In my era of running 3.x and PF1, I had a "only core rules" house rule at my table. There was enough for a GM to keep up with in those books only.
Pathfinder 1E Are people still playing Pathfinder 1e?
payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
Unfortunately, PF2 sent me packing. Stats have been boiled down to 2-3 different working arrays for every character, multi-classing has been shafted into 4E hybrid style, and the level banding is too tight and tactical bog down of combat is boring. Though, that definitely varies by preference. I think PF2 is an outstanding game I just don't happen to like playing.
O
Organized play doesn't let the gm make those decisions, so most of my pf1 gming used all books. PFS did have a core only track too though. I've always been a bit of a completionist anyway which is far easier now that pdf books exist.
I may find I am in the same boat, but since it will not have the things that frustrate me in pf1 and 5e, I'm willing to embrace a new set of problems.
payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
Well, I have a few ideas to make the game more suitable, for myself anyways. If I run it again I'd use the proficiency without level and free archetype variants. That might expand the level banding some allowing better sandbox play, and the additional archetype take the suffocation out of multi-classing. Food for thought.
Thomas Shey
Legend
Free Archetype is one of the better optional rules; it gives a little more variety without impacting character power notably.
(This is primarily a problem with the base rules because class feats are, on the whole, good enough you don't really want to discard them for multiclass or other archetype feats).
I like the idea of being a completionist, but it's not practical to run a game with all of that information. It's better to run a curated experience than to allow everything in a game, I've found.
Also, I don't run PFS.
DrunkonDuty
he/him
I agree, PF 1e Core rules are enough. (With the caveat that Unchained Monk and Rogue are pretty necessary to make those classes suck less.) For a given campaign I'll maybe allow stuff from other books. Also, and I'm pretty sure I said this last time I posted in this thread, I'm limiting it to E8 style. (level limit of 8, with advancement after that taking the form of feats.)
DrunkonDuty
he/him
Addendum: which is well and good for home games. But yeah, organised play is different. Players are allowed, nay encouraged, to have all the latest and greatest in power creep. For a GM it's a lot of work. Hell, for player it can be a lot of work. I think it's why I never warmed to organised play.
payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
I opened the flood gates and had no issues. The only things I banned were the gunslinger and summoner because they were broke ass at creation. I know there are likely other things that are overpowered but they never came up in my games. The advanced players guide was a huge hit and I couldn't imagine playing PF1 without it.
Similar Threads
