Pathfinder 2e: Worth the hassle to learn it?

[WhiteShark]

Thanks for the resources. I think what I’m looking for right now more so than character building is dynamic combat rules, i.e. anything to discourage just standing still and attacking repeatedly. This might just come down to how I structure/present my encounters.

4e achieves this by giving daily and encounter powers that are more effective than basic attacks as well as lots of forced movement powers to shuffle around actors on the battlefield.

[WaterMage]

gritty low level settings.

Gritty and low level are two completely different things. IMO, playing Dark Sun at lv 13 is much more "gritty" than playing 5e at lv 3.

4e achieves this by giving daily and encounter powers that are more effective than basic attacks as well as lots of forced movement powers to shuffle around actors on the battlefield.

4e = wow

Everyone plays the same way. This is **** imo.

That said, the main problem with casters in PF1e/3.5e at high levels is that they are too versatile. For example, in Warhammer Fantasy, human casters must specialize in ONE wind of magic. You can be either a high level Grey Wizard using illusion to make your enemies kill themselves or a Blight Wizard being a human fire artillery, you can't be both, don't matter how strong you are. And magic is much more dangerous in Warhammer. In 40k - Dark Heresy, there is also pyromancer, biomancers, telekineticist, only guys like Magnus the Red can use multiple disciplines at the same time. Same thing in World of Darkness and GURPS. GURPS magic is divided in "colleges", and in World of Darkness, Tremere vampires has a lot of paths to specialize and the really nasty powerful spells are all rituals. Mages have a sphere to specialize into.

[WhiteShark]

Everyone plays the same way. This is **** imo.

This isn't true. Yes, the classes are largely structured the same way internally (at-wills, encounters, dailies), but the specific powers and capabilities they receive are very different, so in practice, they don't play the same way at all.

[WaterMage]

Everyone plays the same way. This is **** imo.

This isn't true. Yes, the classes are largely structured the same way internally (at-wills, encounters, dailies), but the specific powers and capabilities they receive are very different, so in practice, they don't play the same way at all.

I mean, in the sense that everything is around managing cooldowns and enemies have ridiculous high HP.

I like RPGs like Dark Heresy, you character got hit by a bolter in his left arm? He is dead or lost an arm and will need a bionic. Because that is what happens in 40k if a regular human is hit by a bolter. 4e was designed with ZERO regard in consistency of mechanics and lore. This is why is trash.

And PF2e started to copy this 4e BS. Even have final fantasy style summons.

[Luckmann]

If you're interested in PF2 for its mechanics, I recommend playing D&D 4e instead. If you're interested in Pathfinder because it has a large playerbase, I recommend PF1 instead. PF2 felt very mechanically constrained and boring compared to D&D 4e.

PF2 is the game nobody asked for. It doesn't have the breadth and width and depth of 3.X's (which includes PF1) toolboxing. It doesn't have the clean and fomulaic boardgame nature of 4e. It doesn't have the ease-of-use and hand-holding of 5e. Yet it has all of the fundamental issues of all these, having taken inspiration from all.

There are many things I can criticize about all of these, but even though I detest both 4e and 5e, I can still see merit in either of them. They have aspect to them which I can recognize and respect.

This is not true for PF2.

[UltraFan123]

Methinks now that perhaps Paizo just wanted to separate themselves from 3.5 edition and their 2e was just that, because it's true that nobody was asking for this newer edition.

[Unhelpful Contrarian]

Methinks now that perhaps Paizo just wanted to separate themselves from 3.5 edition and their 2e was just that, because it's true that nobody was asking for this newer edition.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe it was said that Pazio wasn’t In the best financial situation at near the tail end PF 1e and 2e was a Hail Mary attempt to bring in more money which ending up paying off quite well in the success of 2e

[J1M]

Everyone plays the same way. This is **** imo.

This isn't true. Yes, the classes are largely structured the same way internally (at-wills, encounters, dailies), but the specific powers and capabilities they receive are very different, so in practice, they don't play the same way at all.

I mean, in the sense that everything is around managing cooldowns and enemies have ridiculous high HP.

I like RPGs like Dark Heresy, you character got hit by a bolter in his left arm? He is dead or lost an arm and will need a bionic. Because that is what happens in 40k if a regular human is hit by a bolter. 4e was designed with ZERO regard in consistency of mechanics and lore. This is why is trash.

And PF2e started to copy this 4e BS. Even have final fantasy style summons.

It's somewhat amazing how many people incorrectly equate "hit points" to "meat". Hit points are an abstraction of many things, including endurance, luck, experience, force of will, and so on.

[UltraFan123]

Methinks now that perhaps Paizo just wanted to separate themselves from 3.5 edition and their 2e was just that, because it's true that nobody was asking for this newer edition.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe it was said that Pazio wasn’t In the best financial situation at near the tail end PF 1e and 2e was a Hail Mary attempt to bring in more money which ending up paying off quite well in the success of 2e

Oh yeah it was a commercial success, but I think what also helped to boost the sales was the massive OGL **** up of ******* of the Coast, so outraged were the tabletop players that they flocked to purchase all the physical stuff that Paizo had published for 2e, eight months worth of it iirc.

[Unhelpful Contrarian]

Methinks now that perhaps Paizo just wanted to separate themselves from 3.5 edition and their 2e was just that, because it's true that nobody was asking for this newer edition.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe it was said that Pazio wasn’t In the best financial situation at near the tail end PF 1e and 2e was a Hail Mary attempt to bring in more money which ending up paying off quite well in the success of 2e

Oh yeah it was a commercial success, but I think what also helped to boost the sales was the massive OGL **** up of ******* of the Coast, so outraged were the tabletop players that they flocked to purchase all the physical stuff that Paizo had published for 2e, eight months worth of it iirc.

It a shame they ditch 1e since I Ike the art design and AP’s a lot more then 2e but such as it is.

I know Pazio is doing a greater push for 2e related games now with even new a CRPG kickstarted, which after seeing have zero interest in.

[PixiGreen]

Not so much of a news for Paizo but a nice illustration:

The lead designer of Pathfinder has come out and said that if JD Vance ever player the game, he wants him to return his books because he doesn't want "fascists" playing Pathfinder.

[UltraFan123]

Not so much of a news for Paizo but a nice illustration:

The lead designer of Pathfinder has come out and said that if JD Vance ever player the game, he wants him to return his books because he doesn't want "fascists" playing Pathfinder.

The funniest thing is that those like him do love saying aloud "if you're a chud that plays our games then return the stuff you purchased back to us!" but after so many tweets of RPG players following his advice and requesting refunds, the coward went and deleted the tweets condemning Vance.

People like him unironically believe that the ones who made Trump win the popular vote are the extreme minority.

[rusty_shackleford]

Perfect opportunity for ACKS to send Vance a free copy

[Roderick]

Transfinder

[TheEmptyRoad]

“Republicans buy shoes too” you absolute ******* nonce. If I was Ossian Studios (they’re making the PF2e CRPG Dragon’s Demand, which will now likely flop) I would be apoplectic from rage.

[Fitz]

Really? It's just now likely that the game will flop? Are we going to ignore the fact that the game looks like monkey ****?

[Unhelpful Contrarian]

“Republicans buy shoes too” you absolute ******* nonce. If I was Ossian Studios (they’re making the PF2e CRPG Dragon’s Demand, which will now likely flop) I would be apoplectic from rage.

Man I was really excited for another Pathfinder CRPG but as soon as look the promotional art for PF2e CRPG Dragon’s Demand I was instantly concerned and the kickstarter trailer/ gameplay only cemented that fact.

[Rand]

The first iteration of "The Dragon's Demand" was a **** adventure anyway.
Badly designed and (iirc) required railroading the PCs to get the "correct" stuff to happen.

[Rand]

The adventure:
https://f.rpghq.org/zAd5duWsc9vl.pdf?n= ... Demand.pdf

[TheEmptyRoad]

Oh, well ****. I just saw there was going to be a CRPG about 2e. Still, Dumbass McFuck CEO ain’t helping matters.

[UltraFan123]

Knowing the current environment around both videogames and tabletop, a Pathfinder 2e CRPG would be a BG3 wannabe. And I mean that in a bad way.

[J1M]

This is on sale if you want to learn Pathfinder 2 via a game:



Haven't played it yet so can't vouch for it.

[rusty_shackleford]

This is on sale if you want to learn Pathfinder 2 via a game:



Haven't played it yet so can't vouch for it.

Is the mandatory encounter/rest thing from the PF2E ruleset?

[J1M]

This is on sale if you want to learn Pathfinder 2 via a game:



Haven't played it yet so can't vouch for it.

Is the mandatory encounter/rest thing from the PF2E ruleset?

I don't know, I haven't learned Pathfinder 2 yet.

[geftsu]

Contrary to many people in this thread I actually really like PF2e as a ruleset. I don't think it's nearly as hard to learn or understand as people make it out to be. I don't think I will come back to 3.5 or PF1e even if I was paid to do so. Feat taxes, chains and the very act of navigating the labyrinthine feat options in PF1e is ridiculous. Many builds devolve into picking the same feat chains for the first several levels just to make your character function on a basic level. The only thing that makes PF1e better than 2e in any way is more character building options and more content, but very often those options aren't good in the first place and you will probably still stick to picking Power Attack > Cleave > Cleaving Finish on any non-tank melee or Point-Blank Shot > Precise Shot > Deadly Aim on every ranged character.
On a side note, taking away attacks of opportunity from most creatures/classes unless they have it explicitly, was based and correct.

I feel that saying anything about the communities around the games is a moot point. Every community around tabletop games I saw or even passed through on my way to get a book or a Foundry module was incredibly lame, gay and infested/ran by commies and ******. ACKS was the only server that seemed to have mostly normal people in it. I only play solo these days, because I have no desire to interact with any people who play tabletop roleplaying games (and my friends I used to play with are across the country from me now due to reasons I will not get into).

As for what to play: there are ways to get books/foundry modules or even foundry itself without spending a dime. You can just read the books or spend an evening running some one-shot by yourself or with willing participants to see how the system works before you commit your money to it. Just play what you like and what people you know are willing to engage with.

[rusty_shackleford]

ACKS was the only server that seemed to have mostly normal people in it.

It's also the official tabletop RPG of RPGHQ

[geftsu]

official tabletop RPG of RPGHQ

What does that mean?

[rusty_shackleford]

official tabletop RPG of RPGHQ

What does that mean?

It means we think it's cool.

Also, @Irenaeus runs a play-by-post game using it

[Acrux]

And that Macris followed and/or liked something rusty posted.