Pathfinder 2E Is It Time for PF2 "Essentials"?

[FrozenNorth]

Thanks for staying engaged. The first two seem somewhat related: characters feel less grounded because their options are siloed, and elements fee disconnected from the world due to the numbers being overtly arbitrary. Let me know if I got that wrong.

I think this is it, for me. It’s not that the design: more options + class based system = more siloing, but also the nature of the options that are siloed.

Options that are siloed that feel like options that should be available to everyone are going to feel more “game-y” than not. Having Conceal Spell and Silent Spell be wizard exclusive doesn’t bother me too much (though it might bother me more if I was playing a Fey Sorcerer focussed on casting spells without being noticed). Having Quick Draw mot being available to Dex-based Fighters bothers me more.

Saying “sure it’s available, just spend your second level class feat on Ranger dedication than your 4th level class feat on a 2nd level Ranger feat” is a good way to get dice thrown at your head.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I think this is it, for me. It’s not that the design: more options + class based system = more siloing, but also the nature of the options that are siloed.

Options that are siloed that feel like options that should be available to everyone are going to feel more “game-y” than not. Having Conceal Spell and Silent Spell be wizard exclusive doesn’t bother me too much (though it might bother me more if I was playing a Fey Sorcerer focussed on casting spells without being noticed). Having Quick Draw mot being available to Dex-based Fighters bothers me more.

Saying “sure it’s available, just spend your second level class feat on Ranger dedication than your 4th level class feat on a 2nd level Ranger feat” is a good way to get dice thrown at your head.

I totally get people not liking the archetype system, though at the same time there's something so naughty word nice about saying "Look, you never have to try and calculate proficiency and spell slots across classes again, you just spend a feat. Also I'm going to give you free feats to spend on this, so don't whine to me about it."

 

[Windjammer]

If my PC fights a bear in the wild and tames it, does PF2 give me control over the same creature or will it swap out its statblock?
If my PC fights a humanoid that’s kitted out with armor, +2 bow and sword, and I defeat it, can I pick up that same gear (and not suddenly have new stats than what that sword had a minute ago)?

4e‘s answers to both questions was No and the result felt like playing Marioworld where the world is window dressing and you can’t really interact with all that much of it, really. Some encounters in 4e literally had environmental components that only the monsters but not the PCS could manipulate, like platforms that were magically unassailable until the monster blew them apart.
That’s what people mean when they say: siloed in game mechanics or building blocks take away from the game‘s verisimilitude.

 

[Retreater]

If my PC fights a bear in the wild and tames it, does PF2 give me control over the same creature or will it swap out its statblock?
If my PC fights a humanoid that’s kitted out with armor, +2 bow and sword, and I defeat it, can I pick up that same gear (and not suddenly have new stats than what that sword had a minute ago)?

4e‘s answers to both questions was No and the result felt like playing Marioworld where the world is window dressing and you can’t really interact with all that much of it, really. Some encounters in 4e literally had environmental components that only the monsters but not the PCS could manipulate, like platforms that were magically unassailable until the monster blew them apart.
That’s what people mean when they say: siloed in game mechanics or building blocks take away from the game‘s verisimilitude.

From what I can tell is, yes, you would have the same access to the same gear. Now your training with it could be different (like that evil warrior might have had different training with it that could yield different results).

As far as I can tell, you would have to spend actions to command your bear ally to fight, but you could do it.

Maybe in Pathfinder Society play, for the purposes of balance, you wouldn't be able to keep weapons/armor/allies beyond what you should have in Organized Play, but otherwise, you're good.

 

[kenada]

If my PC fights a bear in the wild and tames it, does PF2 give me control over the same creature or will it swap out its statblock?

PF2 doesn’t provide for non-special companions, but I don’t think anything would break if you just used the stats from the animal’s bestiary entry. However, it’d be up to the GM. I’d treat it as a minion and let the PC use Command an Animal to direct it. I haven’t looked at the numbers, but I don’t expect the animal to be better than a companion, so it shouldn’t step on the toes of any class that gets one.

If my PC fights a humanoid that’s kitted out with armor, +2 bow and sword, and I defeat it, can I pick up that same gear (and not suddenly have new stats than what that sword had a minute ago)?

Generally, yes. Nothing in the guidelines stops a GM from designing creatures that work differently, but the default assumption is the PCs will acquire the equipment, and it should be the same as the equipment they would use. For example, a rune giant uses a +2 greater striking greatsword. It does 3d12+17 slashing damage in the giant’s hands, and it does 3d12+Str+6 (from greater weapon specialization) in a 16th level fighter’s hands when making a Strike.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Here's the regular enworld forums reality check that Pathfinder 2e and communities related to it are growing, and that it just doesn't have much traction on roll 20 since they support it badly and the entire community aggressively recommends Foundry instead, and that most PF2e players are converts from 5e (to the best of our ability to measure the community of course) who prefer it to 5e.

Here is (again) the growth chart for the subreddit which has doubled in subscribers in the last year. This still being before fan favorite unique classes like the Gunslinger, Magus, and Summoner release and DURING a major pandemic that has smashed in person play, convention play, and local store play.

I'd say by all accounts we're doing pretty well for our ourselves.

 

[dave2008]

If my PC fights a bear in the wild and tames it, does PF2 give me control over the same creature or will it swap out its statblock?
If my PC fights a humanoid that’s kitted out with armor, +2 bow and sword, and I defeat it, can I pick up that same gear (and not suddenly have new stats than what that sword had a minute ago)?

4e‘s answers to both questions was No and the result felt like playing Marioworld where the world is window dressing and you can’t really interact with all that much of it, really. Some encounters in 4e literally had environmental components that only the monsters but not the PCS could manipulate, like platforms that were magically unassailable until the monster blew them apart.
That’s what people mean when they say: siloed in game mechanics or building blocks take away from the game‘s verisimilitude.

Of course you didn't have to play 4e that way. I played 4e without magic shops and my PCs got stuff from looting their victims at times. Additionally, I used a dragon stat block straight from the MM for their companion. What you described was not required to play the game, it was just an assumption based on the idea of balance. Something I've never needed to worry about to much.

 

[dave2008]

PF2 doesn’t provide for non-special companions, but I don’t think anything would break if you just used the stats from the animal’s bestiary entry. However, it’d be up to the GM. I’d treat it as a minion and let the PC use Command an Animal to direct it. I haven’t looked at the numbers, but I don’t expect the animal to be better than a companion, so it shouldn’t step on the toes of any class that gets one.


Generally, yes. Nothing in the guidelines stops a GM from designing creatures that work differently, but the default assumption is the PCs will acquire the equipment, and it should be the same as the equipment they would use. For example, a rune giant uses a +2 greater striking greatsword. It does 3d12+17 slashing damage in the giant’s hands, and it does 3d12+Str+6 (from greater weapon specialization) in a 16th level fighter’s hands when making a Strike.

How does the fighter wield a giant size sword? Is this addressed in PF2 or would I have to house rule that?

 

[dave2008]

Here's the regular enworld forums reality check that Pathfinder 2e and communities related to it are growing, ....

It seems most people in this forum agree with you, so maybe more preaching to the choir?

 

[Porridge]

If my PC fights a bear in the wild and tames it, does PF2 give me control over the same creature or will it swap out its s

PF2 doesn’t provide for non-special companions, but I don’t think anything would break if you just used the stats from the animal’s bestiary entry. However, it’d be up to the GM. I’d treat it as a minion and let the PC use Command an Animal to direct it. I haven’t looked at the numbers, but I don’t expect the animal to be better than a companion, so it shouldn’t step on the toes of any class that gets one.

Just to fill in a few details: RAW, you can use the Command Animal action on an animal that isn’t hostile or unfriendly, for a set list of tricks. (If you have a high enough proficiency level, the CRB suggests allowing this action on more exotic creatures to, though this is left to the GMs discretion.)

Anyone trained in Nature can also take the Train Animal skill feat to train animals in downtime to automatically do these tricks without a roll, or to teach it further tricks.

And anyone expert in Nature can get a non-special animal companion at lvl 2+ by taking the Bonded Animal skill feat and spending some downtime with the animal. This makes it permanently helpful, and increases Command Animal check results by one step.

None of these activities change the animal’s stats.