Pathfinder 2 and the game Paizo should have made

[dave2008]

Never had this problem with my many years with 3e and PF. My games are intact

I haven't either, but many, many, many people have. I don't know that PF2e will suffer from the same problem though. It seems they have worked hard to make a solid core, with tiny fiddly bits that fly around and don't over burden the core structure (thus mitigating game "breaking"). Only time will tell.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Me. a guy that has played D&D since it was first released. I find it funny that people say the choices in PF2 don't mean much, when at most levels in 5e, you don't get anything at all, let alone choices.

The fewer choices you make, the more meaningful each choice actually is.

If you play 5E without feats or multiclassing, then your only real decision points are class and race. In that case, your choice of class is the most meaningful thing in the world, and even your race choice is going to matter somewhat - an elf champion is distinct from a dwarf champion, because there's very little else to distinguish them.

When you make a dozen decisions for a character, each one has a very small impact on the whole. Doubly so when they spread the entire class's worth of features across those decisions, so each one carries only one-twentieth of the weight of your class decision in the other game.

 

[Arilyn]

I haven't either, but many, many, many people have. I don't know that PF2e will suffer from the same problem though. It seems they have worked hard to make a solid core, with tiny fiddly bits that fly around and don't over burden the core structure (thus mitigating game "breaking"). Only time will tell.

If a character is "breaking the game," I feel it's something that can be dealt with at the table. Have a power gamer abusing the system, throw extra hard enemies at him. Someone accidentally built a too weak character, it can be changed, if the player is feeling unhappy with his choices.

Personally, I'd rather have a game with lots of choice, than reduce the options because of fears that some combinations will break the system. I have made a ton of 3e and PF characters, because I'm one of those geeky people that have fun just making characters. I never accidentally broke one. As for power gamers, we'll, there's no way to rein them in.

 

[Henry]

For me at this point, arguing about the differences is like arguing the differences between the colors of mahogany, wine, and merlot, and saying your favorite is demonstrably better. It surprises me still how few people point out the similarities between 5e and other games like PF2.

 

[Campbell]

Pathfinder 2 is focused more towards making the decisions you make in actual play matter. The choices you make while building the character are more about building a set of tools to be used while playing the game. The totality of your choices will imply things about who your character is. It's not I am a two handed sword guy and when I do two handed sword things I am awesome. It's I know how to do these two handed sword things that are pretty awesome. It is up to the player to bring that out in play by utilizing the tools they have available in a skilled manner. The decisions that are meaningful and character defining will happen at the table.

There is a reason most class feats are actions or activities. You are building a toolbox to prove your worth. Player says I'm a master swordsman. Game says prove it. You do not just get to be a master swordsman just like you have never just gotten to be an arch mage. You have to earn it.

I can understand the draw of expressively creating a character that becomes manifest in play based on character building decisions. It can be fun to just unleash a build and have it just do the things you have defined it to do and be awesome basically on its own. It's kind of elemental. Pathfinder 2 is not really that sort of game.

 

[Shardstone]

X

 

[dave2008]

If a character is "breaking the game," I feel it's something that can be dealt with at the table. Have a power gamer abusing the system, throw extra hard enemies at him. Someone accidentally built a too weak character, it can be changed, if the player is feeling unhappy with his choices.

Personally I agree with you, that is my experience too. However, I see no value in discounting the experience of many others and the feedback both WotC and Paizo have received.

Personally, I'd rather have a game with lots of choice, than reduce the options because of fears that some combinations will break the system. I have made a ton of 3e and PF characters, because I'm one of those geeky people that have fun just making characters. I never accidentally broke one. As for power gamers, we'll, there's no way to rein them in.

I'm different, I prefer fewer choices and then I can add more as I see fit. No game has what I want precisely, so I prefer to add what i need rather than cut what I don't.

 

[dave2008]

There is a reason most class feats are actions or activities. You are building a toolbox to prove your worth. Player says I'm a master swordsman. Game says prove it. You do not just get to be a master swordsman just like you have never just gotten to be an arch mage. You have to earn it.

@Campbell , I like your attitude and approach to this forum, but I think I am going to have to stop reading your posts. Every time you talk about the good points of PF2e, or at least what you like, I see things I don't like or frankly scare me! I do not want my skill as a player to prove my character is a swordmaster. I am not a skilled player and don't like the idea of my lack of skill affecting the performance of the group or possibly my enjoyment of the game. However, it is possible that it is still fun for the inexperience player and that you just get more out of it because you are a more experienced player.

I'm going to try to stopping checking these forums so often now, get some work done, free up some time, and try to find a group.

 

[Zardnaar]

Swing and a miss for me. Bought the PDF but I think I need an actual book to get into it and try it elsewhere.

I don't think I would get into it anyway. Would probably prefer fixing 3.5 with OSR stuff than using this.

It's just to hard to read, even 4E was easier.

 

[Rhianni32]

It's just to hard to read, even 4E was easier.

That is something I found too. It feels like I have to sit down with a fork and knife and really chew through this.
bits and parts of rules are added here and there. You have feats and spells that give conditions and have traits that alter and conflict with each other.
It feels very much like a CCG. If that is good or not I have yet to determine.