Pathfinder 2 options for Timmies


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Spike wants to prove something, johnny wants to express something and importantly Timmy wants to experience something. In MTG spike is often most interesting in honing skills, johnny in quirky deck building, and Timmy in wild, big and wacky plays. The fact you can be skeleton filled with bugs(like grist) is something which creates wild experiences while also being a unique form of expression. This is something Timmy and Johnny focused

I would go so far as to say that PF2E as a system is awesome because it lets you do Timmy and Johnny things, and still keep up with the Spikes. PF1E is spike-city, with a little Johnny stuff, but Timmies are punished THE MOST in that system. In MTG I am undeniably a spike even if I have some tendencies towards Timmy and Johnny, but in TTRPGs I'm between Timmy and Johnny, and I like PF2E as much as I do because I can be. The game being "hard" doesn't negate that fun, funny and quirky ideas can still beat this baseline difficulty


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as "Pathfinder 2 options for dummies"


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as "Pathfinder 2 options for dummies"

Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as someone trying to start up a Pathfinder 2 game at their local Tim Hortons.


Jerdane wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as "Pathfinder 2 options for dummies"
Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as someone trying to start up a Pathfinder 2 game at their local Tim Hortons.

Either of those would likely be a more entertaining thread.


SuperBidi wrote:
Finoan wrote:
One, I don't see myself represented in any of those three categories. I am more of a thespian/casual player. I'm here for the story and character building. Do I get a category and a name too?
As I said in the first post, they are archetypes for ways of interacting with the mechanical side of the game. What is your way of interacting with the mechanical side of the game?

Having the themed character I end up with be enjoyably playable from a mechanics perspective.

SuperBidi wrote:
Finoan wrote:
I am pretty sure that my playstyle is incompatible with the 'Timmy' playstyle.
How come? If another player is building a crit oriented character, how does it negatively affects you?

If Spike or Timmy is able to build something really impressive, they are going to pressure the GM into letting them show off their build regularly. Otherwise what is the point?

And then those builds become standardized. And then the baseline. And then encounter design adjusts accordingly.

And then my thematic builds no longer meet the power standards necessary to be playable.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As much as this is a fun thought exercise, RPGs are different animal than Magic: The Gathering.

On these forums, I talk about the mechanics of the game. But if you play with me, you will find story is number one in my games. To me knowing the mechanics well makes you a better DM, which is why I try to know the mechanics well including how to optimize.

But when I DM, I optimize the campaign to my players. That means if someone wants to be great at Diplomacy, I'm going to work that in. I like to build out full stories for each character including friends, romantic interests, customized magic items, individual story arc, and the like.

On forums the only touchstone we really have is the game mechanics as individual campaign tastes and playstyles will differ greatly. So discussion based on individual tastes in story won't have much consensus. I don't spend much time talking about how much I prefer to focus on story and verisimilitude in my games.

Story and verisimilitude are very important to me, more important than the mechanics. I enjoy having a good handle on the mechanics because I've played with pure story DMs and their lack of understanding of mechanics can lead to frustration as players that optimize rip games apart creating an game with little challenge and tension and frustrate DMs that don't know how to mechanically challenge optimizers.

I tend to alter my playstyle according to the DM so long as they give me sufficient information to know what type of character will run best in their campaign.


Finoan wrote:

If Spike or Timmy is able to build something really impressive, they are going to pressure the GM into letting them show off their build regularly. Otherwise what is the point?

And then those builds become standardized. And then the baseline. And then encounter design adjusts accordingly.

And then my thematic builds no longer meet the power standards necessary to be playable.

Wanting to show off a build is a Johnny tendency, probably even more than a spike, and less so a Timmy. Timmy values experiences most of all

Quote:

The first question I always ask of a profile is: what does this profile want when they play Magic? Timmy wants to experience something. Timmy plays Magic because he enjoys the feeling he gets when he plays. What that feeling is will vary from Timmy to Timmy, but what all Timmies have in common is that they enjoy the visceral experience of playing. As you will see, Johnny and Spike have a destination in mind when they play. Timmy is in it for the journey.

One of the great myths about Timmy is that he is young and inexperienced. I think this comes from the fact that a non-Timmy (particularly a Spike) looking at a Timmy play reads his choices as those of inexperience. Why else would he play overcosted fatties or coin flipping cards or cards that, simply put, aren't that good? Because Spike misses the point. Timmy plays with cards that make him happy; cards that create cool moments; cards that make him laugh; cards that allow him to hang with his friends; cards that cause him to have fun. Winning and losing isn't even really the point (although winning is fun – Timmy gets that). For Timmy, the entire reason to play is having a good time.

But fun varies greatly from player to player. This is why for each of the profiles we like to examine many of the subgroups that make up the profile. These subgroups are not an exhaustive list but rather a touch upon a few of the larger subgroups.

It's super important to put emphasis on the fact that Timmy as a "power gamer", which means something else for mtg than it does for TTRPGs, is only one kind of Timmy. A chaos deck, a coin flip deck as mentioned, or even a deck with all Merfolk, can all be Timmy decks. If we translate this to TTRPGs one of the most "Timmy" subclasses of d&d 5E would be the wild magic sorcerer for instance


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let me try and breakdown the best analogous components of TTRPGs to these magic "psychographic profiles" as they are called. The intent behind these three categories is market research and set design focused on making these different kinds of players happy. What should be focused on is motivation for playing, unfortunately the lines I'm going to draw are going to primarily be about non-roleplay aspects of this roleplaying games, and for that reason this analogy is narrow but here we go:

A Johnny's favorite part of the game is the character sheet. Making a character is the most analogous thing in these TTRPGs to deck building which is the primary fun of magic for a johnny. If TTRPGs have Johnnies they will be most excited about brewing up some unique or clever build

A Spike's favorite part of the game will be moment to moment tactical decisions. When to strike, when to move, when to take cover, what spell to use. If in magic a spike against joy from magic by being good at magic and honing their skills as a player, then it would stand to reason that the tactical aspect of this game is the Spike domain

Then we can finally get to Timmy. Timmy wants to get the deck of many things, turn into a T Rex, play as a raccoon, or whatever. I met a player who played a kitsune fire-only kineticist and did not want to take any other elements to round out the build, why? They loved the idea of the Fox and they just thought fire was cool. A Timmy doesn't care about expressing things on the character sheet as much as the Johnny would, and does not care is their build or tactics are suboptimal, they're here to have fun, to hang out with friends and to play characters they love. Shoot them fire blasts because fire is cool

Timmy of the profiles seems to me to be the most likely to be huge into roleplaying a character, and because this isn't Magic: the Gathering, applying Timmy to this game becomes overly broad and probably describes a lot of us! And don't be fooled, wanting to play a wizard because you like wizards, and liking that wizards prep spells and have to think ahead can sound Spike-y, but that reasoning is Timmy reasoning

(Can you all tell I love magic?)


I think PF2e is a very Timmy game because it's a game where dice rolls matter. In other games, there's a lot of skew in base stats such that it's very easy to end up not being able to do anything if you get matched into the wrong monster. But not in PF2e (except wisps, screw wisps). That's very valuable to Timmys because of all the player profiles they hate the idea they are actually incapable of doing something that looked possible.

I GM for Timmys and one thing that pops up a lot is that critting (or just hitting on a low probability roll) feels good to them. Flurry of Blows and Hunted Shot/Twin Takedown are classic Timmy actions because they can maximize number of rolls, as are Animal Companions. At higher levels, AoE spells and stuff like Whirlwind Strike get a lot of Timmy cred; anything that maximizes the number of dice rolled and potential crits. Surprisingly, these kind of Timmys tend to prefer number of effects over power - critting a Demoralize is exactly as good as critting a pick Strike, and Ignition is extra cool because it comes with a second effect they can be reminded of turn after turn.

For Timmys who like big damage, I find they want consistent big damage, so they shy away from crit fishing and towards large flat numbers. Barbarian is a winner here, and I suspect Inventor and Thaumaturge will do well. They also like the two action add a weapon dice type abilities and will try to use them even if its less favourable.

Basically there are lots of Timmys and PF2e is actually good for several kinds.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jerdane wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as "Pathfinder 2 options for dummies"
Whenever I see this thread title, it comes across to me as someone trying to start up a Pathfinder 2 game at their local Tim Hortons.

And now I want to know what part of Golarion is most like Canada. And if they have Timbits.


AestheticDialectic wrote:
Timmy of the profiles seems to me to be the most likely to be huge into roleplaying a character

I definitely like your post, but this part is one I strongly disagree with. It looks very much like Stormwind fallacy to me. If Timmies are less into mechanics than Spikes and Johnnies, it doesn't mean they are more into flavor. I'm a Johnny/Spike and I can assure you my characters are extremely flavorful. Being a Johnny, Spike or Timmy is only about the mechanical part of the game, they are not "psychographic profiles" linked to the roleplay part of the game (as Magic doesn't have such part). I agree with Deriven that a discussion about the non-mechanical part of the game would be extremely hard to conduct as experiences and expectations are extremely wide in the domain.

As a side note, like your player, I've designed mono-element Kineticists just to discover that it's extremely unoptimized (and even at some point not really possible as there are not enough choices you can make) and it's one of the reasons I dislike the class. And I'm absolutely not a Timmy, quite the opposite I tend to dislike big effects and have a strong inclination towards finesse.

Ryangwy wrote:
Basically there are lots of Timmys and PF2e is actually good for several kinds.

Very interesting point. I agree that making a lot of rolls is definitely a Timmy thing so I should add that to Timmy abilities.

About your Timmies (if you allow me to call your players that way), how do they feel when enemies roll their saves against their AoE spells? I personally would have prefered to roll the dice myself as I feel it robs me of my effect, hence my question.


OceanshieldwolPF 2.5 wrote:

I think there needs to be a tacit acceptance of the premise of the thread for those that largely agree with the premise. Regardless of teamwork aspects, there is a value in identifying mechanical approaches to combat and effectiveness.

Personally it isn’t my cup of tea. And I would give serious side-eye to any Fighter “just happening” to wield a pick. It’s pretty ridiculous. “Oh great Black Fang, I had you from my father and he from his father and he from his father before him. Ever have I had your happenstancily awesome mechanical greatness at my side, and truly you are a not-at-all-ridiculous looking weapon, sung about in many many ballads and depicted countless times in popular culture. Yea, though thou be niche, thy fell rulings mean I should swing you with abandon. Find the weak spots in yonder dragon. Swing mightily Black Fang!

But folks like to wrap pretty convincing and playable verisimilitudinous stories about…all manner of things. So, where they want to chat about combat and effectiveness, I say let them have at it.

Military Picks were real weapons, for instance the Bec du Corbin or the Horseman's Pick, also most Warhammers had a spike on the reverse to use as a pick against armour, as did polaxes, and some pole arms.

Big spike on a stick is a pretty widespread solution to your battlefield can opening needs.


I’m absolutely aware of picks, military picks, bec de corbins etc. I spent a few hours today with a hand mattock that has a pick end on the back to clear my back slope and did the same yesterday. I do a lot of gardening work, and that tool is pretty much in constant demand. So I nominally have quite a bit of real life “pick wielding”. The pick end is great for those gnarly roots that go straight down that are hard to chop with the mattock end. Picks? Those things are absolutely deadly. I’m not disputing that they are real, were used militarily or are not deadly. Especially if the “can” has no “can” and is just flesh. Similarly, I once put a garden fork straight through my non-steel capped boot at toe level. The look on me ma’s face! Luckily it only split the webbing between my big toe and the next. So yep, forks are pretty deadly, and they have been used militarily too. The old agricultural flail. Hunting spear. Humans make some pretty nifty tools.

Still gonna give serious side eye to a Fighter “just happening” to have a pick. I’ll make a character with a pick one day. They are super deadly.


Surely classes like Barbarians and Fighters are great Timmy picks? They're tough, they hit hard, and their skillset is concentrated enough that they feel absolutely incredible at the things they do. Psychics are probably what you'd want for a Timmy caster, and even some Kineticists I think cater towards Timmies, especially fire kins.

I think it's also worth mentioning that the ivory tower design of MtG is something Paizo have deliberately avoided applying to PF2e, and to its significant benefit. Paizo doesn't seem to want to segregate its playerbase along arbitrary lines or reward some disproportionately over others for exploiting certain mechanics, which is why simple builds perform just as well as more complex builds, and why even the simplest of character concepts still aren't one-note. This may not entirely satisfy some self-styled Johnnies who want to soar above everyone else by exploiting the right mechanics like they could in 1e, but it does mean everyone gets to play on the same level playing field (and, let's face it, the process of discovery only goes so far in the age of the internet, where broken combos are made publicly known pretty much as soon as any new content releases).

Another important distinction is that the whole Timmy/Johnny/Spike distinction tends to be made in a vacuum, and tends to be a very self-focused playstyle each time: when discussing each respective build, it's pretty much always a Timmy, Johnny, or Spike constructing their own build, with little cooperative interaction with anyone else. This might make more sense for a competitive card game, but in a cooperative tabletop roleplaying game, it's a model that isolates players and their character decisions from one another. Again, PF2e avoids this by having the strength of a party come mainly from cooperation, so playstyles that are normally niche and focused on lots of internal synergy, like crit-fishing, are instead a core part of how players work with one another to maximize their collective effectiveness. I'd go as far as to say that there's a fourth archetypal player in the mix who's all about interacting cooperatively with others and making them more effective, which is a crucial playstyle to take into account in any team game, but that's not a necessary addition to make to an imaginary roster that applies far more to competitive card games than it does to tabletop RPGs in the first place.


AestheticDialectic wrote:

Let me try and breakdown the best analogous components of TTRPGs to these magic "psychographic profiles" as they are called. The intent behind these three categories is market research and set design focused on making these different kinds of players happy. What should be focused on is motivation for playing, unfortunately the lines I'm going to draw are going to primarily be about non-roleplay aspects of this roleplaying games, and for that reason this analogy is narrow but here we go:

A Johnny's favorite part of the game is the character sheet. Making a character is the most analogous thing in these TTRPGs to deck building which is the primary fun of magic for a johnny. If TTRPGs have Johnnies they will be most excited about brewing up some unique or clever build

A Spike's favorite part of the game will be moment to moment tactical decisions. When to strike, when to move, when to take cover, what spell to use. If in magic a spike against joy from magic by being good at magic and honing their skills as a player, then it would stand to reason that the tactical aspect of this game is the Spike domain

Then we can finally get to Timmy. Timmy wants to get the deck of many things, turn into a T Rex, play as a raccoon, or whatever. I met a player who played a kitsune fire-only kineticist and did not want to take any other elements to round out the build, why? They loved the idea of the Fox and they just thought fire was cool. A Timmy doesn't care about expressing things on the character sheet as much as the Johnny would, and does not care is their build or tactics are suboptimal, they're here to have fun, to hang out with friends and to play characters they love. Shoot them fire blasts because fire is cool

Timmy of the profiles seems to me to be the most likely to be huge into roleplaying a character, and because this isn't Magic: the Gathering, applying Timmy to this game becomes overly broad and probably describes a lot of us! And don't be fooled, wanting to play a wizard because you like wizards, and...

I don't think that it is that great an idea to describe these as players but rather - these are 3 aspects of the game that people enjoy. For me it is yes I enjoy that, yes very much so - I've been to 2 MTG world championships, and sometimes I'm into themes for a fun social multiplayer match.


SuperBidi wrote:


Ryangwy wrote:
Basically there are lots of Timmys and PF2e is actually good for several kinds.

Very interesting point. I agree that making a lot of rolls is definitely a Timmy thing so I should add that to Timmy abilities.

About your Timmies (if you allow me to call your players that way), how do they feel when enemies roll their saves against their AoE spells? I personally would have prefered to roll the dice myself as I feel it robs me of my effect, hence my question.

I think it depends on the effects - a pure damage spell might feel slightly worse for the same distribution of rolls, but if there's some crazy crit fail effect it might be even more fun to see the GM's nat 1 do them in. Fear 3 in particular - sending enemies fleeing for one round is a hit with my cleric player (admittedly that guy also loves making his fellow players roll saves...)


Anycase, Timmies want to experience, Johnnies want to express, Spikes want to prove, I think these are broadly applicable and covers pretty much every aspect of games. How they manifest between games, of course, is very different, but it's important to remember that even for MtG, griefers and stallers are Timmies too.

I don't think teamwork adds a new dimension to things - I'd say that, in general, for TTRPGs Timmies are the least concerned about teamwork, though if an individual Timmy's jam is teamwork then they're all for it. Johnnies love the increased amount of weird s*&& that can be pulled off with multiple characters, but wouldn't mind if they could do it themselves. It's Spikes, I think, for who "every +1 matter" speaks to the most, so I'd say the 'teamwork-optimal TTRPG player' is a SPike subset.


Ryangwy wrote:

Anycase, Timmies want to experience, Johnnies want to express, Spikes want to prove, I think these are broadly applicable and covers pretty much every aspect of games. How they manifest between games, of course, is very different, but it's important to remember that even for MtG, griefers and stallers are Timmies too.

I don't think teamwork adds a new dimension to things - I'd say that, in general, for TTRPGs Timmies are the least concerned about teamwork, though if an individual Timmy's jam is teamwork then they're all for it. Johnnies love the increased amount of weird s+~! that can be pulled off with multiple characters, but wouldn't mind if they could do it themselves. It's Spikes, I think, for who "every +1 matter" speaks to the most, so I'd say the 'teamwork-optimal TTRPG player' is a SPike subset.

I love the teamwork aspect, from character building and throughout the campaign. My jam is figuring out what the party needs then crafting for that space. I don't care about every +1. I care about making sure my party can complete the campaign in as efficient manner as possible


I’d say the big hit/big crit martials are definitely timmies as others have said, along with high impact/limited resource blaster casters. I’d also throw in untamed form as very timmyish (as others have stated), along with animal companions, eidolons, and summon heavy builds - inefficient turns to set up an attack from you and your army of minions or your tag team duo feels like a Timmy move. A wrestler build to suplex a dragon is another ridiculous, visually impactful Timmy move.

A crit fishing fighter with slam down, hammer weapon group specialization, and eventually tactical reflexes feels like another Timmy martial build. Hit with a maul, knock them prone, then have two reactive strikes to crit and knock them prone again. And stay down!

Timmies builds in mtg also often spend the entire game doing nothing to set up their giant, win if this lives lose if it dies creature or spell. So if I personally wanted to really Timmy up a build I’d go for an untamed form / animal companion focused Druid build (what’s better than mauling them with a bear? Mauling them with TWO bears) and cap it off with the Timmyest spell in existence, Summon Kaiju! What’s that? You have a Tarrasque? Well I’ve got a Tarrasque AND TWO BEARS!

Side note: while I agree most kineticist builds aren’t actually very Timmyish, mono fire can get fairly close. Fiery body + flying flame + elemental blast + thermal nimbus + crit junction fire + impulse junction + aura junction for a zillion fire damage is a bunch of set up, a huge pile of fire damage, and folds entirely against a fire immune enemy without the fire trait. Timmy city.

And mono element kineticist builds are cool and fun! You gotta remember that you get access to all the composite impulses through elemental overlap as well, though non fire builds are often forced further into the generalist camp since you have to take more of the utility feats - mitigatable by archetypes if you like. Obviously I’m biased though :P


SuperBidi wrote:
AestheticDialectic wrote:
Timmy of the profiles seems to me to be the most likely to be huge into roleplaying a character

I definitely like your post, but this part is one I strongly disagree with. It looks very much like Stormwind fallacy to me. If Timmies are less into mechanics than Spikes and Johnnies, it doesn't mean they are more into flavor. I'm a Johnny/Spike and I can assure you my characters are extremely flavorful. Being a Johnny, Spike or Timmy is only about the mechanical part of the game, they are not "psychographic profiles" linked to the roleplay part of the game (as Magic doesn't have such part). I agree with Deriven that a discussion about the non-mechanical part of the game would be extremely hard to conduct as experiences and expectations are extremely wide in the domain.

As a side note, like your player, I've designed mono-element Kineticists just to discover that it's extremely unoptimized (and even at some point not really possible as there are not enough choices you can make) and it's one of the reasons I dislike the class. And I'm absolutely not a Timmy, quite the opposite I tend to dislike big effects and have a strong inclination towards finesse.

Ryangwy wrote:
Basically there are lots of Timmys and PF2e is actually good for several kinds.

Very interesting point. I agree that making a lot of rolls is definitely a Timmy thing so I should add that to Timmy abilities.

About your Timmies (if you allow me to call your players that way), how do they feel when enemies roll their saves against their AoE spells? I personally would have prefered to roll the dice myself as I feel it robs me of my effect, hence my question.

I don't equate roleplay and flavor personally, but I will say I also simply do not agree with the folks at WotC about these "profiles" being as distinct as they claim, and I personally think everyone has a bit of each, and has each at different times and in different settings. I'm not a platonist after all, I don't believe in essences, in fact I believe that everything is in flux, nothing is static. Sometimes we are all Timmy (dinosaur pfp related)


I'm fairly sure Rosewater has acknowledged people to tend to have a mix of those traits. Nobody is 100% Timmy. But from a game design perspective, being able to say "this card will excite people who care about X" is useful.

Some of the designers have up with additional categories over the years (Vorthos is a strange name, but it refers to people who care about cards because story/lore reasons iirc).

But as far as what kind of stuff excites Timmy? Barbarians going in with giant weapons. Wizards conjuring explosions and earthquakes. The rogue backstabbing someone and dropping them in a single hit. It's the part of someone that likes big flashy things.

All three demographics might play a wizard, but they'll be drawn to different spells. Timmy is probably going to go for the blasting spells especially, while Spike is looking at the fastest way to shut an enemy down. Johnny is building his character around Bespell Weapon and plans to stand on the front line. (Vorthos is going to pick the spells most appropriate to their backstory)

Silver Crusade

Evan Tarlton wrote:


And now I want to know what part of Golarion is most like Canada. And if they have Timbits.

Land of the Mammoth Lords, of course. And unfortunately no Timbits there


AestheticDialectic wrote:
I don't equate roleplay and flavor personally, but I will say I also simply do not agree with the folks at WotC about these "profiles" being as distinct as they claim, and I personally think everyone has a bit of each, and has each at different times and in different settings. I'm not a platonist after all, I don't...

Everyone has a bit of each in them, and that's actually why it's necessary to seperate out the profiles, because in Mark Rosewater's words "players are very good at telling you if something is wrong but not why". The operative MtG example is Odysseys block, I believe - they made an entire set based on cool graveyard synergies and it bombed. Why? Because the set hinged itself almost entirely on reversing card advantage paradigm - discarding a card was worth more than drawing a card - and so there was a lot to prove but not much to experience or express (because playing 'normally' now sucks). The PF2e equivalent would be the Alchemist - balanced on knowing the entire alchemical item list, very bad at generating interesting experiences or allowing you to express a single concept well. Without the psychographs, you'd lump all 3 into a single basket of 'enjoy' and get really lost as to what needs patching and what doesn't - god forbid they raise the ceiling of the Alchemist by giving it a powerful but fiddly mechanic involving, say, hand economy and splash, but do nothing to make playing and of the subclasses feel mechanically distinct or give it the ability to consistently do something. Doubling down on the one psychograph it already appeals to is not a good idea.


FreneticKineticAscetic wrote:
So if I personally wanted to really Timmy up a build I’d go for an untamed form / animal companion focused Druid build (what’s better than mauling them with a bear? Mauling them with TWO bears) and cap it off with the Timmyest spell in existence, Summon Kaiju! What’s that? You have a Tarrasque? Well I’ve got a Tarrasque AND TWO BEARS!

I think this is it (and not just because of my name). While I may not be 100% Timmy, when I want a character that makes a memorable scene, it's when my kobold druid decides to finally show that he really is a dragon. And it's not just mechanics or RP. You can damned well bet a Timmy will replace his little mini with a HUGE GOLD DRAGON on the table.

Are the polymorphed stats just descent? Sure. Can a same level fighter crit me to death? Yeah. But no one is going to forget having a HUGE GOLD DRAGON on the battlemap.


Dubious Scholar wrote:


Some of the designers have up with additional categories over the years (Vorthos is a strange name, but it refers to people who care about cards because story/lore reasons iirc).

Vorthos/Melvin is a second axis for player psychographics. The distinction is important because psychographics on the same axis inevitably eat into each other, but those on different axis don't. If you're a Timmy/Spike primarily, you're less a Timmy than a pure Timmy and less a Spike than a pure Spike, since you get enjoyment from both excitement and challenges and don't need as much of either, but a Melvin/Timmy can be fully Timmy and fully Melvin because the two don't tap into the same part.

The division for those is mechanical - Vorthos want mechanics to reflect the fiction, while Melvin want mechanics to do interesting things (I hope you can see both why these conflict and why they don't with the initial 3). Moreso than Timmy/Johnny/Spike, I think Vorthos/Melvin expresses itself at the system level rather than individual class design. I thin 3.PF1 is a very Vorthos system - things like PCs and NPCs all having the same levels, such that you can have both a PC and NPC gain a level in wizard identically (regardless of it's a good idea), or the random stat roll centered at a person with +0 for everything. The mechanics reflect the fiction. Meanwhile, D&D4e is a Melvin system - monsters and PCs having roles that are not equivalent, and how each role is given a consistent set of tools to pull it off, solo monsters and how they interact with status effects and the like, marking, all these are cool interlocking mechanical design... that are purely mechanical and don't reflect some absolute reality of the fiction.

Needless to say, as anyone who ever found a +1 longsword on a guy dealing 2d8 damage can tell, PF2e leans Melvin. Not that it's a bad thing! That said, the Guardian shows Paizo still has Vorthos considerations.


pauljathome wrote:
Evan Tarlton wrote:


And now I want to know what part of Golarion is most like Canada. And if they have Timbits.

Land of the Mammoth Lords, of course. And unfortunately no Timbits there

Go a bit further south, however, and you might be able to pick up some Timbats in Ustalav, or perhaps curve over to Numeria and satisfy your cravings with some Timbots.


Ryangwy wrote:
That said, the Guardian shows Paizo still has Vorthos considerations.

If the flavor of the Guardian is "Face McShooty", maybe


AestheticDialectic wrote:
Ryangwy wrote:
That said, the Guardian shows Paizo still has Vorthos considerations.
If the flavor of the Guardian is "Face McShooty", maybe

I meant in the sense they didn't flat out make a taunt mechanic, which is a very Vorthos concern


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Ooh do me, which (single or two) do you think I am.

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Pathfinder 2 options for Timmies All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.