Pathfinder 2 Character Sheet #3: Valeros, Human Fighter

Ted Serious · Jul 14, 2018

FitzTheRuke said:
Seems to me that the only similarity to 5e is that they both use a d20 and are fantasy RPGs in the D&D tradition. (Okay, maybe a little more than that, but not much).

All versions of D&D including Pathfinder share the fantasy Paper & Pencil RPG similarity with Pathfinder 2.

In the D&D tradition is a strong important similarity. 4e didn't stick to it and ended badly.

Pathfinder 2 is still very much in the D&D tradition. There's just already a lot more to it in playtest than in 4 years of 5e.

jmucchiello · Jul 14, 2018

So shields have 5 hardness and 1 hit point. Shouldn't a steel shield be able to take a dozen "dents". Are shield users supposed to go into dungeons with a palette of shields they drag behind them? At most levels, the first two hits against a shield will do more than 5 damage each time. And frankly, if 3rd level creatures aren't doing 10 damage in one strike frequently, the hit point economy will have changes A LOT.

HomegrownHydra · Jul 14, 2018

The designers have said that PF2 will expect the use of a grid for battle, but I'm not seeing anything in these sample PCs that would make grid combat interesting. It looks like you will want to minimize movement because moving directly reduces the number of attacks and shield use you get, and there aren't any abilities that would produce really dynamic combat. So combat looks to be a very stationary affair with everyone just standing around until their current opponent dies, and then they move to the next opponent and stand around some more. If the designers are going to expect the grid to be used, it would be nice if they actually take advantage of it.

Morrus · Jul 14, 2018

HomegrownHydra said:
The designers have said that PF2 will expect the use of a grid for battle, but I'm not seeing anything in these sample PCs that would make grid combat interesting. It looks like you will want to minimize movement because moving directly reduces the number of attacks and shield use you get, and there aren't any abilities that would produce really dynamic combat. So combat looks to be a very stationary affair with everyone just standing around until their current opponent dies, and then they move to the next opponent and stand around some more. If the designers are going to expect the grid to be used, it would be nice if they actually take advantage of it.

That’s an awesome example of glass half empty!

It looks like you will want to minimise attacks because attacking directly reduces the amount of movement you get. So combat looks to be a very dynamic affair with everybody running around until they accidentally run into a foe.

In other words, both are true. You can do either. It’s what you choose to make of it.

HomegrownHydra · Jul 14, 2018

Morrus said:
That’s an awesome example of glass half empty!

It looks like you will want to minimise attacks because attacking directly reduces the amount of movement you get. So combat looks to be a very dynamic affair with everybody running around until they accidentally run into a foe.

In other words, both are true. You can do either. It’s what you choose to make of it.

You don't win a battle by running around. Attacks are inherently worth more than movement because it's the attacks that end a battle. So the PF2 method isn't much different than Full Attacks from 3e/PF1 which similarly discouraged movement.

Deverash · Jul 14, 2018

HomegrownHydra said:
You don't win a battle by running around. Attacks are inherently worth more than movement because it's the attacks that end a battle. So the PF2 method isn't much different than Full Attacks from 3e/PF1 which similarly discouraged movement.

The more pressing reason you didn't move in PF/D&D, was attacks of opportunity. You not only lost out on 1+ attacks, but gave /them/ a free attack. If they other guy can't punish you for leaving and especially if you have a higher speed than they do, then move. You lose 1 attack, but they lose 2 to get back to be able to attack you.

You win by dealing damage to the opponets, yes. But you have also have to not lose. And all of this assumes there is nothing else going on the battle you might want to take advantage of.

Flexibility is good, even if you use it to simulate the inflexible system we have now.

Morrus · Jul 14, 2018

HomegrownHydra said:
You don't win a battle by running around. Attacks are inherently worth more than movement because it's the attacks that end a battle.

I’d argue that says more about your tactics than it does about the game rules.

Adso · Jul 14, 2018

HomegrownHydra said:
The designers have said that PF2 will expect the use of a grid for battle, but I'm not seeing anything in these sample PCs that would make grid combat interesting. It looks like you will want to minimize movement because moving directly reduces the number of attacks and shield use you get, and there aren't any abilities that would produce really dynamic combat. So combat looks to be a very stationary affair with everyone just standing around until their current opponent dies, and then they move to the next opponent and stand around some more. If the designers are going to expect the grid to be used, it would be nice if they actually take advantage of it.

That may be what it looks like to you on paper, but this is not what happens in actual play. In fact, the last event I was running demos for (a retailer thing in Chicago) the comments over and over again is how the play is more flexible and cinematic. Folks were amazed at how much movement was opened up in the game.

I love grids. I love designing interesting ones, running on them, and even designing interesting kinds of combat puzzles that utilize grid movement. I'm going to go out on a limb and say were are taking full advantage of the grid.

HomegrownHydra · Jul 14, 2018

Adso said:
That may be what it looks like to you on paper, but this is not what happens in actual play. In fact, the last event I was running demos for (a retailer thing in Chicago) the comments over and over again is how the play is more flexible and cinematic. Folks were amazed at how much movement was opened up in the game.

I love grids. I love designing interesting ones, running on them, and even designing interesting kinds of combat puzzles that utilize grid movement. I'm going to go out on a limb and say were are taking full advantage of the grid.

That's good to hear.

Charlaquin · Jul 14, 2018

Adso said:
Yeah, I'm always puzzled by folks who tell me "it looks like 5e." I like 5e. Some of my best friends made 5e. P2 is not 5e. It's a very different approach to some of the same issues.

I would bet it has a lot to do with some of the earliest information spoiled. Without any further context, phrases like “unified Proficiency system” or “encounter, exploration, and downtime modes” sound, on a very superficial level, like 5e. People often form snap judgments based on superficial details, and as they say, you only have one chance to make a first impression. Once folks had it in their heads that PF2 was going to have similarities to 5e, confirmation bias does the rest of the work from there on in.

Anyway, excellent job on the fighter! I look at this sheet and I get excited to play a PF2 fighter. As the kind of player who loves reactive play and interacting with the action economy, shield fighters just look like so much fun for me to play. I’ll probably be GMing for my playtest group, but I can’t wait for a chance to try out playing a fighter.

Pathfinder 2 Character Sheet #3: Valeros, Human Fighter

Ted Serious

First Post

jmucchiello

Hero

HomegrownHydra

Adventurer

Morrus

Well, that was fun

HomegrownHydra

Adventurer

Deverash

First Post

Morrus

Well, that was fun

Adso

First Post

HomegrownHydra

Adventurer

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Similar Threads

Related Articles