Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e: is it RAW or RAI to always take 10 minutes and heal between encounters?

[CapnZapp]

I think it’s a shame FFG insist on imposing their goofy dice on every game they publish even when it’s a new edition of an existing system.

Aaaah... if it only were the goofy dice...

(I would absolutely have invested in WFRP3 if it was a regular ttrpg only with weird dice. The dice was 5% of the reason my entire being rejected it like antimatter, tops)

 

[CapnZapp]

<The FFG Dice Defender has logged on>

BRING IT!!!

 

[CapnZapp]

Really? Did you see exactly where I went after I ducked around that copse of trees? Can you hurdle the creek the way I did? Are you willing to get ahead of your friends to do it?

If monster A sees hero H disappear around a corner, it simply runs to that corner and... there you are.

If you aren't a Rogue-class character you have zero options to just "disappear".

Sure it is possible to envision a map with enough twists and turns that 10 or 15 squares is enough to break line of sight (multiple corners to turn), but mosts maps just aren't like that. Plus - again unless you're an experienced Rogue - you are running away, you are not stealthing away. And since you aren't stealthing, monsters will automatically locate you by sound ("I can hear her running in the left corridor").

Also PF2 combats are calibrated so that every round is incredibly decisive. Just spending your actions on "run away!" can all by itself be the tipping point between success and failure - had you stayed and fought, the impact of that decision can easily be enough to win (even though you might have to endure going down, spending money on healing potions, getting uncomfortably close to Dying 4, etc).

All of this assumes what actually is not the common case at all, namely that there is no other hero the monsters can wail on. Just because you ran away does not necessarily mean all your party friends have yet had the time to do the same.

Assuming we're still discussing the regular combat rules and mapped combats; not TOTM of course.

 

[CapnZapp]

They aren't really; some of them just don't come up, and some are only relevant during closing. But as an example, being able to cross barriers and the fact getting too far ahead of people can be a bad idea comes up relatively frequently.

PF2 does not have rules for distance. You basically must add a rule like 3E's "-1 for every 20 ft away" or you're trying to run away on a video game map.

 

[CapnZapp]

To clarify: I'm not trying to argue any of you are running your games wrong.

I'm trying to argue I don't buy the notion "since you can add this Paizo gets away clean"

 

[kenada]

Yeah, well, from my vantage point, that's just another rules subsystem overlay.

By that I mean - if this is the core conflict resolution mechanism, great!

But in a game like D&D (or PF2) there already exists a huuuuge core conflict resolution mechanism, for which a fuckton of character abilities and options are geared toward 100%.

I'm simply not interested in adding a second set of rules, especially since there is no integration with the existing set of character options, and especially since the first set of character options is so unbelievably detailed and intricate in PF2. (When I say I get a feeling of "cheating", I don't mean in the sense that somebody is depriving you of agency - I mean in the sense you're cheated out of whatever optimizations you've done on your character build - carefully selecting feats or subclasses or whatever means less and less, the more matters are resolved by a completely different set of parameters.)

So it's not that I'm dead set against it in general.

In a game such as "one page D&D" I would mind much less, since there is essentially nothing to supplant or replace. In a game based around it, I would actively be interested to learn more.

But in PF2, there already exists a mechanism that enables you to "take the decision-making out of the GM’s hands once they are put on the table".

It is called "combat". (To a limited degree, you have skill checks - which absolutely is small and simple enough - but why would you play a complicated game like PF2 if you settle for skill checks as your primary conflict resolution engine?)

On the other hand, since the VP subsystem has no integration with the existing set of character options, GMs are free to make whatever rulings they want without having to worry that they just invalidated or stepped on the toes of those options. If the PCs are in a chase, and someone wants to make a check to go a bit faster, one can just let them do that without any risk that someday Paizo will introduce a feat doing the same thing.

 

[kenada]

All of this assumes what actually is not the common case at all, namely that there is no other hero the monsters can wail on. Just because you ran away does not necessarily mean all your party friends have yet had the time to do the same.

So what you’re saying is you only need to be faster than the slowest member of the party (they can be the bait).

 

[kenada]

I'm trying to argue I don't buy the notion "since you can add this Paizo gets away clean"

I don’t think any of us are arguing that “Paizo gets away clean”. This side discussion got started when it was noted that the party had survived a couple of fights in Abomination Vaults because the monsters used suboptimal tactics and the party was allowed to escape. The consensus response seems to be, “yeah, that’s fine.” Additionally, there’s been a discussion of how to handle escapes (which should implicitly acknowledge that Paizo provides no structures for that except for some advice in the CRB).

 

[payn]

I dont care about goofy dice I just hate reading rule books for games with them. "For $ you get a success/advantage and for every & you get a disadvantage/failure. To make your dice pool take X number of (insert picture of a purple dice here) and then the GM decides how many (insert picture of yellow dice here)..." I dont know why, Just hate reading this stuff.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I dont care about goofy dice I just hate reading rule books for games with them. "For $ you get a success/advantage and for every & you get a disadvantage/failure. To make your dice pool take X number of (insert picture of a purple dice here) and then the GM decides how many (insert picture of yellow dice here)..." I dont know why, Just hate reading this stuff.

The Star Wars books are honestly some of the easiest reads I've seen. Genesys, from what I remember, is pretty good, too. L5R is harder, largely because I think in following the classic 20 questions they put some incredibly important concepts further back than they should.

But what you're talking about is so wonderful and liberating as part of the game, it's hard to fully capture it. Building the dice pools for difficulty are pretty easy and great to modify: if you have a minor problem, add a setback die (or two). If there's something there that could cause real harm to the person, you change a purple die to a red Challenge die, which have critical failures on them. Green dice are ability dice, what you get from your natural talents, while the yellow dice are skill dice, which are better all around and also allow you to get critical successes. It's a really cool separation between skill and talent, where having even one level means that you get a definite edge compared to before, along with the added benefit of being able to get game-changing critical successes ("Triumphs" in system terms).

Spending Advantage and Threat are also similarly great: you can now model cool things like your shots suppressing their target or putting your allies in better position to attack without having to just make it up by GM Fiat or make 4 die rolls to justify it. One of my favorite things was my brother rolling up to a speeder, managing to crack the lock on it and spending 3 advantage to find the keys in the visor. Allowing the players to add little bits into scenes or use their advantage to cause cinematic stuff to occur like shooting gantries with stormtroopers down with a critical success despite failing to hit the troopers is really, really ufn.

The big thing is that it is a system where you shouldn't be making die rolls all the time; if you have everybody rolling a check every time you have a problem, the system won't work well. Instead it's better to have people section off tasks or doing something slightly different, or if they want to do the same thing then one helps the other.