Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?

Remus Lupin

Adventurer
For me, the bigger thing is...Backgrounds. There are hundreds of thousands of characters in the PHB based on Race/Subclass/Background combinations, before you even consider the totals for Ideals/Bonds/Flaws. That stuff is more interesting for making different characters to me.
Sure. That's there. It really doesn't do much for me. Again, I'm thinking here primarily of what's available in terms of class options. I'll agree with respect to backgrounds there's a lot to work with there, but I'm just not fond of the implementation.
 

Imaro

Adventurer
For me, the bigger thing is...Backgrounds. There are hundreds of thousands of characters in the PHB based on Race/Subclass/Background combinations, before you even consider the totals for Ideals/Bonds/Flaws. That stuff is more interesting for making different characters to me.
Yep more ways the "3 flavors" can be expanded. Apparently @Remus Lupin has a group that all play the exact same 3 characters in every class with the same 3 subclasses, the same backgrounds, the same skill selections, the same weapon/spell choices, the same race, the same... well you get the idea... oh and some options just aren't considered because...well because :unsure:
 

Remus Lupin

Adventurer
I'm sorry the fact that I am not fond of the way 5e handles this, and the fact that it provides what I consider to be limited and unexciting options causes you so much personal angst. But the fact remains that this is how I feel about it. I'm always at a loss as to how people think they can sarcasm their way into changing someone's mind on such things.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Sure. That's there. It really doesn't do much for me. Again, I'm thinking here primarily of what's available in terms of class options. I'll agree with respect to backgrounds there's a lot to work with there, but I'm just not fond of the implementation.
That's fair, I suppose. Feats do nothing for me in terms of establishing a character, so different strokes.
 

Imaro

Adventurer
I'm sorry the fact that I am not fond of the way 5e handles this, and the fact that it provides what I consider to be limited and unexciting options causes you so much personal angst. But the fact remains that this is how I feel about it. I'm always at a loss as to how people think they can sarcasm their way into changing someone's mind on such things.
Again, as I stated before... it's not about how you feel... it's about you making false statements. And it's no angst for me I was just trying to educate you in case you honestly thought there were only 3 flavors of every class in 5e...
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
Yep more ways the "3 flavors" can be expanded. Apparently @Remus Lupin has a group that all play the exact same 3 characters in every class with the same 3 subclasses, the same backgrounds, the same skill selections, the same weapon/spell choices, the same race, the same... well you get the idea... oh and some options just aren't considered because...well because :unsure:
You know, PF2 has all of those options as well - backgrounds, races, skills, weapons. Mayyyybe you should cotton on to the idea that Remus Lupin was specifically focusing on a specific variable in the mix - class options offered by the respective games - and using the fact that PF2 and 5e both offer those other options to eliminate them from the equation.
 

Parmandur

Legend
You know, PF2 has all of those options as well - backgrounds, races, skills, weapons. Mayyyybe you should cotton on to the idea that Remus Lupin was specifically focusing on a specific variable in the mix - class options offered by the respective games - and using the fact that PF2 and 5e both offer those other options to eliminate them from the equation.
I don't think anybody is claiming PF2 doesn't have options, just the idea that PF2 has obviously more meaningful & significant options than 5E.
 

Imaro

Adventurer
You know, PF2 has all of those options as well - backgrounds, races, skills, weapons. Mayyyybe you should cotton on to the idea that Remus Lupin was specifically focusing on a specific variable in the mix - class options offered by the respective games - and using the fact that PF2 and 5e both offer those other options to eliminate them from the equation.
I'm not sure what this has to do with my point...I was arguing against the assertion that there are only 3 flavors in any one class in 5e. Do you believe that to be the case?
 
I don't think anybody is claiming PF2 doesn't have options, just the idea that PF2 has obviously more meaningful & significant options than 5E.
More, at least, is potentially quantifiable.

In the 5e PH there are 9 races, each with a sub-race or few, 12 classes & 80 sub-classes, 16 backgrounds, 40+ feats, and three or four hundred spells.
A given character chooses a race, sub-race, background, class, sub-class, a few skills, 4 to 6 feats, and 0 to 40 or so spells.
Seems like a lotta choices.
How does PF2 stack up?
 

Saelorn

Hero
When you refuse to engage with the material and then claim that 5e is really anemic with class and character options that is disingenuous. And is completely and utterly untrue.
A game is not its supplements. The combination of 5E+Xanathar is not the same as 5E alone, and nothing they add in another book will change the contents of 5E.
 

Parmandur

Legend
More, at least, is potentially quantifiable.

In the 5e PH there are 9 races, each with a sub-race or few, 12 classes & 80 sub-classes, 16 backgrounds, 40+ feats, and three or four hundred spells.
A given character chooses a race, sub-race, background, class, sub-class, a few skills, 4 to 6 feats, and 0 to 40 or so spells.
Seems like a lotta choices.
How does PF2 stack up?
Don't forget Ideals/traits/bonds/flaws, which balloon the possible Background combos into the thousands (and extra tables for certain Backgrounds, like Guild Artisan, Outlander, or Folk Hero). My experience is that these fluffy bits are often as important at the table as crunchy bits.

PF2 has numerically more options, primarily through the proliferation of Feats. These are mostly granular and crunchy differences, rather than character focused.
 
Don't forget Ideals/traits/bonds/flaws
I didn't forget them, so much as dismissed them out of hands as they are:
strictly optional
totally arbitrary (you can just make 'em up)
all do the same thing, mechanically (the DM gives you 'inspiration' if he wants to)
and, of course, are something I don't care for, personally, so I let my opinion override my objectivity...

...so, yeah, go ahead and count those up, too. ;)

PF2 has numerically more options, primarily through the proliferation of Feats. These are mostly granular and crunchy differences.
Granular & crunchy certainly counts.
I would be curious to hear actual counts, even just approximate.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Granular & crunchy certainly counts.
I would be curious to hear actual counts, even just approximate.

I didn't forget them, so much as dismissed them out of hands as they are:
strictly optional
totally arbitrary (you can just make 'em up)
all do the same thing, mechanically (the DM gives you 'inspiration' if he wants to)
and, of course, are something I don't care for, personally, so I let my opinion override my objectivity...

...so, yeah, go ahead and count those up, too. ;)
I find those tools in the Backgrounds section important to getting into a character as distinct.

PF2 Core Rulebook has:

6 Ancestries (No "Subrace" package equivalent, just Feat trees)
35 Backgrounds (basically a Feat selection, without much in the way of RP tools)
12 Classes (no "Subclasses" as such, just Feat trees)
12 "Archetypes" (optional Feat trees that replace multi-classing and Prestige Classes, the 12 in COre just repeat the 12 Classes as Feat trees)

Aaaaaand Feats. Many Feats. Ancestry Feats, Skill Feats, Blue Feats, Red Feats, Big Feats, Small Feats, Fuzzy Fur Feats. Feats, Feats, Feats. (by which I mean, I'm not going to count those, they are Legion)

The Feats are where the rubber meets the road for customization in PF2. Personally, my biggest criticism of 5E is that WotC didn't kill Feats with a stake and burn the body, sooooo yeeeeeaaaaah.
 
Last edited:
PF2 Core Rulebook has:
6 Ancestries
35 Backgrounds
12 Classes
12 "Archetypes"
So, at a high level, pretty comparable, it sounds like....

Aaaaaand Feats. Many Feats. Ancestry Feats, Skill Feats, Blue Feats, Red Feats, Big Feats, Small Feats, Fuzzy Fur Feats. Feats, Feats, Feats. (by which I mean, I'm not going to count those, they are Legion)
...and spells, I assume? Or do the folks complaining about the wizard /really/ have something to complain about? ;)
 

Advertisement

Top