Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e: Actual Play Experience

[Retreater]

After running three sessions of PF2 and having time to mull over the experience, I have to say at this stage I don't think it's going to last with my group. Combats have already grown long and frustrating. (They're only 2nd level.) A four monster combat with the 3 action economy means a devastating barrage of 12 attacks, which have an increased risk of critical hits in the new system.
Players are puzzled when trying to make characters. The player who took an alchemist already abandoned the character because he felt worthless.
42 different conditions (many of which have several rankings to keep up with) are doled out with abandon. It hasn't been unusual for a character to have 3 conditions at the same time during a fight.

 

[CapnZapp]

After running three sessions of PF2 and having time to mull over the experience, I have to say at this stage I don't think it's going to last with my group. Combats have already grown long and frustrating. (They're only 2nd level.) A four monster combat with the 3 action economy means a devastating barrage of 12 attacks, which have an increased risk of critical hits in the new system.
Players are puzzled when trying to make characters. The player who took an alchemist already abandoned the character because he felt worthless.
42 different conditions (many of which have several rankings to keep up with) are doled out with abandon. It hasn't been unusual for a character to have 3 conditions at the same time during a fight.

Yes, PF2 requires a high degree of player investment and skill.

 

[kenada]

I was just talking in general. Adding +2 can't be a big deal when the original rules would routinely add +1 to +4 just because the monster was higher level than you.

I’m not sure what you mean. Higher level monsters naturally have higher stats (in the core rules, ignoring proficiency without level). Where did the original rules say to routinely add +1 to +4 just because the monster was higher level than you? I ask because I wasn’t aware that was a thing in the rules as written.

After running three sessions of PF2 and having time to mull over the experience, I have to say at this stage I don't think it's going to last with my group. Combats have already grown long and frustrating. (They're only 2nd level.) A four monster combat with the 3 action economy means a devastating barrage of 12 attacks, which have an increased risk of critical hits in the new system.

Are you running all monsters on the same initiative? I used to do that too, but Paizo recommends against doing that when you can. It confers an advantage to the monsters, and it adds a big period of dead time when the PCs aren’t doing something (while you resolve the monsters’ turns).

Players are puzzled when trying to make characters. The player who took an alchemist already abandoned the character because he felt worthless.

This seems like the real killer. If players aren’t interested in or are put off by the character building aspects, PF2 is not going to be very fun for them.

42 different conditions (many of which have several rankings to keep up with) are doled out with abandon. It hasn't been unusual for a character to have 3 conditions at the same time during a fight.

Nine of those (dying and disposition conditions) aren’t in play most of the time, and the detection conditions are situational. I’m curious how your PCs have been getting 3 conditions at a time, since that hasn’t been our experience.

 

[CapnZapp]

I’m not sure what you mean. Higher level monsters naturally have higher stats (in the core rules, ignoring proficiency without level). Where did the original rules say to routinely add +1 to +4 just because the monster was higher level than you? I ask because I wasn’t aware that was a thing in the rules as written.

Using the standard rules, a level 10 PC gets +10 to "everything" while a level 12 monster gets +12.

This effect is very similar if not identical to a level 10 monster getting the elite treatment. After all, 12-10=2.

Since fighting monsters two levels above yourself isn't a problem in the RAW, I really don't see how fighting an elite monster while using the proficiency without level variant can be a problem.

(Obviously the elite modifications used to equal about a single level's worth of upgrade. Now that same modifications equal more than that. This is a given, since level means less. After all, we removed level from proficiency, so I wouldn't expect anything else)

 

[Retreater]

Are you running all monsters on the same initiative? I used to do that too, but Paizo recommends against doing that when you can. It confers an advantage to the monsters, and it adds a big period of dead time when the PCs aren’t doing something (while you resolve the monsters’ turns).

No. I didn't know that was a recommendation. I can look into it. It's an added level of one more thing to keep up with for the GM, but if it makes a better game, I guess that's okay. Is there an official announcement or errata about it I can read for more information?

This seems like the real killer. If players aren’t interested in or are put off by the character building aspects, PF2 is not going to be very fun for them.

Yeah. We have 2 players who are into the crunch, 2 who are new and just don't get it, 1 who doesn't really want to put in the effort, and 1 other who is opposed to learning because PF1 is clearly the bestest version of any game ever. Haha.

Nine of those (dying and disposition conditions) aren’t in play most of the time, and the detection conditions are situational. I’m curious how your PCs have been getting 3 conditions at a time, since that hasn’t been our experience.

I'm running the Age of Ashes AP, and I'll give you a specific example, marked in Spoiler tags....

Spoiler: Example from Age of Ashes, Hellknight Hill

The Hellcrowns were causing persistent bleed damage, enfeebling, and frightening the characters. When characters dropped, they had the dying condition - and later the wounded condition.

 

[CapnZapp]

Yeah. We have 2 players who are into the crunch, 2 who are new and just don't get it, 1 who doesn't really want to put in the effort, and 1 other who is opposed to learning because PF1 is clearly the bestest version of any game ever. Haha.

I'm running the Age of Ashes AP, and I'll give you a specific example, marked in Spoiler tags....

Spoiler: Example from Age of Ashes, Hellknight Hill

The Hellcrowns were causing persistent bleed damage, enfeebling, and frightening the characters. When characters dropped, they had the dying condition - and later the wounded condition.

Yes, Paizo have designed an uncompromising game which is incredibly easy for 5th Edition gamers to hate because it's absolutely jam-packed with little cluttery modifications and for Pathfinder 1 gamers to hate because it is utterly different in almost every aspect.

My best advice is to simply play it with people who actually enjoy it. You have 2 players already, just need to find two more...

 

[CapnZapp]

I’m curious how your PCs have been getting 3 conditions at a time, since that hasn’t been our experience.

Believe me, it happens. Easily. It's not like Paizo have asked their writers to go easy on gamers for the first few levels. Almost every low-level module so far has featured fights on a complexity similar to Retreater's example. They also sport incredibly lethal fights right out the gate.

Utterly unlike 5E the game is not about "having a good time" and "don't worry, you can mess up and still win encounters handily".

You need to avoid mistakes to survive. Each and every +1 modifier needs to be applied for maximum effect. You have three actions each turn, and you need to learn how to use them. Offense, defense, positioning; everything matters.

When the game was released last August I started out with a small homebrew campaign. The players started muttering how difficult everything was, and I tried telling them I just tried to adhere to the encounter guidelines as I learned the ropes. They didn't quite believe me. Heck, I didn't believe me - thinking I might have made mistakes whenever fights came close to TPK's. I started to ease up on the difficulty.

Now we've started playing Extinction Curse, an official Adventure Path, and boom! the very first serious encounter almost TPK:d them. Three unconscious heroes out of five after the monster's second turn. The monster itself was unharmed. That's a "Moderate" encounter to you! (In 5E parlance I would call that triple ultra deadly with extra on top... )

Clearly me going soft on them hadn't prepared them for official level 1 play! Okay, so they healed up. Then the unrelenting string of difficult encounters asked of them with no time for recuperation ground them right back down. I gave them NPCs to help them out against the final fight of the chapter/level. It was either that, or start over.

Now they believe me.

 

[kenada]

Since fighting monsters two levels above yourself isn't a problem in the RAW, I really don't see how fighting an elite monster while using the proficiency without level variant can be a problem.

(Obviously the elite modifications used to equal about a single level's worth of upgrade. Now that same modifications equal more than that. This is a given, since level means less. After all, we removed level from proficiency, so I wouldn't expect anything else)

Okay, I see your logic. Thanks for the explanation.

No. I didn't know that was a recommendation. I can look into it. It's an added level of one more thing to keep up with for the GM, but if it makes a better game, I guess that's okay. Is there an official announcement or errata about it I can read for more information?

It’s mentioned in the “Encounter Mode” section of the “Playing the Game” chapter of the CRB (emphasis mine).

The GM rolls initiative for anyone other than the player characters in the encounter. If these include a number of identical creatures, the GM could roll once for the group as a whole and have them take their turns within the group in any order. However, this can make battles less predictable and more dangerous, so the GM might want to roll initiative for some or all creatures individually unless it’s too much of a burden.

I probably read that and didn’t process they really meant you shouldn’t use group initiative until I saw someone mention it on the official forums. The GMG is more explicit about it in the “Running Encounters” section of the “Gamemastery Basics” chapter (again emphasis mine).

Batch Initiative
If you have multiple enemies of the same type, such as four goblin warriors, you might want to have them act on the same initiative for simplicity. If you do, you can roll just one initiative check for all of them. They still take individual turns and can still individually change their initiative by Delaying. Note that a lucky initiative check could mean the batched creatures can easily gang up on the PCs, and a terrible roll could mean they all get struck down before they can do anything, so use this technique only when necessary to keep the game moving.

Yeah. We have 2 players who are into the crunch, 2 who are new and just don't get it, 1 who doesn't really want to put in the effort, and 1 other who is opposed to learning because PF1 is clearly the bestest version of any game ever. Haha.

Is it possible to get the two who are into the crunch to help the newbies? From what I’ve read, PF2 new players are supposed to have an easier time learning PF2 (due to not having to unlearn old habits), but they’ve still got to get to the starting line. To help my players learn the new system, I printed off copies of the quick reference from the Torment and Legacy demo adventure.

I'm running the Age of Ashes AP, and I'll give you a specific example, marked in Spoiler tags....

Spoiler: Example from Age of Ashes, Hellknight Hill

The Hellcrowns were causing persistent bleed damage, enfeebling, and frightening the characters. When characters dropped, they had the dying condition - and later the wounded condition.

That’s rough. I looked up the creature on the PRD, and it seems designed to inflict all the things on PCs. There are multiple saves to avoid the effects, and you can remove the nails, but that’s still a lot of stuff to track at the table.

 

[Retreater]

Is it possible to get the two who are into the crunch to help the newbies? From what I’ve read, PF2 new players are supposed to have an easier time learning PF2 (due to not having to unlearn old habits), but they’ve still got to get to the starting line. To help my players learn the new system, I printed off copies of the quick reference from the Torment and Legacy demo adventure.

They're not exactly the best teachers and come across a little snarky and judgmental.

 

[kenada]

They're not exactly the best teachers and come across a little snarky and judgmental.

That’s totally a fair take. I hesitated suggesting it because crunch friendly players can sometimes end up being unhelpful when trying to ‘help’ new players.