Grade the Pathfinder 2E Game System

[Thomas Shey]

Unless I’m reading you incorrectly, this seems like a false dichotomy. The alternative to a system like PF2 is not necessarily one with a lack of mechanics or fewer ones. It’s how the mechanics are deployed that I dislike in PF2 (and notably also PbtA games) rather than the existence of mechanics per se. I don’t want more things left up to adjudication. If anything, PF2 leaves more up to GM discretion than I’d like anyway. I just don’t think the only way to address that is with an enumerated list of things you can do, which is why I’ve taken the approach I have in my homebrew system (see the five words commentary thread for examples of play).

It doesn't feel like one to me. If you don't spell out at least the common things ("enumerate them") then, in practice, it turns too much into finding out if the GM and you are on the same page.

Or we're not talking about the same things at all. Which is possible.

 

[kenada]

It doesn't feel like one to me. If you don't spell out at least the common things ("enumerate them") then, in practice, it turns too much into finding out if the GM and you are on the same page.

Or we're not talking about the same things at all. Which is possible.

I don’t know. There’s going to be some enumeration because that’s just the nature of providing systems to do things. That’s fine if not expected. I’m pushing back on the seeming implication that the alternative to having a lot of enumeration is needing to find out (or what I assume is meant by “rules light”).

A couple weeks ago, I made this post pushing back in the opposite direction. It had started from a discussion of minimalist gaming, and my position there was that’s not the only way to implement something like a “neutral referee” or to foster player creativity. I linked this worked example, which I also think applies here. There’s some enumeration, but there’s not a lot. It avoids the issue of “needing to find out” by prescribing who gets to say what and when.

Anyway, I was responding regarding why I burnt out. There’s more to it than that (which I won’t share because there almost no constructive conversation that can be had here from that), but the big one is just how the system is put together.

 

[kilpatds]

The crit <10> and tiers of failure/success takes a bit of time to learn in PF2. Some really like that tactical crunch, for me it gets a little grindy.

As a mechanic, success by 10 == crit is a good one (and similarly for critical failures). It's just too easy to access by dint of level, instead of characterization.

 

[payn]

As a mechanic, success by 10 == crit is a good one (and similarly for critical failures). It's just too easy to access by dint of level, instead of characterization.

Its the "dint of level" that makes me greatly dislike it.

 

[Emberashh]

Ive been consistent in my assessment of PF2 as soulless.

People get confused by that, and they should know that I mean it in the literal definition of the word. PF2 is tedius and uninspiring; soulless.

 

[payn]

Ive been consistent in my assessment of PF2 as soulless.

People get confused by that, and they should know that I mean it in the literal definition of the word. PF2 is tedius and uninspiring; soulless.

Thought about it for a moment, but I cant really say any D&D edition or derivative has soul anyways.

 

[Parmandur]

Thought about it for a moment, but I cant really say any D&D edition or derivative has soul anyways.

Now I want to see a rulebook for Dancers & Discotheques.

 

[Nilbog]

I've been running it since release, currently the players in my campaign (home brewed, not an adventure path) are level 11.

I absolutely love it, it hits the sweet spot for me regarding rules depth. It has covered most of the situations I've encountered without me having to fall back on a DM ruling, which while I don't mind too much of it frustrates me ( I'm spending my money on a rule system after all)

Is it perfect? Absolutely not, there are some overly fiddly subsystem's and the layout of the core rulebook is super janky, I'm really hoping the remaster can fix both of those.

 

[payn]

Now I want to see a rulebook for Dancers & Discotheques.

 

[Velderan]

Thought about it for a moment, but I cant really say any D&D edition or derivative has soul anyways.

The only soul I can think of in any D&D edition is Gary's ramblings in the 1e DMG. It often reads like he's having a conversation with the reader, sharing his knowledge and insight. I can't think of another TTRPG book by any publisher that comes across the same way.