Pathfinder 2E PF2E Gurus teach me! +

[payn]

Although this is very true, especially if you use off the shelf adventures as is, PF2e also makes it very easy to change this if you wanted to. Play an official adventure a level or two above suggested or adjust encounters using the system parameters which work and you can have "easy mode" back. I think that probably nullifies a lot of the strengths of PF2e so better off just using another system but it is an option for those that just want to autopilot and are attracted to other parts of pf2e.

Funny you should say that, I was just thinking about how I ran APs in PF1. I always kept the party about a level behind the advancement track so the challenge was right (for my group). Now, I'm thinking keeping them a level ahead might be the ticket in PF2.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Funny you should say that, I was just thinking about how I ran APs in PF1. I always kept the party about a level behind the advancement track so the challenge was right (for my group). Now, I'm thinking keeping them a level ahead might be the ticket in PF2.

Entirely possible.

 

[Retreater]

Now, I'm thinking keeping them a level ahead might be the ticket in PF2.

So far that's working for me. It's a Goldilocks challenge level.

 

[Campbell]

One thing I would stress to players of spellcasters is to embrace their skills as much as their magical prowess outside of combat. Skills and spells have niches they each fill. A healing focused Cleric is going to want to invest in Medicine for example. Casters (and everyone else) are going to be a lot more broadly capable than in most versions of D&D (both in terms of ability scores and skill training). Your Wizard is going to very much be an adventurer as much as they are a Wizard. It's best to embrace that if you want to be successful.

 

[billd91]

-The wealth per level guidelines, and the item system in general, is not optional. It's part of the math of the game. The same goes with the encounter guidelines. It is not like most D&D editions where you can just ignore item and CR recommendations. Mark put a lot of effort to make the math of the game work when you just follow the guidelines, so I would tell any new 2e GM to consider those guidelines sacred until they understand why they are the way they are. All the APs already do that for you.

After playing 5e, this became one of the utter deal-breakers for PF2 for me. 5e returned me to the contentment of having magic items actually be something semi-optional and real boosts in broader utility rather than expected math to fulfill - like back in the AD&D days.

1. If you want to avoid the headache of tracking this, you can just use the (very popular) Automatic Bonus Progression optional rules in the Gamemastery Guide. This is, IMO, a big quality of life bump -- you don't have to worry about gear at all, and can just hand out magic items whenever it feels fun/flavorful to do so.

I dropped out of PF2 before the GG came out. So if I ever do pick it back up, it seems this would be an absolute must for me to be satisfied with PF2.

 

[Porridge]

After playing 5e, this became one of the utter deal-breakers for PF2 for me. 5e returned me to the contentment of having magic items actually be something semi-optional and real boosts in broader utility rather than expected math to fulfill - like back in the AD&D days.

I dropped out of PF2 before the GG came out. So if I ever do pick it back up, it seems this would be an absolute must for me to be satisfied with PF2.

During the playtest the developers floated the idea of making something like Automatic Bonus Progression rules the default rules, but they found a large majority of playtesters preferred going the other way. Personally, I share your dislike for mandatory magic items (and I can't imagine playing without the Automatic Bonus Progression rules). But that's not what the majority of playtesters wanted...

 

[Mallus]

Pathfinder 2e sounds interesting, but also significantly more complex than 5e while at the same time not 3.75e, either.

How much time did it take 3.5/5e DMs to get up to speed running Pathfinder 2e? From what I've been reading lately, 2e sounds like it belongs squarely in the "I'd like to play it, but not run it" category.

I've really become accustomed to all the ways 5e streamlines the game. I'm also a little leery about the 'expected gear' and 'tighter, therefore harder to mess with' challenge rating system.

 

[billd91]

During the playtest the developers floated the idea of making something like Automatic Bonus Progression rules the default rules, but they found a large majority of playtesters preferred going the other way. Personally, I share your dislike for mandatory magic items (and I can't imagine playing without the Automatic Bonus Progression rules). But that's not what the majority of playtesters wanted...

There's a segment of the gamer community, not just tabletop but also computer, that just loves to craft/fiddle with gear - from item bonus elements in PF2 to modifying equipment in Diablo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls. I am increasingly NOT part of that community so many of my items in any of those computer games end up being minimally modified. It's just not what I'm playing for.

 

[payn]

After playing 5e, this became one of the utter deal-breakers for PF2 for me. 5e returned me to the contentment of having magic items actually be something semi-optional and real boosts in broader utility rather than expected math to fulfill - like back in the AD&D days.

You and me both.

I dropped out of PF2 before the GG came out. So if I ever do pick it back up, it seems this would be an absolute must for me to be satisfied with PF2.

Im also a big fan of proficiency without level and free archetype variants.

 

[Scribe]

There's a segment of the gamer community, not just tabletop but also computer, that just loves to craft/fiddle with gear - from item bonus elements in PF2 to modifying equipment in Diablo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls. I am increasingly NOT part of that community so many of my items in any of those computer games end up being minimally modified. It's just not what I'm playing for.

Hello, its me.