Pathfinder 2E I think I am giving up on PF2ER

I don't know what to tell you. The combination of all the things, considering my preferred playstyle as GM, combined with the learning curve just adds up to it not being worth the effort.
I don’t blame you. If I’m not mistaken, you said you were working on a degree currently also? That’s rough, especially if you feel like you need to get everything right while you’re learning the system. If that’s the case, I would definitely look into a rules-light game to just relax and unwind.

log in or register to remove this ad


Small Ball Archmage
I don't know what to tell you. The combination of all the things, considering my preferred playstyle as GM, combined with the learning curve just adds up to it not being worth the effort.
Catching up a little on the conversation, if for the sake of Starfinder you did happen to keep going with the game, and reviewing your other comments in the thread, my main advice-- only if you're sticking with the game, if you've got your heart set on switching systems go for it; would actually concern how you prep adventures in the first place:

1. I tend to use a lot of site-based adventures, because that way I can use an adversary roster-- by prepping a list of appropriate creatures, I simply slap encounters together at the last minute by having memorized this chart (Quick Adventure Groups is new to the remaster, I included it in the snip because its neat and I didn't know it was there, I only memorized the actual table):

and this chart:

If I just look at my adversary roster, I just pick out the level of my list of appropriate monsters, and ad hoc the encounters-- so at that point I have some encounter maps I picked up (I like prefab ones from patreon, for VTT reasons, but at the library we use ye olde wet erase chessex mat and I have to do even less prep) sometimes I include a few hazards that look neat in the adversary roster, and just cross them off as I use them (I could repeat traps, especially the simple ones, but the complex ones feel like one-offs to me.) We do 1-2 encounters per four-hour session, and I tend to like 2-4 encounter adventuring days, which is normal for this game, so if the site is longer than 4 total encounters, that's 2+ sessions of prep by itself. I usually plan a vague layout for the site in my head that solidifies at runtime. Your GM Screen should have the DC by level chart on it, but you can also just use simple DCs.

2. As for rules, I'd actually just encourage you to stick with it, and have your whole party stop to look up a rule when you aren't sure, partially to take the burden off you, and partially because doing it for a while will build the institutional table knowledge that you can reference later-- eventually you'll say something like "hmm, what was counteract again?" and one of your players will remember it, especially if you let the table use nethys to look things up, it's pretty fast, but at the library we use the rule book, and it's still pretty fast. I think 'make a ruling and move on' is good advice kinda, but for learning games it's maladaptive, because it means you never actually learn the rules unless you're diligent about going back afterward. I'm also saying this under the assumption you plan to play this game for a good long time, because the longer payoff is worth it.

3A. Stop looking at the system for flaws, not because it's perfect (it's not, as close as I think it got), but because it's getting in the way of you learning the game. I'm seeing people in the thread talking about some of the best classes in the game under the impression that they're bad, or giving advice where the thing they're saying to do is good, but the thing they're saying not to do was also fine-- like people talking about debuffs as the caste'rs bread and butter, that playstyle is lovely, but you can also spend your adventuring day dropping fireballs just fine. The Champion is excellent, the Barbarian is excellent, the Oracle is fine, even the pre-remaster Witch was good-- the remaster is just shifting them up in the pack, I've even become convinced that the Alchemist pulls its weight due to someone running numbers for me to demonstrate how it works. Bad in this game is mid-tier in every other DND-like you've played that would feature char-op, and everything works from level 1.

3B. The way the system does work is occasionally unintuitive-- take caster damage, the average damage is there for a blaster (and their AOE is very satisfying), but it relies heavily on the way that damage on successful saves boosts your average in contrast to missing and the way that compares to hit chance for a martial. Alchemist bombs have a similar math quirk in that their hit chance doesn't matter, since most of the damage comes from splash as you get the feats and your hit chance would fall behind.


Life is too dang short for games that don't work for you or your table. So many to choose from that might be a better fit.
I had to finally make that same decision too, that PF2e wasn't going to be for me. That sucked, as I like Paizo and their products, I still buy the maps though. Their APs are decent to convert to another system.

But there are a variety of "D&D" games - Basic Fantasy, DCC, Castles & Crusades, OSE, 1-5e, BECMI, etc. Other fantasy games - Against the Darkmaster, Dragonbane (hella fun!), One Ring, Blades in the Dark, 13th Age, Warhammer Fantasy Role Play, etc.

My friend and I are doing a shelf audit. We're playing the games we have on the shelf, mini-campaigns, or even a one to three shots. Then deciding if the game is worth keeping, redundant, unnecessary, etc. A lot of them no longer appeal, and I've been able to sell them off to those who really want them. Trimming the collection is nice! I can focus on the supplements I have.
Granted, at this time, it's still about 4 bookshelves. :ROFLMAO:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads