Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ZeshinX" data-source="post: 8045899" data-attributes="member: 6793656">I very much enjoyed PF 1e, but once we started playing 5e, it hit most of the right notes for us.&nbsp; Initially, we found ourselves missing some elements, like character options (in terms of fleshing out a character concept) and a lack of skill progression.&nbsp; We also found we disliked magic item attunement and the way concentration works.&nbsp; However, over time and playing, we found we less and less missed those elements and our dislikes practically evaporated.The one element we found we still missed was not so much skill progression, but lack of ability to learn (become proficient in) new skills as the game progressed (except perhaps a new skill or two learned when hitting your class' archetype/subclass).&nbsp; Oh sure, downtime can fill that gap, but we felt it should be part of the level-gaining process.&nbsp; We also felt the list of skill/tool proficiencies was too small.&nbsp; Of course, we found a suitable houserule and everyone gains a new skill/tool prof of their choice every 4 levels (character level, not class level)...and we just deal with the small number of actual skill profs (and we attach a LOT more uses for the tool profs as well).I've found, in 30 years of playing D&amp;D, that I vastly prefer the abstract approach to D&amp;D (1e/2e, 5e), rather than the simulationist approach (3.x, PF).&nbsp; My group skipped 4e and PF 2e completely (neither were our cup of tea).The flow and feel (for my group) of 5e, overall, just feels better and a long-needed, deep breath of fresh air for us after 3.x/PF 1e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ZeshinX, post: 8045899, member: 6793656"] I very much enjoyed PF 1e, but once we started playing 5e, it hit most of the right notes for us. Initially, we found ourselves missing some elements, like character options (in terms of fleshing out a character concept) and a lack of skill progression. We also found we disliked magic item attunement and the way concentration works. However, over time and playing, we found we less and less missed those elements and our dislikes practically evaporated. The one element we found we still missed was not so much skill progression, but lack of ability to learn (become proficient in) new skills as the game progressed (except perhaps a new skill or two learned when hitting your class' archetype/subclass). Oh sure, downtime can fill that gap, but we felt it should be part of the level-gaining process. We also felt the list of skill/tool proficiencies was too small. Of course, we found a suitable houserule and everyone gains a new skill/tool prof of their choice every 4 levels (character level, not class level)...and we just deal with the small number of actual skill profs (and we attach a LOT more uses for the tool profs as well). I've found, in 30 years of playing D&D, that I vastly prefer the abstract approach to D&D (1e/2e, 5e), rather than the simulationist approach (3.x, PF). My group skipped 4e and PF 2e completely (neither were our cup of tea). The flow and feel (for my group) of 5e, overall, just feels better and a long-needed, deep breath of fresh air for us after 3.x/PF 1e. [/QUOTE]

Verification