Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder 2e: Actual Play Experience
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 7999956" data-attributes="member: 5834"><p>2. I agree the power level does not differ. For me that is ok. I didn't like having super optimal choices to boost power. It made my players pick those same things over and over again. If you wanted to compete, everyone else that played that same class did the same thing. It ruined variation in character building and focused too much on power optimizing.</p><p></p><p>Now the DM can tell the guy who wants to play a two-weapon fighter or dagger thrower that , yeah, you might not do optimal damage, but you'll be highly effective playing one of those concepts.</p><p></p><p>Whereas in PF1 and 5E with feats, a melee was a two-handed weapon guy or he was a chump. Archers were amazing in PF1 or 5E with sharpshooter. Nearly every other type of martial was inferior to those two.</p><p></p><p>The same could be said of caster choices in PF1 and 5E. In PF2 you can pretty much make whatever concept you want and you will be effective and only marginally less effective than some other slightly optimized choice. That means more character variability without being punished for sub-optimal choices like the power-gaming in PF1 and 5E.</p><p></p><p>3. I don't much remember 4E magic items. PF2 magic items are pretty simple, but provide useful bonuses. They aren't as good as some of 5Es great items. Then again handing out those 5E items definitely shifted the balance substantially. But even so a melee martial with a belt of giant strength versus a sharpshooter archer was a sad comparison against a mobile creature. With 5Es move and attack with no limit, the premium on mobility was high. A jerk DM could make a melee martial feel pathetic having some fast moving dragon or flying creature rip him apart while he is stuck on the ground. That's why I used to build switch hitters in 5E. Some kind of martial sorlock or an archer because mobile creatures just ate parties without mobility alive, yet died like cream puffs if you had a battery of ranged attackers.</p><p></p><p>4. Not having any trouble using Treat Wounds, Crafting, or Recall Knowledge. In fact, they seem easier than PF1 and more useful than 5E. Useful subsystems that aren't too hard to adjudicate seem good to me.</p><p></p><p>5. Alchemist bombers are nasty. Incapacitation effects suck, but are understandable with not wanting to short circuit main encounters. Shields need some work. Sturdy Shield is an ok fix, but shields still need some work.</p><p></p><p>Caster-Wizard/Sorcerer balance is a problem. I want more information and time to see what people come up with before I address it, but I can see it in game right now. It's not super fun.</p><p></p><p>I can say Cleric, Bard, and Druid are fine. I didn't think the druid would be fine until I saw one in action. Druid is just fine. Maybe more than fine. They have plenty of one action options that are effective. Sorcerer and Wizard not so much.</p><p></p><p>6. I agree. You could really say all forms of fighting are fairly balanced except maybe the monk who might be a little weak. I will have to see. But the monk's defenses seem really good.</p><p></p><p>Game needs more time out at the moment with more people playing to higher levels figuring out how things work. Old way of playing PF1 is not how you play PF2. I'm learning that as I go along.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celtavian, post: 7999956, member: 5834"] 2. I agree the power level does not differ. For me that is ok. I didn't like having super optimal choices to boost power. It made my players pick those same things over and over again. If you wanted to compete, everyone else that played that same class did the same thing. It ruined variation in character building and focused too much on power optimizing. Now the DM can tell the guy who wants to play a two-weapon fighter or dagger thrower that , yeah, you might not do optimal damage, but you'll be highly effective playing one of those concepts. Whereas in PF1 and 5E with feats, a melee was a two-handed weapon guy or he was a chump. Archers were amazing in PF1 or 5E with sharpshooter. Nearly every other type of martial was inferior to those two. The same could be said of caster choices in PF1 and 5E. In PF2 you can pretty much make whatever concept you want and you will be effective and only marginally less effective than some other slightly optimized choice. That means more character variability without being punished for sub-optimal choices like the power-gaming in PF1 and 5E. 3. I don't much remember 4E magic items. PF2 magic items are pretty simple, but provide useful bonuses. They aren't as good as some of 5Es great items. Then again handing out those 5E items definitely shifted the balance substantially. But even so a melee martial with a belt of giant strength versus a sharpshooter archer was a sad comparison against a mobile creature. With 5Es move and attack with no limit, the premium on mobility was high. A jerk DM could make a melee martial feel pathetic having some fast moving dragon or flying creature rip him apart while he is stuck on the ground. That's why I used to build switch hitters in 5E. Some kind of martial sorlock or an archer because mobile creatures just ate parties without mobility alive, yet died like cream puffs if you had a battery of ranged attackers. 4. Not having any trouble using Treat Wounds, Crafting, or Recall Knowledge. In fact, they seem easier than PF1 and more useful than 5E. Useful subsystems that aren't too hard to adjudicate seem good to me. 5. Alchemist bombers are nasty. Incapacitation effects suck, but are understandable with not wanting to short circuit main encounters. Shields need some work. Sturdy Shield is an ok fix, but shields still need some work. Caster-Wizard/Sorcerer balance is a problem. I want more information and time to see what people come up with before I address it, but I can see it in game right now. It's not super fun. I can say Cleric, Bard, and Druid are fine. I didn't think the druid would be fine until I saw one in action. Druid is just fine. Maybe more than fine. They have plenty of one action options that are effective. Sorcerer and Wizard not so much. 6. I agree. You could really say all forms of fighting are fairly balanced except maybe the monk who might be a little weak. I will have to see. But the monk's defenses seem really good. Game needs more time out at the moment with more people playing to higher levels figuring out how things work. Old way of playing PF1 is not how you play PF2. I'm learning that as I go along. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder 2e: Actual Play Experience
Top