Search results

I see lots of plusses for you... what did she get out of the deal?

This is the philosophy in Kingmaker. The are 20 zones with levels attached and a whole section about how to let characters know they might be in over their head.

I don't think a hack is needed. Kingmaker looks like a good template. I'm modifying encounter tables to add even more variety, but I think it would work as is.

I used to be in this camp. However, more often than not, I find that "puching above your weight" is too often the result of op gimmicky builds, metagaming, or exploiting rules issues. In the current campaign I'm in (Way of the Wicked), we are constantly taking on challenges way above our level...

I agree. Many of the non-core classes are the best in the game.

Since this closed on foundry... Really hoping the plugins that support Kingmaker for 2e will be in foundry for that campaign's launch next spring.

I may find I am in the same boat, but since it will not have the things that frustrate me in pf1 and 5e, I'm willing to embrace a new set of problems.

O Organized play doesn't let the gm make those decisions, so most of my pf1 gming used all books. PFS did have a core only track too though. I've always been a bit of a completionist anyway which is far easier now that pdf books exist.

This is exactly what brought me back around to PF2.

For better or worse, a lot of the players I'm currently playing with are the types who'd create builds that would later become the internet power builds.

My goal is to learn foundry by then via playing and gming some pf2. Then launch into kingmaker next summer. Gives me plenty of time to spice up the hexploration even more than this edition did.

I gmed PFS games for years (close to 1000 tables) and you can't do much about broken characters in that environment. Now playing home games I'm finding people generally want to play even more broken stuff once the PFS rails are off. Been a definite turn off.

Some of the things we all hated about the math during the playtest, I've come to appreciate. Most of my worst PF1 one experiences are due to ridiculous bonus stacking. Kitsune fey-blooded sorcerers throwing around confusion in every enounter makes things boring for everyone at the table...

PF1 had codes and edicts as well. Torag in particular got softened greatly with the kill all goblins part of the dogma being removed to make room for warm fuzzy goblins accepted by society. Fluff-wise goblins becoming a PC race was one of the top reasons PF2 was rejected and organized play...

Still waiting on the foundry release for vtt, but I bought the rest of that. (Not going to use the 5e bestiary, but I have a pdf copy.)

There are more factors than alignment. A dwarven paladin of Torag who has edicts from their god to kill all goblins, then they probably should kill the goblin.

In my area PF2 killed organized PF play. We embraced the playtest all in and generally were not happy. Now a couple years later I've come to appreciate the elegance of PF2 design. We still play PF1 APs and dabbled in 5E, but I keep finding points of frustration with both that PF2 directly...

The companion guide includes an adaptation of the camping rules from Owlcat for use inTTRPGs

I don't know if it will be as hard as you fear. Many areas are very story dense. The zones have a lot of story locations with their own plots. Some areas have one story or set of encounters per hex, and each zone has it's own random encounter chart on top of that. As a result, many of those...

They have zoned areas so that you can focus on level appropriate challenges. If a third level party decides to skip to a cr20 dragon lair, they are going to die, likely long before reaching the lair. I think it's a good balance of true sandbox and some rails to keep balance