not interesting.
PF1 has more options to sift through at most levels.
Well, there are some levels in PF1 where you don't have to make choices.I'm agreeing with keftiu. I don't think you are actually wanting to be convinced.
Let me ask you a question
Do you really think forcing all barbarians to be chaotic and all monks to be lawful is fun?
Do you really think that’s a good idea? Cause stuff like that is one of the biggest flaws of 1e
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!
|
|
I've been reading and rereading the rules to 2e for years now. Every so often I start watching a ton of 2e content creators on YouTube and generally I'm of the opinion that its probably the most well designed system to date, but I have a growing list of oddities, barriers to entry, or general silliness that make me hesitate.
I'd love feedback on any or all of the following issues:
Is your long list of oddities and barriers from reading the rules or playing the game? If it's just from reading the rules, stop reading the rules and play the game, you'll have more fun.
4) Every player needs a rulebook. Real DnD 4e energy on this one.
1: Every player that wants to build a character on paper on their own, without using apps or online references, needs a book. That's true for every game system ever made that has the complexity of any version of D&D or Pathfinder.
2: Use Pathbuilder and Archive of Nethys. No books required.
3: Use a pre-gen character. No books or prep required. That's how we deal with new people that show up to organized play with no book, character, or any knowledge of how to play the game. Dose help to give them the rule reference card from the beginner's box or a 1-page printout of the conditions and basic actions.
4: Barrow a book and take good notes on your character sheet. Works for any game system.
The best way to dislike PF2e is to compare it to other games constantly, and overthink it's complexity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best way to dislike PF2e is to compare it to other games constantly, and overthink it's complexity.
Agree, this is one of the big problems that many players coming from other systems suffer from.
I think it's worth making comparisons with other systems and proposing changes for errata, for new books, items, homebrews or even leaving inheritance to be considered in a next edition. But people often get carried away by criticism and overestimate self-discomfort and end up not having fun.
I too would like to be convinced. But, I only have a couple of problems:
1 - As a GM, I am not liking the current stories.
2 - Also, as a GM, I'd like PCs to be a bit stronger.These are my main reasons.
Also ...
3 - I am not a fan of how Summoning was broken up.1 - I'd recommend taking another look. I'm "only" moderately progressive as well (compared to many people on this forum) and I honestly can't see much of a difference between the APs Paizo put out and other fantasy stories. Well, apart from Paizo's work being substantially better than that of pretty much everyone else I know. I find it to be mostly very subtle. If all else fails, homebrewing is always an option and substantially easier to do, as you have guidelines for building most things.
---
Homebrewing may well be the way to go.
2 - There are plenty of tools for that. Your main stop would be the variant rules.
I will check this link out.
Ancestry paragon (basically double ancestry feats) is more about flavour than strictly increasing effectiveness, though it can do both.
This may be what I am looking for.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
4) Reliance on technology at the table is a barrier for entry to me
So, you don't want to use free rules by relying on technology. But you also don't want players to have to have books. For the game they're playing.
This entire list sounds like the most nitpicky thing imaginable.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OP, you say that you play First Edition. However, as a former 1E player I know that many of your criticisms (complicated character creation, leveling, save-or-suck, etc.) are either also true in 1E or were much worse in 1E.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but when you say that Second Edition is too complicated compared to First Edition, do you mean that learning a new system would require some amount of effort on your part and that you're happy playing 1E?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!
Stuff like alignment damage sucks
I feel like having alignment so integrated into mechanics hurts complex villains or characters
The only reason alignment damage exists is because it existed in the previous edition and that’s it.
Alignment damage doesn’t exist in an era where people are focusing a lot more on story and rp
Alignment damage is a leftover from early dnd editions where crunch and war gaming was the focus
I asked Mark Reifter and he said alignment damage had issues and harmed things like complex characters, and that’s why he advocated for the bare minimum some support for not playing with alignment, and said that alignment damage only carried over simply because it existed and for no other reason
What happens when a villain who is either doing evil things in pursuit of a good noble goal or thinks they are the hood guy takes good damage? Alignment damage only works for black and white cartoonishly evil villains
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Title of this thread: "I'd like to be convinced to switch to 2e"
Ok let's try this in game.
"Playing PF2e will make you 10 years younger, make you live longer, and be rich."
"Fact check: only half true."
"Play PF2e or I'll have my pet dragon roast you alive!"
"I think it would be to your benefit and to the benefit of everyone on the forums if you tried the game."
A cloaked ratfolk comes out of the shadows and whispers in your ear. "I'll give you 200 gold to try this game."
NOTE TO SELF: Why don't I ever roll that well in combat?
I asked Mark Reifter and he said ......Making up conversations with former Paizo employees isn't going to give your arguments any weight. Unless you can link to an actual post where we can see exactly what he said, no one is going to believe that you aren't just creating a story to make yourself sound authoritative.
Your demonstrated inability to read and interpret printed rules and to differentiate between rules and flavor makes you a totally unreliable narrator, especially when interpreting a private conversation that no one else was privy to.
[Like the last time a staff member had to publicly correct your overblown claims]
I can send you proof. You have discord?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll take eight!Title of this thread: "I'd like to be convinced to switch to 2e"
Ok let's try this in game.
"Playing PF2e will make you 10 years younger, make you live longer, and be rich."
A cloaked ratfolk hands you a book wrapped in cloth. "Read the rules and play the game eight weeks in a row. If you miss a week, you have to start over. Once you finish the eighth game, you will be eight years younger and live eight years longer. As for finding riches, the game will lead the way to treasure. All this and more for the low price of six gold. Or did you want eight copies of the game? I can arrange that for 50 gold paid in advance."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!
Well some of us like the alignments. If you are going to have gods and religions, which is kind of a staple in a fantasy game then you need some mechanics to hang off them. This is one that works fine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!Well some of us like the alignments. If you are going to have gods and religions, which is kind of a staple in a fantasy game then you need some mechanics to hang off them. This is one that works fine.
I think alignment for the sake of clerics and who they are allowed to follow is fine
But otherwise the heavy alignment mechanics, like alignment damage, shouldn’t be in the game, at least in my and many others’ opinions
Things like The Dragon Prince or Game of Thrones or LotR or The Witcher doesn’t have people get damaged by alignment because alignment damage would make writing complex characters who aren’t 2-dimensional hard
Seeing that people are really focusing on story, roleplay, character and other similar things now, alignment damage shouldn’t have carried over. D&D did away with alignment damage, other TTRPGs don’t have any alignment damage stuff, like MoM, Shadowrun and other things doesn’t have any alignment damage in it.
D&D ditched alignment damage, PF should have aswell
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!Well some of us like the alignments. If you are going to have gods and religions, which is kind of a staple in a fantasy game then you need some mechanics to hang off them. This is one that works fine.
And also, people are complex. You can’t just neatly place them into one of nine boxes
Alignment for the sake of cleric and deity stuff is fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time, maybe alignment damage needs to go away?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
About alignments. PF2 loosed a good opportunity to thrown this out! It's obviously better than PF1/3.x but IMO the entire system ao double maniqueist alignment system could be entire throw into bin!Well some of us like the alignments. If you are going to have gods and religions, which is kind of a staple in a fantasy game then you need some mechanics to hang off them. This is one that works fine.And also, people are complex. You can’t just neatly place them into one of nine boxes
Alignment for the sake of cleric and deity stuff is fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time, maybe alignment damage needs to go away?
These are not people. These are fantasy archetypes meant to fit into boxes for the sake of participating in the fantastical war of good versus evil and chaos versus law.
If I wanted to play complex people, I'd play a different type of game. Games like D&D and PF can accommodate those that want to play complex people in a real world if you so choose. I never tell everyone they can't do something.
But it's base design is high magic fantasy against enemies fantastical storybook representations of good and evil, law and chaos, and the like drawn from many different literary and media references.
It's not I want to play real world people in their gritty greyness. D&D has never felt like that type of game to me.
It's not quite a superhero game, but it's definitely high fantasy good versus evil type of game.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
“Good alignment/element hurt Evil magic/damage makes characters and story writing not work” is a ridiculous notion, a reaction you made up.
Holy damage is a fantasy staple that exists in numerous stories outside of Tabletop.
Alignment doesn’t work only if you operate on a black and white insanity type of morality that falls under “kill anything Evil, no exceptions”, which P2 does not advocate for.
“fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time”
That is applicable to any system of ethics/morals in a media.
Alignment is short hand, it’s an aesthetic mechanic that help make the game what it is, just like having Classes and Levels. Alignment isn’t the best moral system, its not a bad moral system, it’s A moral system with flavor that a lot of people like.
If you say it prevents a story honestly it’s because you’re using it wrong.
“Good alignment/element hurt Evil magic/damage makes characters and story writing not work” is a ridiculous notion, a reaction you made up.
Holy damage is a fantasy staple that exists in numerous stories outside of Tabletop.
Alignment doesn’t work only if you operate on a black and white insanity type of morality that falls under “kill anything Evil, no exceptions”, which P2 does not advocate for.
“fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time”
That is applicable to any system of ethics/morals in a media.
Alignment is short hand, it’s an aesthetic mechanic that help make the game what it is, just like having Classes and Levels. Alignment isn’t the best moral system, its not a bad moral system, it’s A moral system with flavor that a lot of people like.
If you say it prevents a story honestly it’s because you’re using it wrong.
I will say that it cause a lot problem for the story when you can detect main antagonist with one cantrip that available on first level
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I can say to OP is "Welcome to the 2e playtest, where almost exactly all these concerns were brought up, and swept under the rug."
Luckily Paizo went out of business shortly after PF2 launch, proving its critics that it was truly a badly thought-out game that failed to respect the incredibly touchy sensibilities of PF1 diehards.
Except it didn't, lol, lmao.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OP, you say that you play First Edition. However, as a former 1E player I know that many of your criticisms (complicated character creation, leveling, save-or-suck, etc.) are either also true in 1E or were much worse in 1E.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but when you say that Second Edition is too complicated compared to First Edition, do you mean that learning a new system would require some amount of effort on your part and that you're happy playing 1E?
I had the same reaction.
All I can say to OP is "Welcome to the 2e playtest, where almost exactly all these concerns were brought up, and swept under the rug."Luckily Paizo went out of business shortly after PF2 launch, proving its critics that it was truly a badly thought-out game that failed to respect the incredibly touchy sensibilities of PF1 diehards.
Except it didn't, lol, lmao.
Folks, criticizing a design decision is different than saying the game is bad or a failure. Please don't be extremists.
Because not everyone agrees or disagrees on the same issues. We just raise questions of things that could, in the opinion of each one, could have been better worked on or tried differently. It's an exercise in possibilities and opinions for designers to read and consider in the future.
Now there's a little bit I'd like to repeat as well. Sometimes people get too carried away with the criticism they have of the game and stop enjoying it because of it, especially ignoring all the good and well done parts of it.
Now there's a little bit I'd like to repeat as well. Sometimes people get too carried away with the criticism they have of the game and stop enjoying it because of it, especially ignoring all the good and well done parts of it. So be careful not to get too carried away by your own criticisms, in any TTRPG there will always be things you won't like, instead of worrying about finding the perfect system, simply look for the system that works best for you from the options available either current as well as old.
Since a lot of people are talking about alignment, I’m going to make a new thread. I’ll post the link here
“Good alignment/element hurt Evil magic/damage makes characters and story writing not work” is a ridiculous notion, a reaction you made up.
Holy damage is a fantasy staple that exists in numerous stories outside of Tabletop.
Alignment doesn’t work only if you operate on a black and white insanity type of morality that falls under “kill anything Evil, no exceptions”, which P2 does not advocate for.
“fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time”
That is applicable to any system of ethics/morals in a media.
Alignment is short hand, it’s an aesthetic mechanic that help make the game what it is, just like having Classes and Levels. Alignment isn’t the best moral system, its not a bad moral system, it’s A moral system with flavor that a lot of people like.
If you say it prevents a story honestly it’s because you’re using it wrong.
You can have holy damage without it being alignment damage. D&D has radiant damage for example. Other systems have their own version of holy damage that isn’t tied to alignment
Anyways. I made a new thread for us to talk about alignment in: https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43t36?Alignment-damage-and-heavy-alignment
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All I can say to OP is "Welcome to the 2e playtest, where almost exactly all these concerns were brought up, and swept under the rug."Luckily Paizo went out of business shortly after PF2 launch, proving its critics that it was truly a badly thought-out game that failed to respect the incredibly touchy sensibilities of PF1 diehards.
Except it didn't, lol, lmao.
Eh, it's the job of a publishing company to make money, not create some mythical system that will appeal to everyone.
|
|
2) What's wrong with it is that it makes character creation more difficult. I get the impression they were going for the opposite effect but that's the effect it has for me.
4) Reliance on technology at the table is a barrier for entry to me.
5) I understand not giving people access my gripe is entirely based on not liking it's name.
7) One hour immunity isn't the issue so much as attempting to heal at a more competent skill level results in an increased chance to heal anything at all.
11) You described my problem with it. Adding your full level to *everything* and then +8 and then bonuses leads to adding huge numbers for everything. Plus it's like, "well I leveled up again time to erase literally every number on my character sheet."I appreciate you popping in before your game!
If reliance on tech is an issue for you, what RPG have you found where players don't need their own copies of the player handbook to work effectively?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I can say to OP is "Welcome to the 2e playtest, where almost exactly all these concerns were brought up, and swept under the rug."
I kept my Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest Rulebook, and the character sheets in it on pages 429-431 are worse than the character sheets in the PF2 Core Rulebook, pages 624-627. For example, the playtest character sheets are sideways in landscape mode, which is not as convenient as a sheet of paper upright in portrait mode. Paizo did improve the character sheets, but they are still not so good.
Furthermore, I strongly suspect that Paizo called the three main character-building elements Ancestry, Background, and Class because renaming the controversial term "Race" to "Ancestry" and adding "Background" gave them ABC. They might have wanted to advertise that building a character in PF2 is as easy as ABC. They never did, because we playtesters did complain about the many steps after Ancestry, Background, and Class and played around with naming them Destiny, Equipment, Feats, etc. in alphabetical order.
Paizo had worthy goals in the playtest, such as simpler rules with more rigor leading to well-balanced encounters. However, in the published result, balance was the overwhelming objective. Rigor fared well, since it did not conflict with balance, but simplicity was sacrificed.
And balance had an odd effect:
PF1's ruleset because it's honestly not all it's cracked up to be. Yes, you can make powerful characters that can defeat enemies/adventures considered difficult, but honestly, once you make the character, the "adventure" is basically just going through the (mathematical) motions, and when enemies are defeated based on initiative counters, it's not very fun or engaging. "Oh, I won Initiative? I cast my typical encounter-ending spells, concluding the 15 minute adventuring day."This doesn't work in PF2.
If actually want to enjoy the game the first step is decoupling that idea and treating 2e as its own complete game.So much this.
Playing PF2 characters the same way you played PF1 characters will get you killed.
Pathfinder 1st Edition is excellent for playing a power fantasy in which heroes who can battle fearsome monsters because they are the best wizards and warriors in the world. Pathfinder 2nd Edition's balance did not simply nerf the power fantasy, it utterly destroyed it. As Riddlyn said, that change means that PF2 is not an update of PF1. Instead, it is a new game in the same setting. (And the setting did translate well. I am converting the PF1 Ironfang Invasion adventure path to PF2 rules and though it requires converting every unique opponent, it is the same adventure path after the conversion.)
If Vin's players want to play a power fantasy, then do not switch to PF2.
Mysteriously, my players had no trouble switching to PF2. Part of the reason is that most of them have played several different roleplaying games, such as Runescape, Traveller, L5R, and GURPS, and the others had played neither D&D nor PF1 before. But the main reason is that the experienced players loved teamwork. They built their characters for teamwork opportunities rather than individual power. And teamwork works just fine in PF2.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will say that it cause a lot problem for the story when you can detect main antagonist with one cantrip that available on first level
That's why you have more than one character that pings on that cantrip, or have the antagonist not ping on it, or have used options that prevent that cantrip from detecting them.