Pathfinder 2E Are you moving from 5E to PF2?

MockingBird · Aug 24, 2019

Couldn't one just make their NPCs as of they were making a character even if the rules are more simplified? Just seems like a nonissue unless I'm missing something. I know some folks need rules for everything.

doctorhook · Aug 25, 2019

dave2008 said:
I get that it might lack the depth you want, but how can you possibly say it is undersupported?

If you lived through any previous editions (3e and 4e especially, or PF1) then you came to get used to a certain amount of new content. 5E’s been on shelves for five years, and there is still a serious dearth of new spells, magic items, feats, and class options, especially if you don’t count playtest (UA) or unofficial (DMG) material. The situation has been improving, but there is definitely a lack of official support compared to the past, and that’s disappointing.

MockingBird · Aug 25, 2019

doctorhook said:
If you lived through any previous editions (3e and 4e especially, or PF1) then you came to get used to a certain amount of new content. 5E’s been on shelves for five years, and there is still a serious dearth of new spells, magic items, feats, and class options, especially if you don’t count playtest (UA) or unofficial (DMG) material. The situation has been improving, but there is definitely a lack of official support compared to the past, and that’s disappointing.

I think this is more of a positive rather than a negative. Too much bloat can and will be a bad thing.

CapnZapp · Aug 25, 2019

MockingBird said:
Couldn't one just make their NPCs as of they were making a character even if the rules are more simplified? Just seems like a nonissue unless I'm missing something. I know some folks need rules for everything.

Yes, of course you can ignore any and all monster building guidelines and just create a PC that happens to be under the DM's control.

This is true in every edition.

The issue here is that a segment of the customer base wants and needs this to be the ONLY way of creating NPCs.

In today's market, that is unacceptable to me. (And most of you, I wager)

I love the 5E way - of doing things on my side of the table (I'm the DM).

However I can understand the players wanting more crunch on their side. But that's another issue.

dave2008 · Aug 25, 2019

doctorhook said:
If you lived through any previous editions (3e and 4e especially, or PF1) then you came to get used to a certain amount of new content. 5E’s been on shelves for five years, and there is still a serious dearth of new spells, magic items, feats, and class options, especially if you don’t count playtest (UA) or unofficial (DMG) material. The situation has been improving, but there is definitely a lack of official support compared to the past, and that’s disappointing.

I lived through 1e, 2e, 3e, & 4e. Official support, that is your issue. OK. Listen, the official support is more than enough for me, but I get were your coming from if that is your line.

However, there is a just ton of 3PP support: there are at least a dozen different settings available, at least 2 large bestiaries (and many more really), and more classes, spells, magic items, maneuvers, etc. than I can even begin to document. I don't have any issue find any amount of content I may want for whatever style of game I want to play.

doctorhook · Aug 26, 2019

MockingBird said:
I think this is more of a positive rather than a negative. Too much bloat can and will be a bad thing.

Oh and I can totally agree with that. PF1 absolutely crossed that line, and the others probably did too (to a lesser extent). I think 5E swing the pendulum too far the other way, to the extent that it seemed like Hasbro was trying to starve this game (and certainly they had WotC on a very short leash at the beginning of 5E). I’d still like a lot more support than 5E is currently getting.

Markh3rd · Aug 26, 2019

doctorhook said:
Oh and I can totally agree with that. PF1 absolutely crossed that line, and the others probably did too (to a lesser extent). I think 5E swing the pendulum too far the other way, to the extent that it seemed like Hasbro was trying to starve this game (and certainly they had WotC on a very short leash at the beginning of 5E). I’d still like a lot more support than 5E is currently getting.

Honestly I don't mind the pace. It gives me plenty of time to try out what is offered now and be very familiar with what is established by the time they introduce something new. PF1 was so fast that I couldn't keep up with it and as a DM that's a bad feeling.

Even as a player I began to have so many options in PF1 that it took lots of time trying to read everything that I could obtain when I leveled up. Overall I feel a slow release schedule is healthier long term, as long as the adventures are coming out on a regular basis. Which WOTC has been good about.

And as the other poster said you can always find 3PP to supplement your game if you don't care about everything being official for your homebrew game. I have several of those products as well.

dave2008 · Aug 26, 2019

doctorhook said:
I’d still like a lot more support than 5E is currently getting.

I get that people feel this way. But to be honest I just can't fathom needing more content. I have two groups and we have been playing 5e since about a month after it released (transitioned our 4e games) and we have only gone through about 25% of the race and class options. As the DM, I love all of the official and 3pp content because I like to tinker, but my players will never use everything that is already "officially" available.