Pathfinder 2E Is it fun to play a caster in PF2?

[Thomas Shey]

Absolutely. I say more that you have to be aware of it (in 5e at least), but I think we are talking about the same basic idea. I could go into more detail, but I don't think that is necessary.

Yeah, my guess is you're just not comfortable with dealing with the precision and calculation (though as Condiments says, its not difficult to do it in kind of quick eyeball-fashion, especially if, as would probably be a good idea, you aimed kind of low). Now, how the balance would look with PWL I have no clue, though like I said, I can't figure damage and hit points on both ends still weighing in pretty strongly).

 

[dave2008]

Yeah, my guess is you're just not comfortable with dealing with the precision and calculation (though as Condiments says, its not difficult to do it in kind of quick eyeball-fashion, especially if, as would probably be a good idea, you aimed kind of low).

I played 4e for 4+ years so I am definitely familiar with that level of precision and calculation. However, I am not comfortable doing it. What I mean is that I reject the idea that encounters should be balanced for the PCs and their level.

To me, an encounter should be balanced around what makes sense for the world and the circumstances. If a typical guard should be CR (or level) 2 then that is what it is, it doesn't matter what level the PCs are. I realize you can do that in PF2, but as you said the quickly becomes trivial (or conversely impossible) in PF2 and I can stretch that threat a lot longer in 5e.

PS - we have gotten pretty far off topic from the OP, so I will probably end this line if discussion here. I think there are a lot of great things about PF2, but I just don't think it is quite for me or my group. Furthermore, I really have to get to know it more to figure out how I can homebrew it to meet our tastes.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I played 4e for 4+ years so I am definitely familiar with that level of precision and calculation. However, I am not comfortable doing it. What I mean is that I reject the idea that encounters should be balanced for the PCs and their level.

To me, an encounter should be balanced around what makes sense for the world and the circumstances. If a typical guard should be CR (or level) 2 then that is what it is, it doesn't matter what level the PCs are. I realize you can do that in PF2, but as you said the quickly becomes trivial (or conversely impossible) in PF2 and I can stretch that threat a lot longer in 5e.

PS - we have gotten pretty far off topic from the OP, so I will probably end this line if discussion here. I think there are a lot of great things about PF2, but I just don't think it is quite for me or my group. Furthermore, I really have to get to know it more to figure out how I can homebrew it to meet our tastes.

If you try Proficiency Without Level, please do a thread on it. I haven't tried it but I know a player of mine is interested in it because they prefer 5E's smaller numbers. Would be very interested in your experiences if you go for it.

 

[dave2008]

If you try Proficiency Without Level, please do a thread on it. I haven't tried it but I know a player of mine is interested in it because they prefer 5E's smaller numbers. Would be very interested in your experiences if you go for it.

Will do!

 

[SteveC]

I was reading about spells in Pathfinder and I came across a massive guide to the best ones. I think it's something useful to look at in terms of what casters can do. The consensus is that there are still a lot of bad or "trap" spells around, which is quite different from other feats or class abilities. Here's the link (it's a google doc).

 

[Justice and Rule]

I was reading about spells in Pathfinder and I came across a massive guide to the best ones. I think it's something useful to look at in terms of what casters can do. The consensus is that there are still a lot of bad or "trap" spells around, which is quite different from other feats or class abilities. Here's the link (it's a google doc).

Interesting list though I have disagreements.

 

[SteveC]

Interesting list though I have disagreements.

It wouldn't be an RPG if it were any other way. I look at guides like this to get started and then go from there. For me, it's usually "did I miss something about this option?"

 

[Justice and Rule]

It wouldn't be an RPG if it were any other way. I look at guides like this to get started and then go from there. For me, it's usually "did I miss something about this option?"

Sure. I only got through 1st level, but I do disagree that some of the utility stuff like Magic Disk and Ant Haul: one cannot always bring a cart or donkey into a dungeon. But it's definitely got interesting perspective.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well, that's always going to be an issue; the kinds of games people see are going to color how they assess the value of spells. I doubt there's any way around it.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I played 4e for 4+ years so I am definitely familiar with that level of precision and calculation. However, I am not comfortable doing it. What I mean is that I reject the idea that encounters should be balanced for the PCs and their level.

To me, an encounter should be balanced around what makes sense for the world and the circumstances. If a typical guard should be CR (or level) 2 then that is what it is, it doesn't matter what level the PCs are. I realize you can do that in PF2, but as you said the quickly becomes trivial (or conversely impossible) in PF2 and I can stretch that threat a lot longer in 5e.

This also has to do with what genre the system is trying to model. In 4e and somewhat similar in PF2e, the system is designed for escalating heroes that are no longer threatened by typical guards (in almost any numbers) at higher levels. Hero to Demi God. Not sure about PF2e but 4e was fairly explicit with this (could have done even better) with its Tiers of play, Epic destinies for all, etc.

It doesn't mean that high level PCs wouldn't meet Level 2 guards if they tried to break into a random mundane warehouse in a small city to steal a shipment of mundane swords. They would -- but the system doesn't spend time trying to model that type of ecounter and also assumes that most of the time the goals of higher level heros wouldn't really take them in conflict with these types of typical mundane guards very often as well. If they do, describe the butt kicking and move on.

So I never thought of encounters being balanced to PCs as divorced from the genre of hero to demigod, and the assumption that PCs would be setting goals that are more and more ambitious (and thus more likely to encounter higher level stuff in it's 'native' settings). So it's not that encounters are balanced around PC levels in a vacuum-- it does make sense in the world relative to the PCs and what they are trying to accomplish. This is a big assumption and a little limiting, but I'd say don't use these systems if the GM and players aren't going along with that.