CapnZapp
Legend
Ah yes, getting blinded by the awesome Striking runes! Yes, been there, done that.Can you perhaps specify an exact magical item comparison so I can understand the difference between a 5E item and a PF2 item? So far my players like PF2 items. They like that they changed magic weapons from a flat bonus to damage and hit to the potency and striking runes. They like how holy items tend to do more damage against fiends. Really makes it seem like a holy sword. They also like you can cast a spell from a magic item and not have it take your concentration slot like 5E. There seems to be a lot more variability, strategy, and usefulness with PF2 items.
But there really is only two categories of magic items in PF2.
Fundamental runes, and pretty much optional items.
The fundamental runes have a high impact and sure, they are not subtle or boring. Still, they encourage the 3E/PF1 view where any humanoid NPC has to have them, or it feels "unrealistic" why it should deal level-appropriate damage. It should be the GMs decision whether any tool used by a NPC is lootable or not. Plus, and I guess this is the more important caveat, their use is already factored in by the game. Meaning that you're entitled to getting them. Meaning that not getting them is a punishment, rather than getting them is a reward.
While I dislike how 5E monsters are designed with no items (feats, m/c) in mind, I do like how 5E items are unadulterated rewards.
Back to PF2 - other items, not so much. Sure cold or acid runes, but note how the only place where you can be generous as a GM is damage - and only martial damage to boot!
There's a truckload of items giving a +1 bonus to this specific thing here or one less penalty to that thing there. Far too many items are simply not worth the effort of keeping track of their use. At least a static +1 bonus to a skill can be jotted down on your character sheet and then forgotten about.
What there is not, however, is transcending items - everything (including damage runes) feels so "already calculated in". For instance, I would be surprised if even a single of my own items from my Tomb of Annihilation campaign would be "legit" within the PF2 framework.
Then PF2 has talismans. Yuck.
Sure 5E has its missteps too. Any item that gives an absolute benefit is bad for the game. 5E has items and feats that say "you can't become" surprised or tracked or prone or whatever. That's just lazy game design, that short-circuits certain story developments for no reason. Here Paizo is infinitely better, since it understands that anytime you say "it's impossible" in a level-based game, what you really should say "the DC is high". Instead of saying you can't be this or that, give a high counteract level so that yes, against low-level effects you can indeed not be this or that, but that against a high-level effect your protection isn't so absolute any more.
But overall, 5E magic items can be whatever you want them to be. I liked that in 3E, and I don't like how PF2 actively locks down items for me.
Zapp
tl;dr: there's this brilliant example in the 5E DMG that throws the difference into stark contrast:
If you let a level 1 character get a ring of invisibility in PF2, he would... hang on, wait a minute - there is no ring of invisibility in PF2!That said, rarity shouldn't get in the way of your campaign's story.
If you want a ring of invisibility to fall into the hands of
a 1 st-level character, so be it. No doubt a great story will
arise from that event.
As a GM, I interpret this as the game not trusting me with handing out an always-on invisibility item. Paizo knows best. Better make every item as limited and conditional as possible, so you can have as many variations of the same effect as possible (you can get a permanent item that gives you invisibility, but conditions apply: you can only use three times a day, you need to remember how many times a day you've used it, it only applies if you wear light armor, and you'll give up one out of three armor rune slots for the privilege) which is exactly what went wrong with 4E items: too damn many limitations.
It really can't be stated any clearer.
Last edited: