Search results

I'd say it depends on the game. PF2 is better for telling Paizo AP stories and D&D 5e is better for telling WotC adventures. For a homebrew game, it appears to me mostly to be a matter of how quickly you want character progression math to scale and player tolerance for complexity. For one game...

Unless your definition of "hard core fan" relates only to purchasing, that statement wouldn't match my observations. Of nine hardcore PF1 players I observed over the years (in two games), one had a full subscription and one had a subscription to APs only. One bought via game stores. Three bought...

I think @kenada describes it pretty well. I wouldn't buy the Playtest book. One of my regular games played the entire Playtest and then the Final Release for a few months. If I had to pick between the final version and the playtest version, I would pick the Final Version because it got more...

For PF2, there's a number of folks who rated it as 1-Star because the shipping method bent the cover. I've not read through the 5e reviews to see if there's some similar kind of thing among its data, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I can agree with the sentiment that the system was working as intended and likely comes close to the balance the designers wanted. But of my two regular games: one didn't find it to be fun and the other didn't even want to try it. I rated it as "poor" because at those two tables it failed to...

Sorry? I hope the longer reply was clearer. Perhaps a better summary would have been: I found it handy for some conceptions and frustrating for others. I appreciate the Dedication Feat approach as an option, but alone it seemed insufficient. EDIT: We've stopped playing PF2, so I'm slowly...

There's an old D&D-like game called "Thieves' Guild" that had a number of supplements, "Thieves' Guild 2", etc. Each of them included numerous small scenarios for thieves. You could look at those as a number of operations a guild might be engaged in...

I don't recall guidance about them in PF1, but I wouldn't have looked for it. As you say, the technique has been around forever. A new DM would likely appreciate secret roles being included in the rules, but veteran DMs already knew the option was there for them. There are other similar and...

This is hard to say because I'm still very new to 5e. (Coming from PF2; made my first 5e character last night.) I might be tempted to bring over parts of the action system, but it isn't a "must-have." For instance, I liked how the three-action system could lead to spells with different casting...

Short Answer: It is hit and miss, but then that's pretty much always been the case. It seems to depend on your character conception and the class features exposed via the Dedication feats. My own experiences were that the PF2 multiclass rules did really well with a Wizard who wanted to tote a...

You could perhaps run the Plaguestone adventure to get a taste without committing to a full AP. That's levels 1-4. Its an okay module and you'll see the system. The math in PF2 is tighter so you're less likely to see it fall apart. Getting into matters of taste, some of our crowd thought the...

PF2 is a decent and playable game. The compelling reasons that I see are: If you're into Golarion, you can continue to enjoy new Paizo APs without having to convert them. The action economy is expressed a little clearer and has a couple more options that you might use. You get better balanced...

Oh, that's a problem. Once they've got a taste for characters, they won't be sated by regular dog food. You're going to need a character generator that can spit characters out in volume.

From memory, I recall the Druid player didn't like the spells that transformed them into an animal. I seem to remember he didn't think they were worth casting and that was something he felt was central to his conception. Then he pivoted to trying to be a healer and thought he didn't have enough...

I don't know about @Xenonnonex, but I found "blaster" type Wizards did okay, but other variations were lacking. For instance, "buff" spells generally affected fewer people (or just one person) and had short a duration, though sometimes they could be improved if slotted higher, though you don't...

For my own game, the only thing that makes a Paladin fall is the player deciding they want a fallen Paladin. (A fallen Paladin is an interesting character concept.) They're free to make their own oath and roleplay it strictly or loosely. The class, to me, is a bag of powers. For my friend's...

I'd say whenever they had a choice and chose to go against their oath. That said, the more interesting question to me is what happens because of it. In my games, the deities are not real; the atheists are correct. Any oath has to be upheld by society. Society can be political. Society can be...

I don't think its radical. It would be desirable, if it were possible. De gustibus non est disputandum. That is, it will be hard to get away from it being a matter of taste/preference. What you might be able to do is define a number of traits you find to be desirable and then associate that...

Heh, good point. I guess I channeled a PF1 conversation there. The PF2 variation would be about the multi-class feats.

Yes, I'd say mixed. PF2 is going to appeal to many people. There was a playtest and Paizo probably didn't ignore the majority of their customers. We perhaps have a few really casual, casual players. We have two that don't really want to know any game system. They have characters made for them...