Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?

[Zardnaar]

My main problem with PF2 is presentation. I need a book but the PDF is enough to make me not want to fork out to buy said book.

It's something I would need to be able to blob out on the couch with and digest over several weeks.

I'm not convinced PF2 execution was right. Something like 5E math with Star War Saga Edition classes could help and achieve a lot of what PF2 does.

Still it might work for them if it's still around in 5 years or so it's a success.

 

[Xenonnonex]

In my experience with building PF2 characters I am finding the system corridors me into certain paths. Some choices are much better than others and I am choosing these options. I can certainly try the other choices but they seem to achieve little in game. This is of course my experience and YMMV.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Backgrounds is a fluff choice with close to zero crunch.

I would hardly call gaining skill proficiencies, gaining tool proficiencies, gaining equipment, gaining spells in certain backgrounds as just a fluff choice with close to zero crunch.

 

[Zardnaar]

In my experience with building PF2 characters I am finding the system corridors me into certain paths. Some choices are much better than others and I am choosing these options. I can certainly try the other choices but they seem to achieve little in game. This is of course my experience and YMMV.

Modern D&D kind of does that as well.

 

[Remathilis]

Those claiming 5E has many build choices clearly have never played previous editions.

Getting to pick a Background there, a subclass here, is not even close to the customization available in d20.

Backgrounds is a fluff choice with close to zero crunch.

Most if not all subclasses added in supplements only reshuffle existing abilities and mechanics already offered by the PHB.

Claiming this is "much choice"? Please.

I played Basic and AD&D and 5e clearly has more choice points than either.

 

[Imaro]

With PF2 I am finding sure there is a lot of choice. But a lot of that choice should have been part and parcel of the either ancestry itself or a class feature. It wants you to invest in what are actually false choices.

Ok I thought I was the only one who was thinking this, especially when it comes to ancestries. It takes multiple levels and choices to basically get everything that's handed to you at level 1 in D&D 5e. And to be fair I guess there are a small number of variant options but overall it left me with the impression people were lauding deep customization when in fact it was just spreading out of the same abilities over more levels... Like you said, false choices.

 

[CapnZapp]

I would hardly call gaining skill proficiencies, gaining tool proficiencies, gaining equipment, gaining spells in certain backgrounds as just a fluff choice with close to zero crunch.

Then you don't know choices that bring crunch.

They can make up new Backgrounds all day long, and it changes absolutely nothing: you're just recombining existing choices.

No new crunch at all.

 

[Rhianni32]

Its always interesting to read discussions of people saying a system is broken because ABC choices in character building are the best and XYZ is useless because a different system that has a class with the same name is the preferred choice.
Course then others end up saying no they feel XYZ is too OP and needs nerfing because nobody would pick ABC.

 

[CapnZapp]

I played Basic and AD&D and 5e clearly has more choice points than either.

You are deliberately skipping multiple decades worth of D&D just to make a cheap point.

 

[CapnZapp]

Ok I thought I was the only one who was thinking this, especially when it comes to ancestries. It takes multiple levels and choices to basically get everything that's handed to you at level 1 in D&D 5e. And to be fair I guess there are a small number of variant options but overall it left me with the impression people were lauding deep customization when in fact it was just spreading out of the same abilities over more levels... Like you said, false choices.

False and false... But yes, choices that merely remove restrictions that needn't have been there in the first place.

As opposed to choices that actually let you branch out to do stuff outside of the box.

5E's Great Weapon Fighting is a brutally crude but also brilliantly obvious example: it basically gives you +50% damage.

Not saying this differential is balanced or desired. Just holding it up to those unsure what I mean by "more bounded than 5E" and "reaching outside the box".

In sharp contrast, PF2 feats seems to be carefully curated to never give you anything extra, always only giving you the bounded ability.

A feat never gives you an actual edge, it only ever gives you the ability to use this other bonus in place of this here bonus. It means you get to be as good as someone who was good at it all along; but it never lets you minmax, it never gives, say, that +2 bonus that would have allowed you to "climb outside the box"...