Pathfinder Beginner Box Review

Hello buckaroos! We return once again from the feet of the golem with a new PAIZO PRODUCT REVIEW! Today we’re looking at the new Pathfinder Beginner Box, Paizo’s latest in a hugely successful line of products for newcomers to our hobby. Spoiler alert: they’ve got another success on their hands. Let’s get into it!

First Impressions​

We start off this box review with an initial impression, and the initial impression is good! Bright, colorful, cheerful lettering, and a good heft—all things that say “good RPG thing must buy” to my primal dicegoblin brain. Upon first opening, we see a bag of dice, a bag of token bases, and a handful of small inserts culminating in a page that says READ THIS FIRST.

Of course I do not READ THAT FIRST! I huck the token bases to the side and take a gander at the dice. One each of d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, and d20, each in strong, single colors with clear lettering. I’m of mixed mind on these dice. On one hand, I appreciate a grab-bag approach to starter dice: my first starter set in a beginner box had mixed colors, and non-uniform dice to me makes them easier to share. That said, the bright primary colors evoke a handful of crayons, and while beginner boxes are in part meant to accommodate a younger audience and get them excited, I think the color-scheme may be skewing a bit young. The Crayola colors are easily forgiven as soon as you dig past the READ THIS FIRST page and you see the character sheets with delightful reference images for each of the dice—but we’ll get to the character sheets in a bit. I only have a few minor issues left with the dice. This is a bit snobbish, but I consider any dice set that doesn’t have two d10 and four d6 to be incomplete. Also, I’d prefer a resealable dice bag over the disposable one: my first set of dice from my beginner box is down to just five dice from the original ten because they spent their lives rattling around loose in their box.

Now, the inserts! A little postcard lets you know that there’s a custom Syrinscape playlist for the adventure contained within. Neat! The other postcards are player reference cards, which are about the best attempt at getting new players over the fairly steep Pathfinder learning curve I’ve seen yet. That said, there is a bit of a shock when you turn them over and are greeted with a wall of text. Finally, the READ THIS FIRST page is short, sweet, and to the point, laying out how to approach the Box as a solo player or with a group of players.

Character Sheets​

Below the READ THIS FIRST we have the character sheets, and here’s where the Box starts to show its hand a bit. You’re clearly meant to use this with a group of players, as it’s those pregenerated character folios which appear before the Hero’s Handbook which contains the solo adventure. That said, I have quite a lot of good things to say about these character sheets. Cover page features a name, a class, a huge splash art of the character’s portrait, and a quick description to help potential newcomers choose their playstyle.

Like the reference cards, the meat and potatoes of the character sheets can seem like an overwhelming barrage of information, but thankfully a solid half of that text is dedicated to explaining and leading a new player through the rather complicated process of understanding a Pathfinder character sheet. Truly excellent layout design is on display here—little coordinating lettered yellow circles lead the reader easily from explanation to relevant box, and the most-used sections of the sheet (AC, hit points, so on) are boxed out in red to stand out from the regular black. As I said before, there’s a handsome little sidebar displaying each of the dice available and their abbreviations—excellent! Also, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen this on a Pathfinder character sheet before, but these now have a space for personal pronouns! Finally, the layout artist gets a cheeky point from me for putting a few characters of character history on the back page of the folio—literal backstory.

As an aside: Wayne Reynolds' art maintains his high level of technical excellence, but there’s something repetitive about the characters' poses. This all stands in contrast to the cover art for the Hero’s Handbook, done by Ekaterina Burmak. The character posing here helps focus the eye on defining aspects of each character: Kyra’s pose pulls back and up into her holy symbol, shining forth with protecting energy against the lightning blast of the dragon. Valeros pushes forward into his shield, taking the brunt of the blast, emphasizing his role on the front line and the use of his shield in his playstyle. And then, off to the side, we see Merisiel darting in, lines almost blurred with speed, unseen by the dragon, dagger darting forward to the exposed neck. Sure, Wayne’s art is technically more accurate to the adventure—the dragon is green, and on top of one of the massive mushrooms in its cavern—but I definitely like Ekaterina’s art more.

The Hero's Handbook​

The Hero's Handbook kicks off with a solo adventure, a delightful little romp through a quick little cavern with a few nasties and quite a bit of treasure. My advice for those taking their own crack at it? Fortune favors the bold. The rest of the Hero’s Handbook concerns itself with expertly navigating a new player through the process of making a new character, complete with the colorful lettered circles that connect to spaces on the provided empty character sheets. Also, the Hero’s Handbook FINALLY does away with the difference between ability scores and ability modifiers—thank goodness.

The Game Master's Guide​

Like the Hero’s Handbook, the Game Master’s Guide kicks off with an adventure. As a GM and as an adventure designer, I do appreciate the way the adventure designers generally nail one-page sections for each room or encounter. Like with the solo adventure, there’s excellent escalation of challenges: first simple combat, then a combat with some saving throws, then skill checks, puzzles, persistent damage, and some undead to let the cleric shine in an offensive moment. Other nice spots of design include magical boon rewards and defending monsters getting some home turf advantages. Also, it must be said: this features a dragon in a dungeon. Points again!

My only real issues with the adventure was the tired artifact of XP—if we’re going to be doing away with ability scores and modifiers, just take the leap to milestone XP, especially if the Game Master’s Guide later insists all players advance equally anyway—and the climactic encounters seem a little lackluster. Perhaps it’s just a glut of excellent encounter design I’ve seen from other places lately, but I tend to expect a little more action from the environment. That said, this is an introductory adventure, and I wouldn’t want to throw a new GM too far into the deep end.

The rest of the Game Master’s Guide is simply excellent material for a new GM learning the ropes, and indeed is a fantastic refresher for experienced GMs wanting a straightforward and concise presentation of the fundamentals of running tabletop games in general and Pathfinder 2E in specific. My only issue with this section is that there's more ogre art in line with their supposed foul and flabby nature. I can tell this was a deliberate choice because much of the rest of the monster art, specifically that of the orcs, is lifted directly from the Bestiary. I will keep my ogres beautiful and beefy, thank you very much.

The Rest​

What’s left? Well, we have the fold-out maps, which are excellent and which absolutely require a full table to use properly. There are tokens for every monster that appears in the Game Master’s Guide, and even tokens for every ancestry/gender/class combination possible with the limited options available in the Hero’s Handbook. Also, some tokens with action and reaction symbols on them for use with the relevant spaces on the included character sheets.

In summary, the Pathfinder Beginner Box is an excellent introduction to the game for new solo players and new groups, and an excellent reintroduction for veterans looking for a refresh on the game’s core identity. Well worth the investment and guaranteed to be a hit at your table.

 

[transmission89]

Good question. But, as that isn’t relevant to the point I was making, I’ll just sidestep that question and address what I’m actually talking about.

PF2 BB is, ostensibly an introduction to the system. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that at least some of its target demographic are people who don’t know the system.

One of the design features of PF 1 is that you do (very much) need to consider future options as you build a character. It is not unreasonable for someone familiar with PF1 to assume the same is true of PF2 unless the introductory product clarifies otherwise. Such players will naturally spend longer on character building.

This is an entirely predictable result that Paizo could have accounted for. And if they didn’t, they probably should have.

Cool.

That is just, wow... An introductory set is to introduce that particular product.

Where in the 5e starter set does it lay out the differences to 4e? It doesn’t even mention it!
Same with the 4e box set from 3e and so on. There is no clarification because none is needed

 

[Rune]

That is just, wow... An introductory set is to introduce that particular product.

Where in the 5e starter set does it lay out the differences to 4e? It doesn’t even mention it!
Same with the 4e box set from 3e and so on. There is no clarification because none is needed

You and I seem to be talking past each other. Carry on with your business. I’ve got better things to do.

 

[transmission89]

You and I seem to be talking past each other. Carry on with your business. I’ve got better things to do.

Not at all. I get what you’re saying and it’s unreasonable to expect that a published rpg product would take the time and page count to discuss changes from a previous edition (outside of specific conversion guides and the like).

Being generous and applying that to the actual rulebook, again not in the crb or in the 5e phb. Or the 4e phb. Or the 3e phb etc.

 

[kenada]

Because if it doesn’t, player’s won’t necessarily know, and, thus, will likely take longer to make their characters. Especially if they have reason to assume otherwise, like experience with PF1.

This may be why some people are claiming that it takes significantly longer to make level 1 characters in PF2 than in 5e, while others are claiming otherwise (as in the post that sparked this line of inquiry).

Having seen this clarification….

I think that’s a fair point. In my limited experience with my group, all of my players spend way too much time window shopping before making a choice. However, I’m not sure how much that is due to worries about viability versus looking at the cool things they get at higher levels. I think if they started from a concept (versus browsing for inspiration), character creation would go more quickly for them.

 

[GreyLord]

I can explain why it takes a while in PF2e to make a character, at least for me and probably other players that were with us in our try of the PF2e.

#1. YOU HAVE to UNDERSTAND We had NO experience with PF2e (well, maybe limited experience, some HAD tried the playtest I believe, not everyone though). Zero, None, Nada (with the caveat I added). You start off the bat building your ability scores rather than rolling them, using a standard array, or even a point buy like system. Every race, background, and class adds different numbers to your ability scores. While those who are experienced with the system may know these off the top of their head, I DO NOT. I have to read through them to understand what gives me what ability scores. I STILL don't have these memorized. Some make sense, others aren't something that would occur to me off the top of my head. Reading through the options and making these decisions with your ability scores in mind just takes me longer because of this. Perhaps if I were an experienced PF2e player I'd know all these ability score building points off the top of my head...but I don't.

In addition, I did not see anywhere where it said you have to be an expert and memorize all that stuff to play the game. If it had, you can be guaranteed we would not have even given it a shot. However, because we did NOT know it at first, and because we do not have all these options memorized (even if it is more limited in the PF2e Beginner Box, it's still a lot for a beginning player of PF2e to grasp) it TAKES TIME.

(edit - For comparison, 5e doesn't have the drawn out building of your ability scores, thus this is one section where 5e takes less time. It takes less time for those unfamiliar with the system to figure out their ability scores, though perhaps someone who was unfamiliar with D&D would still have trouble deciding what to assign where which may add time).

#2. In the BB, once you choose your class you still have to decide what to add your other ability score points to. They have to be different ability scores, so even if you only care about Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution if you were a Wizard, you still have to figure where you want that third ability score increase (You get 4 ability score increases, one is automatic depending on the class, you choose the other 3). Perhaps experienced players know exactly where they want to put it, but I didn't. With other systems it is relatively easy as you either already rolled it up by chance, you already know which scores (standard array) you want your highest scores to be in and don't really care what you put the other scores in, or with point buy you can focus the points on precisely the ability scores you want to max out with. The PF BB forces you to sort of spread out a little rather than focus on a min/max type idea, or otherwise.

#3. This is a new system. I am unfamiliar with it. Period. If you cannot understand that and why it may add to the time to create new characters, I'm not sure if you should be commenting on how long a character may take a new player to a system.

(edit: This would obviously also apply to any system new players are creating new characters with).

#4. In the PFBB you get Character sheets. They are a tad more complex and confusing than your standard Character sheets in 5e and you need to understand what the differences between Trained and Expert are. It's kind of like filling in a bubble sheet for a test, a test with many fill in bubbles. The Skill system has a lot more options and I LIKE THE VARIETY more than how 5e does it, BUT...it means you fill in a LOT OF BUBBLES for the skills and other items on your character sheet. I definitely felt I did FAR more writing and filling in on my character sheet than I have for any D&D game (including 3e and 3.5) for PF2e. It takes time to fill that sucker out. I don't know how anyone could cut that time down.

(In comparison, 5e is much simpler. You simply have a proficiency bonus and ability score modifiers, and they apply broadly, so filling out the sheet is much quicker. You have far more limited skills that use your proficiency bonus and after that you don't really worry about it. Shorter list and not as many differing numbers reduces the time to do this in 5e).

#5. In relation to #4 above, the book just gives you what equipment your starting character has, but it does not tell you the numbers that go with that equipment. You have to flip back and forth in the book to get it down, or you have to write it down and than find the relevant information in the book to write it down. Now, if you were really experienced with PF2e, you might be able to do this off the top of your head, but I can't. Heck, I play 5e a bit and can't even do that with all the items in 5e, much less PF2e.

All those things above made creating a character with the BB a longer experience than it would for me with 5e. I imagine that if these are the tailored down options of the BB from the Full game, that it probably would take longer to make a character using the full Core rules than it does with the BB. Hopefully that explains WHY it took me longer to make a character. As I said, I didn't find it too complex or confusing, or even frustrating. Creating the character was actually kind of fun, but it DID take time. I'm not going to lie about that to anyone. Simply put, it took quite awhile. I think the GM of our PF2e BB game knew it would take time which is why they had us create characters PRIOR to the first session, so we wouldn't be spending that much time during the first session making new characters.

 

[Nilbog]

I can explain why it takes a while in PF2e to make a character, at least for me and probably other players that were with us in our try of the PF2e.

#1. YOU HAVE to UNDERSTAND We had NO experience with PF2e (well, maybe limited experience, some HAD tried the playtest I believe, not everyone though). Zero, None, Nada (with the caveat I added). You start off the bat building your ability scores rather than rolling them, using a standard array, or even a point buy like system. Every race, background, and class adds different numbers to your ability scores. While those who are experienced with the system may know these off the top of their head, I DO NOT. I have to read through them to understand what gives me what ability scores. I STILL don't have these memorized. Some make sense, others aren't something that would occur to me off the top of my head. Reading through the options and making these decisions with your ability scores in mind just takes me longer because of this. Perhaps if I were an experienced PF2e player I'd know all these ability score building points off the top of my head...but I don't.

In addition, I did not see anywhere where it said you have to be an expert and memorize all that stuff to play the game. If it had, you can be guaranteed we would not have even given it a shot. However, because we did NOT know it at first, and because we do not have all these options memorized (even if it is more limited in the PF2e Beginner Box, it's still a lot for a beginning player of PF2e to grasp) it TAKES TIME.

(edit - For comparison, 5e doesn't have the drawn out building of your ability scores, thus this is one section where 5e takes less time. It takes less time for those unfamiliar with the system to figure out their ability scores, though perhaps someone who was unfamiliar with D&D would still have trouble deciding what to assign where which may add time).

#2. In the BB, once you choose your class you still have to decide what to add your other ability score points to. They have to be different ability scores, so even if you only care about Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution if you were a Wizard, you still have to figure where you want that third ability score increase (You get 4 ability score increases, one is automatic depending on the class, you choose the other 3). Perhaps experienced players know exactly where they want to put it, but I didn't. With other systems it is relatively easy as you either already rolled it up by chance, you already know which scores (standard array) you want your highest scores to be in and don't really care what you put the other scores in, or with point buy you can focus the points on precisely the ability scores you want to max out with. The PF BB forces you to sort of spread out a little rather than focus on a min/max type idea, or otherwise.

#3. This is a new system. I am unfamiliar with it. Period. If you cannot understand that and why it may add to the time to create new characters, I'm not sure if you should be commenting on how long a character may take a new player to a system.

(edit: This would obviously also apply to any system new players are creating new characters with).

#4. In the PFBB you get Character sheets. They are a tad more complex and confusing than your standard Character sheets in 5e and you need to understand what the differences between Trained and Expert are. It's kind of like filling in a bubble sheet for a test, a test with many fill in bubbles. The Skill system has a lot more options and I LIKE THE VARIETY more than how 5e does it, BUT...it means you fill in a LOT OF BUBBLES for the skills and other items on your character sheet. I definitely felt I did FAR more writing and filling in on my character sheet than I have for any D&D game (including 3e and 3.5) for PF2e. It takes time to fill that sucker out. I don't know how anyone could cut that time down.

(In comparison, 5e is much simpler. You simply have a proficiency bonus and ability score modifiers, and they apply broadly, so filling out the sheet is much quicker. You have far more limited skills that use your proficiency bonus and after that you don't really worry about it. Shorter list and not as many differing numbers reduces the time to do this in 5e).

#5. In relation to #4 above, the book just gives you what equipment your starting character has, but it does not tell you the numbers that go with that equipment. You have to flip back and forth in the book to get it down, or you have to write it down and than find the relevant information in the book to write it down. Now, if you were really experienced with PF2e, you might be able to do this off the top of your head, but I can't. Heck, I play 5e a bit and can't even do that with all the items in 5e, much less PF2e.

All those things above made creating a character with the BB a longer experience than it would for me with 5e. I imagine that if these are the tailored down options of the BB from the Full game, that it probably would take longer to make a character using the full Core rules than it does with the BB. Hopefully that explains WHY it took me longer to make a character. As I said, I didn't find it too complex or confusing, or even frustrating. Creating the character was actually kind of fun, but it DID take time. I'm not going to lie about that to anyone. Simply put, it took quite awhile. I think the GM of our PF2e BB game knew it would take time which is why they had us create characters PRIOR to the first session, so we wouldn't be spending that much time during the first session making new characters.

Seems a tad harsh that you are comparing building a character in a system you are experienced and familiar with (5e) to one you know nothing of (pf2e) and then complaining the one you know nothing about is more complex.

I agree that someone who has years of experience with 5e and also has been playing pf2e since release that pf2e character gen is a longer process as it has more decision points, but I stand by my opinion that the difference isn't massive and certainly not to the point where it becomes confusing or frustrating

 

[transmission89]

I can explain why it takes a while in PF2e to make a character, at least for me and probably other players that were with us in our try of the PF2e.

#1. YOU HAVE to UNDERSTAND We had NO experience with PF2e (well, maybe limited experience, some HAD tried the playtest I believe, not everyone though). Zero, None, Nada (with the caveat I added). You start off the bat building your ability scores rather than rolling them, using a standard array, or even a point buy like system. Every race, background, and class adds different numbers to your ability scores. While those who are experienced with the system may know these off the top of their head, I DO NOT. I have to read through them to understand what gives me what ability scores. I STILL don't have these memorized. Some make sense, others aren't something that would occur to me off the top of my head. Reading through the options and making these decisions with your ability scores in mind just takes me longer because of this. Perhaps if I were an experienced PF2e player I'd know all these ability score building points off the top of my head...but I don't.

In addition, I did not see anywhere where it said you have to be an expert and memorize all that stuff to play the game. If it had, you can be guaranteed we would not have even given it a shot. However, because we did NOT know it at first, and because we do not have all these options memorized (even if it is more limited in the PF2e Beginner Box, it's still a lot for a beginning player of PF2e to grasp) it TAKES TIME.

(edit - For comparison, 5e doesn't have the drawn out building of your ability scores, thus this is one section where 5e takes less time. It takes less time for those unfamiliar with the system to figure out their ability scores, though perhaps someone who was unfamiliar with D&D would still have trouble deciding what to assign where which may add time).

#2. In the BB, once you choose your class you still have to decide what to add your other ability score points to. They have to be different ability scores, so even if you only care about Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution if you were a Wizard, you still have to figure where you want that third ability score increase (You get 4 ability score increases, one is automatic depending on the class, you choose the other 3). Perhaps experienced players know exactly where they want to put it, but I didn't. With other systems it is relatively easy as you either already rolled it up by chance, you already know which scores (standard array) you want your highest scores to be in and don't really care what you put the other scores in, or with point buy you can focus the points on precisely the ability scores you want to max out with. The PF BB forces you to sort of spread out a little rather than focus on a min/max type idea, or otherwise.

#3. This is a new system. I am unfamiliar with it. Period. If you cannot understand that and why it may add to the time to create new characters, I'm not sure if you should be commenting on how long a character may take a new player to a system.

(edit: This would obviously also apply to any system new players are creating new characters with).

#4. In the PFBB you get Character sheets. They are a tad more complex and confusing than your standard Character sheets in 5e and you need to understand what the differences between Trained and Expert are. It's kind of like filling in a bubble sheet for a test, a test with many fill in bubbles. The Skill system has a lot more options and I LIKE THE VARIETY more than how 5e does it, BUT...it means you fill in a LOT OF BUBBLES for the skills and other items on your character sheet. I definitely felt I did FAR more writing and filling in on my character sheet than I have for any D&D game (including 3e and 3.5) for PF2e. It takes time to fill that sucker out. I don't know how anyone could cut that time down.

(In comparison, 5e is much simpler. You simply have a proficiency bonus and ability score modifiers, and they apply broadly, so filling out the sheet is much quicker. You have far more limited skills that use your proficiency bonus and after that you don't really worry about it. Shorter list and not as many differing numbers reduces the time to do this in 5e).

#5. In relation to #4 above, the book just gives you what equipment your starting character has, but it does not tell you the numbers that go with that equipment. You have to flip back and forth in the book to get it down, or you have to write it down and than find the relevant information in the book to write it down. Now, if you were really experienced with PF2e, you might be able to do this off the top of your head, but I can't. Heck, I play 5e a bit and can't even do that with all the items in 5e, much less PF2e.

All those things above made creating a character with the BB a longer experience than it would for me with 5e. I imagine that if these are the tailored down options of the BB from the Full game, that it probably would take longer to make a character using the full Core rules than it does with the BB. Hopefully that explains WHY it took me longer to make a character. As I said, I didn't find it too complex or confusing, or even frustrating. Creating the character was actually kind of fun, but it DID take time. I'm not going to lie about that to anyone. Simply put, it took quite awhile. I think the GM of our PF2e BB game knew it would take time which is why they had us create characters PRIOR to the first session, so we wouldn't be spending that much time during the first session making new characters.

Yup, as Nilbog said, here you aren’t comparing like for like. I get that you are new to the system. I can imagine it took you time. I can also imagine it took you a long time in 5e as well the first time you made them.
Yes PF2 ancestry adds modifiers to your scores. Oh wait, so does race in 5e. Unlike 5e, PF2 modifies your scores with background and class. Luckily that is only a +2 at each step. Thats not a laborious process and as you sound experienced in 5e, you’ve already got a good idea of what those stats mean...
Also, 5e doesn’t have drawn out ability scores? I’ll take adding +2 to different stats 4 times over spending time calculating a point buy with each step costing different points.

When I’ve been saying the level 1 character creation should be a similar time between the editions, I’m saying on a like for like basis (so either someone equally as noviced/experienced to both systems)

You’re absolutely right the pf2 character sheet is an unholy mess and think they dropped the ball there. There is more to fill out in it, but you do so through each step a bit at a time with the character creation guide telling you what to put where at each point.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Its so absurdly fast with Pathbuilder 2e, like 'puts OSR games to shame' fast, I just created a solid pool of pregens for new players today, the only reason any of them took more than a couple of minutes was that I kept going back and redesigning them to hit the right balance of 'iconic tropes' and 'wouldn't-see-this-in-5e'

Even players entirely new to the game have been able to generate characters super quickly using it. Coming from DND beyond, its like night and day. Redrazors is working on a web version as well, so soon the 'android only' problem won't exist.

 

[CapnZapp]

Pathfinder 2 is definitely and massively more complicated than 5th edition.

That's not the problem - in fact, in part it's a feature and not a bug.

The problem is instead that Pathfinder 2 is extremely cluttery. For all of its talk of a cleaned up ruleset... yeah, no. It's completely filled with the brim with exceptions and rules that seem like they should work identically, but actually vary slightly. And there are several rules subsystems that have a large impact on the game (and so you don't easily decide to skip them) but are massively over-engineered. Paizo really likes to use a thousand words when a hundred would be straight up superior.

And that's not even talking about the literally thousands of feats. The game would be straight up much better if half of them were just plain removed, disappeared into nothing. Sure plenty of feats are harmless in that they don't impact games that don't feature them. But the way Paizo decided to claim every single last square inch of design space with their feats make it very hard to gamesmaster. It utterly wrecks the "yes, but" GM paradigm. Whenever you as the GM gets asked if a hero can do this or that a little faster or better than what the rules allow - greasing the wheels as it were - you're immediately brought to a full stop since if you say "yes, but..." there's far too often a feat that allows that exact shortcut. The game is explicitly designed not to give any power to the GM because Paizo has taken the right away in order to sell more feats. (This is the exact opposite of "giving the power to the GM" which is what the game boasted as an advantage over PF1, by the way)

And it's a game with loads and LOADS of little pesky modifiers, often conditional ones with easily forgotten criteria. If you can't do numbers like 3d12+1d6+1d6+18+7+15-10-5=? in your head quickly and effortlessly, even hours into a play session, don't bother. And no, that wasn't some extremely niche corner case either. I'm saying that 3d12+1d6+1d6+18+7+15-10-5= can and will happen a dozen times each and every combat round (at high levels), maybe not in every combat, but likely some combats of every play session. And that's after hitting, which might involve d20+27+2-1-1+1-4 this attack, but d20+27-1-1+1 the previous attack. Every time you roll the dice, something will have changed, so you can never precalculate what you will be adding to the d20 or the 3d12.
A greater striking greataxe does 3d12 damage. Add two elemental runes like Fire and Lightning for the 2d6. Then add your static bonus, plus some modifier. Then add 15 for the monster's vulnerability to fire and subtract 10 for hardness or slashing resistance. Finally subtract 5 for lightning resistance.

As for the lethality, it's not necessarily built into the rules. Any GM worth his salt can easily write an adventure that even newbies find easy (combat-wise).

It's the official adventures. PF2 definitely doubles down on the combat-as-sport paradigm. All three official APs to date start off with shockingly difficult fights. The only reason things get better at double-digit levels is because the game is inherently balanced to slowly tilt in the favor of heroes.

But there are definitely aspects of it that have to do with the rules. PF2 is going all in on the idea that combat is balanced for the individual encounter. Everything in the game is geared towards the expectation characters enter each and every fight at full HP. (Actually, that's one of the optional variants that should have been in the GMG - a section on how to rejig the game into allowing resource-management since it's not immediately obvious what you need to do to have it back in your game)

It's a hard game to love. There's simply so many aspects of it that chafe. I do love its combat, or rather, I love the monsters. Stat blocks are reasonably clean so I don't have to read up on them beforehand, yet feature individual powers that make different monsters look and act differently.

In our group of five people, three have stated that in hindsight they prefer 5E (even though we're definitely in the market for something more crunchy than 5E), with one being neutral and only one actively preferring it (finding its downsides preferable to the downsides of 5E). Myself, I'm the GM (or DM), so I'm mostly disappointed if I don't get more mileage out of the considerable investment (not the economical investment, but the mental investment of mastering its rules) before shelving it.

I don't have high hopes for the long-term success of Pathfinder 2. It desperately needed a senior designer remembering the KISS principle, with the power to kill people's darlings.

In summary: I can definitely play PF2, but I am deeply disappointed Pathfinder 2 reads and plays like it was written by a dev team entirely unawares of the great improvements 5th edition has brought to the D&D hobby. Why couldn't at least one Paizo employee swallow her pride and go look over the fence to see what 5E was up to. (5E did come out several years before publication of PF2!)

PF2 is so... very 2010. Pathfinder 2 would have been lauded as a great game if it competed against 3rd edition or 4th edition. In fact, in too many ways PF2 comes across as a superior 4E product. (That's not meant as a good thing).

Now in 2020 it just comes across as quaint and unfriendly and bloated and dated.

 

[transmission89]

Pathfinder 2 is definitely and massively more complicated than 5th edition.

That's not the problem - in fact, in part it's a feature and not a bug.

The problem is instead that Pathfinder 2 is extremely cluttery. For all of its talk of a cleaned up ruleset... yeah, no. It's completely filled with the brim with exceptions and rules that seem like they should work identically, but actually vary slightly. And there are several rules subsystems that have a large impact on the game (and so you don't easily decide to skip them) but are massively over-engineered. Paizo really likes to use a thousand words when a hundred would be straight up superior.

And that's not even talking about the literally thousands of feats. The game would be straight up much better if half of them were just plain removed, disappeared into nothing. Sure plenty of feats are harmless in that they don't impact games that don't feature them. But the way Paizo decided to claim every single last square inch of design space with their feats make it very hard to gamesmaster. It utterly wrecks the "yes, but" GM paradigm. Whenever you as the GM gets asked if a hero can do this or that a little faster or better than what the rules allow - greasing the wheels as it were - you're immediately brought to a full stop since if you say "yes, but..." there's far too often a feat that allows that exact shortcut. The game is explicitly designed not to give any power to the GM because Paizo has taken the right away in order to sell more feats. (This is the exact opposite of "giving the power to the GM" which is what the game boasted as an advantage over PF1, by the way)

And it's a game with loads and LOADS of little pesky modifiers, often conditional ones with easily forgotten criteria. If you can't do numbers like 3d12+1d6+1d6+18+7+15-10-5=? in your head quickly and effortlessly, even hours into a play session, don't bother. And no, that wasn't some extremely niche corner case either. I'm saying that 3d12+1d6+1d6+18+7+15-10-5= can and will happen a dozen times each and every combat round (at high levels), maybe not in every combat, but likely some combats of every play session. And that's after hitting, which might involve d20+27+2-1-1+1-4 this attack, but d20+27-1-1+1 the previous attack.
A greater striking greataxe does 3d12 damage. Add two elemental runes like Fire and Lightning for the 2d6. Then add your static bonus, plus some modifier. Then add 15 for the monster's vulnerability to fire and subtract 10 for hardness or slashing resistance. Finally subtract 5 for lightning resistance.

As for the lethality, it's not necessarily built into the rules. Any GM worth his salt can easily write an adventure that even newbies find easy (combat-wise).

It's the official adventures. PF2 definitely doubles down on the combat-as-sport. All three official APs to date start off with shockingly difficult fights.

But there are definitely aspects of it that have to do with the rules. PF2 is going all in on the idea that combat is balanced for the individual encounter. Everything in the game is geared towards making characters enter each and every fight at full HP. (Actually, that's one of the optional variants that should have been in the GMG - a section on how to rejig the game into allowing resource-management since it's not immediately obvious what you need to do to have it back in your game)

It's a hard game to love. There's simply so many aspects of it that chafe. I do love its combat, or rather, I love the monsters. Stat blocks are reasonably clean so I don't have to read up on them beforehand, yet feature individual powers that make different monsters look and act differently.

In our group of five people, three have stated that in hindsight they prefer 5E (even though we're definitely in the market for something more crunchy than 5E), with one being neutral and only one actively preferring it (finding its downsides preferable to the downsides of 5E). Myself, I'm the GM (or DM), so I'm mostly disappointed if I don't get more mileage out of the considerable investment (not the economical investment, but the mental investment of mastering its rules) before shelving it.

I don't have high hopes for the long-term success of Pathfinder 2. It desperately needed a senior designer remembering the KISS principle, with the power to kill people's darlings.

In summary: I can definitely play PF2, but I am deeply disappointed Pathfinder 2 reads and plays like it was written by a dev team entirely unawares of the great improvements 5th edition has brought to the D&D hobby. Why couldn't at least one Paizo employee swallow her pride and go look over the fence to see what 5E was up to. (5E did come out several years before publication of PF2!)

PF2 is so... very 2010. Pathfinder 2 would have been lauded as a great game if it competed against 3rd edition or 4th edition. In fact, in too many ways PF2 comes across as a superior 4E product. (That's not meant as a good thing).

Now in 2020 it just comes across as quaint and unfriendly and bloated and dated.

That's great and all, but here we are talking about the beginner box as a product. I think it's already well understood from your multiple threads that you dislike pf2.
What is becoming personally irritating is your statement of opinion as absolute fact and making the case from there. "It's a hard game to love". And paraphrasing from your other threads "It's not the 5e+ game that I wanted, therefore it is a convoluted failure". In YOUR opinion. There are many who do love it.

Yes it has more modifiers than the advantage/disadvantage of 5e ( which brings a load of reductive problems of its own IN MY OPINION). I could take the time to argue your example of modifiers is again disingenuous as we could break down the rolls of 5e in a similar manner (adding prof bonus adding str bonus, halving for resistance, wait, does this use my bonus action or is it a standard action? Does this count as a melee attack or a melee attack action?). But it would be a pointless argument as it would sail right over into you saying that PF2 has more modifiers (which I get, but it's not as absurdly complicated as you are trying to present).

Honestly, I'm beginning to wonder why you post on the subject of pf2. I mean, you're absolutely free and welcome to. But it's got to be a little tiring from moving all the goal posts in your arguments when challenged by other players, as well as wasting time and energy talking about a system you dislike. I mean, each to their own, but I personally wouldn't be wasting my time.