Pathfinder 2E I think I am giving up on PF2ER

[Velderan]

Ok, so I can see the confusion.
And I've honestly had trouble GMing most of the post-2000 era F20 games (3.x/PF1, 4E, 5E, PF2) for this reason.
The games' challenge comes from encounters, designed to ramp up with ever-increasing threats across several categories:
1) Tactics
2) Terrain
3) Increased monster abilities and HP

Eventually, there is only so difficult you can go in these categories that you reach a TPK. How can an encounter-based game stay fun without ever-increasing the challenges of the encounters?
In a story-based game, you can keep the interest in the narrative. In a mystery, keep creating mysteries. But in a game about fighting where you're allowed to only push the combat to the X Level to threaten the group only to 25% of their abilities? You're gonna mess up. It doesn't matter how experienced of a GM you are. It doesn't matter how tight the math is. Just by trying to keep them on their toes and keep it interesting, you're going to wipe out the party.

Thank you. That does help better understand your view.

I've never had a character fail a save on a disease or other affliction.

Never? Do they frequently use hero points on failed saves or are they just lucky on saves to begin with?

In the current AP I'm running, my group has had multiple people fail their saves and contract ghoul fever, which has led to them leaving the dungeon early to seek aid in town when I described the onset of the affliction. It definitely made their characters fear fighting ghouls after that. Also two of them failed their saves and contracted lycanthropy. That one is going to be fun because I rolled some dice to figure out the current moon phase and determined the full moon was 2 weeks away. Aside from vaguely describing the wound from the werewolf initially, they've probably forgotten about it and we're currently about a week away from the first full moon. I'll remind them again a day or two prior when I describe some dreams or something, I haven't fully figured that one out yet.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I'm not saying that the actions of the characters would be written, but there would be the possibility that such a scene could unfold with the design of the adventure. There would be signs, portents, clues, that would lead to encounters rather than just isolated encounters on a battlegrid with no motivations for the enemies, no tie-in for the rest of the world.
When you buy an AP, you get "here's a pointless fight with a dragon that fights to the death."

I find APs for most systems (but especially D20) are designed in a very specific way for a very specific audience that wants stuff now rather than later. I'm not sure that it talks about how the game necessarily should be played, but rather the sort of people who are more likely to buy pre-made adventures.

 

[Incenjucar]

I'm not saying that the actions of the characters would be written, but there would be the possibility that such a scene could unfold with the design of the adventure. There would be signs, portents, clues, that would lead to encounters rather than just isolated encounters on a battlegrid with no motivations for the enemies, no tie-in for the rest of the world.
When you buy an AP, you get "here's a pointless fight with a dragon that fights to the death."

A campaign is ~200 events. How many do you want to devote to tracks and wounds?

 

[Retreater]

Never? Do they frequently use hero points on failed saves or are they just lucky on saves to begin with?

It's a combination of factors.
First, the monster has to hit.
Second, the character has to fail the saving throw (which is usually lower than you'd expect).
Third, the character has to decide to not spend a Hero Point to save.

It's just something that didn't happen in early levels. And by the time you're running into monsters who more commonly spread afflictions, they have the tools to deal with them.

 

[Retreater]

I find APs for most systems (but especially D20) are designed in a very specific way for a very specific audience that wants stuff now rather than later. I'm not sure that it talks about how the game necessarily should be played, but rather the sort of people who are more likely to buy pre-made adventures.

I've found that people who play Pathfinder are MUCH more likely to be AP-people than homebrew people. Perhaps that's wrong? Even what I've seen from PFS is largely written this way.

 

[billd91]

I've found that people who play Pathfinder are MUCH more likely to be AP-people than homebrew people. Perhaps that's wrong?

Well, if they're customers of Paizo, they had to get drawn in to that market somehow. Was it the PF2 game or was it the APs? Maybe both together? Since Paizo is known for both, I don't think it's that surprising that they'd attract people into both.

Even what I've seen from PFS is largely written this way.

What way? For an audience that wants stuff now rather than later? If so, considering the PFS adventures are written to present a whole adventure inside a 5-hour time slot while still having time for the bookkeeping, are we surprised? It's not like they have a lot of extra time to build atmosphere, use foreshadowing, etc.

 

[Retreater]

A campaign is ~200 events. How many do you want to devote to tracks and wounds?

I'd prefer a campaign of ~35 to 50 events that matter, that have tension, excitement, and challenge. If we want to have a few "turn your brain off" fights that don't matter, that's okay. We certainly don't need 200.
Not in this economy.

 

[Retreater]

What way? For an audience that wants stuff now rather than later? If so, considering the PFS adventures are written to present a whole adventure inside a 5-hour time slot while still having time for the bookkeeping, are we surprised? It's not like they have a lot of extra time to build atmosphere, use foreshadowing, etc.

Right. I guess the point is that fights in an Adventure Path shouldn't be written the same as a 5-hour one-shot PFS game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I find APs for most systems (but especially D20) are designed in a very specific way for a very specific audience that wants stuff now rather than later. I'm not sure that it talks about how the game necessarily should be played, but rather the sort of people who are more likely to buy pre-made adventures.

I'm not sure the evolution of a game system put out by a company that is, in many ways, as known for their adventures as their actual RPGs is as separated out as I think you imply here.

 

[Incenjucar]

I'd prefer a campaign of ~35 to 50 events that matter, that have tension, excitement, and challenge. If we want to have a few "turn your brain off" fights that don't matter, that's okay. We certainly don't need 200.
Not in this economy.

So you want to go from level 1-20 with about 20 total combats and 30 non-combat activities?