Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gorgon Zee" data-source="post: 8005854" data-attributes="member: 75787">CapnZapp, you clearly have made the decision not to run with attrition. And that's absolutely OK. It's a valid and fun way to play to allow your players to completely heal up after every encounter, especially if your players apparently will just quit the game rather than play in an attrition game.But it makes your statements that PF2 doesn't work with attrition seem&nbsp; hollow. I am also playing in an AP that's at times brutally hard (likely the same one as you). Most encounters have half the party at low HP -- just like yours (met any elemental giants backed up by dozens of archers yet?). But we have a different play style. We LIKE attrition. After each encounter we ask the GM if it looks safe to rest and the typical answer is &quot;maybe for 10 minutes, but any longer than that and patrols will be coming&quot;. So we do go into the next encounter down on HP. We do have to spend magical healing between encounters just to get our fighter up to 75%. Because we like that style of play.This honestly is not meant as a disparagement on your style of play -- it would be hypocritical of me to say so, as I'm also playing in a fun 4E campaign which absolutely is &quot;full heals between encounters&quot;, but it doesn't seem like the differences between our styles are based on the systems -- it seems that they re based on the GM style. Which, for my money is a strong win -- it makes it clear that PF2 can work well with a full-heal or an attrition play style. It can even do so with using published Adventure Paths, so it doesn't even require much GM work. In fact, our two different experiences show that all it takes is a simple bit of GM direction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gorgon Zee, post: 8005854, member: 75787"] CapnZapp, you clearly have made the decision not to run with attrition. And that's absolutely OK. It's a valid and fun way to play to allow your players to completely heal up after every encounter, especially if your players apparently will just quit the game rather than play in an attrition game. But it makes your statements that PF2 doesn't work with attrition seem hollow. I am also playing in an AP that's at times brutally hard (likely the same one as you). Most encounters have half the party at low HP -- just like yours (met any elemental giants backed up by dozens of archers yet?). But we have a different play style. We LIKE attrition. After each encounter we ask the GM if it looks safe to rest and the typical answer is "maybe for 10 minutes, but any longer than that and patrols will be coming". So we do go into the next encounter down on HP. We do have to spend magical healing between encounters just to get our fighter up to 75%. Because we like that style of play. This honestly is not meant as a disparagement on your style of play -- it would be hypocritical of me to say so, as I'm also playing in a fun 4E campaign which absolutely is "full heals between encounters", but it doesn't seem like the differences between our styles are based on the systems -- it seems that they re based on the GM style. Which, for my money is a strong win -- it makes it clear that PF2 can work well with a full-heal or an attrition play style. It can even do so with using published Adventure Paths, so it doesn't even require much GM work. In fact, our two different experiences show that all it takes is a simple bit of GM direction. [/QUOTE]

Verification