Pathfinder 2E I played my first PF2e game this week. Here's why I'm less inclined to play again.

[Eric V]

I just completed the 1-20 Blood Lords AP as an investigator. It worked extremely well.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm stuck on the assumption that an investigator is supposed to be good in combat. And that a mystery requires initiative.

Maybe I should avoid PF2 as well.

Like most D&D derivatives, PF2e assumes all classes are combat capable in addition to whatever else they do. The differences are usually about how and how they go about it and what they do outside of it.

 

[Kichwas]

Maybe the characters I chose were poor examples (in which case, taking them out of the stack of the dozen pregens we were handed might have been a good idea). But with my lack of experience, I can't tell the difference between a lacking demo and a lacking game.

While the reasons you didn't like it might very well have stayed true other wise... yes. You got handed 2 classes that I would NEVER hand a new player.

The fact that you ended up with both of the worst possible classes to hand a new player is very bad luck.

I have no idea if you would have still felt the same way about PF2E otherwise. But those two are just beasts of managing the action economy in the worst ways for people who have not yet decided they like it. They're classes you hand 'True Believers", not the people passing in the Airport you're trying to teach about the Good News...

Not even in regards to the thematic aspects people above my post are debating, the game mechanics of Investigator and Inventor are just downright 'fill out this tax form' convoluted to reach the same result as classes that just say "I do stuff" and get told "stuff happens."

Your 'Missionary' basically led with telling you to give up sex, drugs, and rock and roll, before telling you any of the 'Good News' bits.

 

[GMMichael]

Like most D&D derivatives, PF2e assumes all classes are combat capable in addition to whatever else they do. The differences are usually about how and how they go about it and what they do outside of it.

I think a Decker is crying somewhere.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I think a Decker is crying somewhere.

Is Shadowrun a D&D derivative? Not last time I looked. A lot of modern and futuristic games are more willing to have non-combat specialists (though even in most of those complete noncombatants are usually a bad idea), because the games they're wrapped around have more processes that require a lot of noncombat engagement that's not just about the player.

If anything deckers, netrunners and similar character types tend to have the problem they tie up too much time in their own gig; that's one reason a common evolutionary trend in hacking is to make it needed to do on-site, and in time frames comparable to combat turns.

 

[Osgood]

I got suckered into playing PF2 for like 6 excruciating months. I have never had less fun with any gaming system, it actually sent me into an existential crisis about my 40 year relationship with role-playing that I haven’t fully recovered from more than half a year later. If I ever encounter someone who says they are considering trying PF2, I’ll suggest they try something less harmful like heroin instead.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I got suckered into playing PF2 for like 6 excruciating months. I have never had less fun with any gaming system, it actually sent me into an existential crisis about my 40 year relationship with role-playing that I haven’t fully recovered from more than half a year later. If I ever encounter someone who says they are considering trying PF2, I’ll suggest they try something less harmful like heroin instead.

Not to put too fine a point on it, dude, but you aren't everyone. I played in two full 20-level PF2e campaigns and a shorter 6 level ones and would say I enjoyed about 80-90% of that play (and most of the part I didn't enjoy was an issue with my choice of class in the long one).

I mean, don't get me wrong, you like what you like, but hyperbole and overprojecting aren't virtues.

 

[Nilbog]

I got suckered into playing PF2 for like 6 excruciating months. I have never had less fun with any gaming system, it actually sent me into an existential crisis about my 40 year relationship with role-playing that I haven’t fully recovered from more than half a year later. If I ever encounter someone who says they are considering trying PF2, I’ll suggest they try something less harmful like heroin instead.

Hope you've made a full recovery.

The world of over reactive posting would never be the same without you.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

Context: I have GM'd for an investigator from levels 1 through 9, and three campaigns overall.

The DM apologized for not realizing I was an Investigator and needed some additional prep opportunity baked into the game, but he shouldn't have had to.

The investigator benefits from having setup time, but it isn't necessary to the class working.

If there's a mystery of some sort involved, and if you have the opportunity to prep with some investigation, then you can use your Int for attack rolls

You don't need any of the above, you can ALWAYS use Devise a stratagem (and should be most rounds!). Importantly, you also don't need there to be "a mystery" in the literal sense, you just need to declare a concept or individual you want to investigate during exploration mode. Investigators can be played in any style of campaign.

2 hours

2 hours isn't enough time to showcase a system properly. I imagine you were playing a Pathfinder Society Bounty. These play VERY differently from a home game due to the public nature and time constraints. Even full PFS games tend to gloss over mechanics and present a narrow railroad adventure for the sake of efficiency.

But I also needed an action to power myself up for a damage bonus, and in a battle that only lasts 2-3 rounds, it's not worth trading an attack now for a small damage boost later. So basically the whole setup was a more complicated way to get two attacks, sometimes, maybe.

It is absolutely worth trading an action for the damage bonus. Most combats should last 3-5 rounds, 2 rounds is extremely short for a PF2 combat. Keep in mind that because of MAP, your attacks after the first are significantly less valuable. Move, Overdrive, attack is far more useful than move, attack, attack in most cases.

Finally, complexity. A demo D&D character sheet is one piece of paper, single-sided; maybe two if you're a spellcaster. Every PF character sheet was two pieces of paper, at least the first of which was double-sided. And the class features are dense. I had to read both of them very carefully (while the game was going on) to figure out how all the pieces interlocked.

This is absolutely a reasonable criticism. PF is not newbie friendly if you're coming in blind. It is not as fun for one-shots compared to campaigns where you can really learn your character, in my opinion.

 

[Dyson Logos]

2 hours isn't enough time to showcase a system properly.

But for every other game I've played, it is enough to get a feel if the game is for you or not. I sign up for short RPG sessions "en masse" when I go to conventions for exactly this reason. A short introductory session like this should be enough to completely hook a new player.

Or sometimes, enough to bounce off of the system or setting completely.