|
I'm GMing for a group of 4 players, only one of whom has prior TTRPG experience (and that was just a handful of 5e sessions in grad school). We are playing in person, and I was expecting them to have trouble keeping track of everything. But actually they've all been really good at it. Pathbuilder keeps track of most of it for them, and they haven't had any issues filling in the gaps. We've even had a no-TTRPG-experience guest player drop in and play a (pre-made) druid without any issues. I think this speaks really highly of the system — it's pretty easy to just pick up on the fly in my experience.
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2022 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
A lot of the stuff is just fairly self explanatory which is very nice even as a ttg vet. It's a good system! Now give me starfinder 2e, paizo
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2022 23:10
|
|
|
Can someone TLDR what makes p2e so much more complicated/crunchy whatever than 5e? Because p2e just doesn't seem that complex to me? I've only played Fighter/Rogues so far though. Like I've got a friend who showed some interest in getting a ttg going, but refused to do pathfinder because it's way to complicated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Can someone TLDR what makes p2e so much more complicated/crunchy whatever than 5e? So, a simple and ubiquitous example is degrees of success. In 5e, things either succeed or fail - bounded accuracy means that the general numbers involved don’t change too much from 1-20, and attacks will crit on a nat 20. In pf2e, the target numbers escalate pretty dramatically from 1-20 (as do the size of your bonuses to your roll), and you need to be cognizant if results that are -10 and +10 from the success mark because crit success and crit failure is a thing on dozens of different rolls. Now, this isn’t that complicated or crunchy. But it is definitely more so than 5e. Similarly, character building in pathfinder just involves making many many more choices over the course of building and leveling a character compared to 5e - and each of those choices in turn is going to be linked to a table with ten or a dozen or a hundred choices. There’s just a lot more there, for better and worse. This is further compounded by the bad reputation of the Mathfinder 1e/3.5 days which were even crunchier still with a ton more interactions and systemic complexity. A lot of the criticisms from those days no longer apply, but when we’re talking about someone who is hard disinterested based purely on reputation, it’s likely a factor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 00:40
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Can someone TLDR what makes p2e so much more complicated/crunchy whatever than 5e? Pathfinder 1e was a lot worse because it was based on DnD3.5 which went for a full on "the rules are the actual physics of the game world" approach. PF2e has somewhat inherited this approach but tried to make it more streamlined 'behind the scenes'. This means, for example, that basically nothing is 'per encounter', or 'per short rest'... instead it 'requires a 10 minute activity to recharge', e.g. the Refocus action, or the Repair action to repair a damaged shield. Otherwise there's a couple of big differences that can add to initial complexity: - No adv/disadv, instead you need to track the numeric bonuses - three-action system and the multiple-attack-penalty that comes with it - character creation needing a bunch of choices At level 1 in DnD5e you're making basically three choices - stat allocation, race and class. In PF2e you're adding a bunch of feats on top of that, which is especially daunting if you're looking at Pathbuilder or AON and so you're seeing every possible non-core option too. Once you do have a character, though, it's pretty simple.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 00:43
|
|
|
3.5/PF1e did not have "the rules are the physics of the game world," that's a common misconception but it's absolutely not a physics-simulationist system, far from it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
Ah ok I can see if dnd doesn't have like ok I'm doing my second attack on a flat footed opponent who's behind cover etc etc that that could get sorta confusing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 02:31
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Can someone TLDR what makes p2e so much more complicated/crunchy whatever than 5e? Well, for a simple example, take a look at the Pathfinder 2e fighter class table and the number of moving parts you have at level 10 (ancestry feats, class abilities, class feats, skill feats, skill proficiencies, various items that will often have a daily or encounter ability, etc), and compare to how much more limited the set of abilities and choices a level 10 fighter in 5e will have. Even the simplest PF 2e character will have a noticeably higher complexity floor than a simple 5e character, and will have at least a handful of situational things to actively choose between in combats rather than "move and attack and bonus attack". Roadie fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Sep 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 03:14
|
|
|
i've never played 5e, but pf2e is orders of magnitude less complex than pf1e. it seems complicated if you're looking at the rulebook for the first time, but once you play the game it's incredibly straightforward
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 04:11
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Ruby Phoenix I've never used the chase system before, what's broken about it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 06:34
|
|
|
Procrastine posted:I've never used the chase system before, what's broken about it? Part of it is that it's generally designed with the assumption of characters on foot with no extraordinary movement abilities and approximately equal base speeds, is my understanding?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 14:58
|
|
|
The Golux posted:Part of it is that it's generally designed with the assumption of characters on foot with no extraordinary movement abilities and approximately equal base speeds, is my understanding? Basically yes. The big problem is that there’s no mapping from “chase points” to actual ranges or anything else in the system. If the PCs want to do basically anything other than follow the target and use the standard listed ways to defeat obstacles, it’s pure handwavium, which is jarring compared to the rest of PF2e. Also air chases and combats can be really screwed up if anyone has a weapon that knocks prone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 16:09
|
|
|
Arivia posted:An item is anything that's not a one-time use consumable, like a potion or an elixir. This is one of those cases where it's much easier to suss this out looking at the printed rulebook since it's got nice tables breaking down consumable versus permanent items by level. Finally got back to my books to look at this stuff, and it looks like I'd be better off taking the lump sum and buying scrolls since I'm playing a Sorcerer? I certainly don't need half plate or an everburning torch after all. There doesn't seem to be much data around on what equipment is useful for what yet that I can find and it's a bit vexing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 19:12
|
|
|
Hunter Noventa posted:Finally got back to my books to look at this stuff, and it looks like I'd be better off taking the lump sum and buying scrolls since I'm playing a Sorcerer? I certainly don't need half plate or an everburning torch after all. I don't know what level you are but spellcasters really want a magical staff and a Shadow Signet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 19:26
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I don't know what level you are but spellcasters really want a magical staff and a Shadow Signet. Based on previous posts, 2.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 19:54
|
|
|
what do those do in 2e? Do you just mean a staff that is a magical weapon or an actual casting staff? And as a 1e player not familiar with shadow signet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
The Golux posted:what do those do in 2e? Do you just mean a staff that is a magical weapon or an actual casting staff? And as a 1e player not familiar with shadow signet. staves are one of the main items casters use and they basically give you extra spells Shadow SIgnet: https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=1073 changes a spell attack to a reflex or fort dc instead, i haven't seen this item before and that is insanely good
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 20:10
|
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:staves are one of the main items casters use and they basically give you extra spells Ah that does sound good. I suppose if staves work similarly to 1e they must have slashed the price on them if they're desirable now, they were good in 1e but generally horrifically expensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 20:12
|
|
|
Yes, they are as low as item level 3, are nearly all common meaning they can be found in most towns/cities, and are affordable all throughout a campaign. Staff of Fire is only 60gp
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 20:17
|
|
|
Generally all the 2e magic item stuff has rebalanced costs so anything up to level 15 items is merely "really expensive", and it's only past that point that things escalate from "mortgage for a fancy house" up towards "small country's GDP". It fits the thematics of the setting a lot better than the clumsy pretending of the 1e rules that all magic items are inherently ultra-rare. For example, a type IV bag of holding is 2,400 gp, which is the same cost as 80 suits of full plate armor or hiring an unskilled labor force of 65 people for a full year—pricey, but you can no longer break the economy by selling one in the wrong place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 20:34
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I don't know what level you are but spellcasters really want a magical staff and a Shadow Signet. Yeah, it's level 2 to start, so its a single level 1 item. So it really only benefits martials or people who can't see in darkness to take an item over the gold. I filtered the AoN equipment list and there's a lot of neat circumstantial items, but nothing of much use for a Sorcerer at that level.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
Are all the ongoing campaign foundry modules as good as the Beginner's Box? Looking at this, there's like, 0 prep work needed to run this aside from making stairway connectors from scene to scene and reading ahead a little bit. Very tempted to run Blood Lords if so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 17:28
|
|
|
I've seen the Abomination Vaults and Outlaws of Alkenstar ones, and they're both very good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
I know some people who are playing Blood lords on foundry and it's apparently excellent
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 18:00
|
|
|
I've been running Outlaws of Alkenstar on foundry for some goons and the Foundry module makes it pretty easy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 18:20
|
|
|
The Paizo Foundry APs are so good it almost makes me wish my group would quit playing in person again lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
The only downside is, now that I've seen those Foundry APs, I don't want to do any non-Foundry AP campaigns ever again. They've spoiled me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
I've been playing Blood Lords on Foundry and it does seem to be very well set up for the GM.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:Are all the ongoing campaign foundry modules as good as the Beginner's Box? Looking at this, there's like, 0 prep work needed to run this aside from making stairway connectors from scene to scene and reading ahead a little bit. Alkenstar is great but far from perfect. A few encounters don't have maps and it assumes previous experience DMing because stuff can get a bit crazy. Considering the module is designed for advanced / high complexity classes I think it is OK if everyone knows what they are doing. Abomination Vaults is presented in such a way to mostly allow the GM to wing it. Being a dungeon helps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 20:20
|
|
|
Enos Cabell posted:The Paizo Foundry APs are so good it almost makes me wish my group would quit playing in person again lol I'm glad one of my group lives out of town from the rest of us so we have a good excuse to keep using Foundry. I'm a Kingmaker backer and I am extremely excited to see what the Foundry module ends up looking like, despite the fact that half my pledge was the Pawn Box and Maps and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 23:04
|
|
|
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6si5l?Kineticist-Playtest-Analysis Doesn't sound too bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 12:37
|
|
|
Man that playtest analysis is a great window into what makes PF2e such a well designed system, particularly because right now you can compare it directly to the shitshow that is D&D One
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
Want to switch my group off of Lancer and the system vote ultimately landed on this. Haven't read the rules yet but I've done some casual flipping through the book and it seems cool and I am excited. What I would like to know is how does this game actually deal with caster supremacy? The op says, "It also gets rid of Caster supremacy. spellcasters are still extremely strong, but a lot of their strength is in their utility now. The fighter, surprisingly enough is probably the biggest damage class in the game, which feels amazing." but that's the actual problem; linear martials versus quadratic casters. Doesn't matter if the fighter is the highest dps, dps was never why casters were strong to begin with. It was their monopoly on utility and capacity to trivialize encounters with save or die/suck spells/magical means of evading the environment (fly, knock, summon monster, etc.). At a casual flip through, it's hard for me to parse exactly what actually stymies casters. I have a hunch it's that all of the actually busted utility spells are uncommon/rare/rituals so you largely don't suffer from the wizard or cleric always being a days rest away from having the easiest answer. I know focus spells are talked about a fair bit and they do seem to fit the mold (like monk getting access to quivering palm and ethereal jaunt, both of which are the kind of thing I'm talking about so it's good) but I also didn't see any fighter or rogue focus spells. Is a lot of utility just shunted off into skill feats? Do a lot of class and ancestry feats bolt on spell-like things to fighter and rogue? I see wands still exist, what exactly stops some nerd with a wand of summon monster 1 from invalidating the rogue as a trapfinder?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
Failboattootoot posted:Want to switch my group off of Lancer and the system vote ultimately landed on this. Haven't read the rules yet but I've done some casual flipping through the book and it seems cool and I am excited. What I would like to know is how does this game actually deal with caster supremacy? The op says, "It also gets rid of Caster supremacy. spellcasters are still extremely strong, but a lot of their strength is in their utility now. The fighter, surprisingly enough is probably the biggest damage class in the game, which feels amazing." but that's the actual problem; linear martials versus quadratic casters. Doesn't matter if the fighter is the highest dps, dps was never why casters were strong to begin with. It was their monopoly on utility and capacity to trivialize encounters with save or die/suck spells/magical means of evading the environment (fly, knock, summon monster, etc.). In short: Casters get a lot less spells per day, and the power level of the spells across the board is majorly decreased. Compare PF1 Haste to PF2 Haste, for example. Out of combat utility and mobility took the hardest hits in terms of nerfs imho. Even spells like Detect Magic function completely differently and are much less powerful in adventuring. At the same time skills got majorly buffed and you can do a lot more things without having casting. Other than the Bard casters aren’t a big issue, and even Bards are not anywhere near as broken as a like Arcanist or Wizard in PF1. They’re just noticeably better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 17:45
|
|
|
The game is also designed for high level play. There is alot less save or suck and save or die. All the usual suspects have the Incapacitation trait so they won't shut out your big bads. https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=93 Rogues are also no longer the trap monkey. Its more of a thing anyone can do. Alot of traps use other skills to disarm. One in Abomination Vault lets you disarm it with intimidation. For most of my experience, casters are more debuff focused and AOE. Summons are ok but they are usually a level or two below the party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
Casters also can't use spells to invalidate skills. See Pass Without Trace and Knock, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
Also there's a general level one feat that anyone can take with appropriate skill training for using magic items regardless of class: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=857 I think in general it's not entirely that casters are weaker (though they are) as much as other classes having a lot more combat options in terms of either applying their own debuffs, grapples/grabs/trips/shoves, or other archetype based things. I think martials in general have better choices for picking up a cool free archetype that works with their stats more than most casters do. A second casting free archetype doesn't really do much for you as a sorceror, and you aren't going to want to take something that puts you in melee, but there are far more options you can feasibly take as a rogue or fighter to pick up some specific utility you like for your character.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
also flying takes an action to maintain, not having the move-action distinction means that maintaining flight fucks with your ability to do things badly, especially since most spells are two-action for a much shakier chance of success because of tighter numbers. there also aren't really spells that Just Work, No Save like 3.5 forcecage or force too many saves to not do something like 3.5 prismatic <blank>
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
Summons and Pets requiring your actions to use and sharing your MAP make them alot weaker. In my last game we had a mage summon dragons using his highest level slot and even then, they didn't contribute a ton.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Mechayahiko posted:Summons and Pets requiring your actions to use and sharing your MAP They don't share MAP, except Summoner eidelon and mounts
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2022 18:53
|
|
