Pathfinder 2E Is this a fair review of PF2?

[willrali]

Well, um. This is I actually a much more effectively dissuasive review,with no acrimonious rhetoric. Thank you.

Yeah, no sense in trying to minimize key aspects of the game. I love it but it’s not for everybody.

 

[willrali]

Probably a bit cheeky but is it possible you could share those flow charts? The rule organisation is my biggest bugbear of the system

They need tidying up before being unleashed on the public. But when I’ve done that, sure. I’ll post them here.

 

[Lefi2017]

I get the 3 action economy is great
and that people t(Players like, me option but are they more than +1 and +2s?)

But what really is the gm part
how flexible is it to gm how fast can I adapt scenario or monster on the table based on player choices
how far and smooth runs dming

how easy/quick is basic prep

what is it about PF2 that would make me run it as a GM/DM over 5 I have little interest in being a player so it stands and falls with this

 

[CapnZapp]

Thing is, PF2 is a great improvement over PF1. It was created solely for that reason. The game's ability to compete with 5E seems to have been no consideration at all.

 

[BigZebra]

Thing is, PF2 is a great improvement over PF1. It was created solely for that reason. The game's ability to compete with 5E seems to have been no consideration at all.

Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by "compete with 5E". I would say that PF2e being D&D-like but much crunciher, more tactical and with way more options is definitely competing with 5e.

Further, if Paizo had made PF2e a total depature from their past, I'm sure they would have alienatied more of the old guard than they did.

I'm actually considering whether my group should try a PF2e adventure (Fall of Plaugestone perhaps) when we finish our current 5e campaign (Tyranny of Dragons), since the players really like combat and options. But I'm not sure all of them can manage the added complexity. And also I'm afraid the idea of adding level to checks makes everything the same: Yay I leveled up and am now more awesome. GM: Yeah, but all DCs just increased as well.

Anyway, I need to playtest it to see for myself - and I digress. Point being I'm sure there are 5e players looking for more options and crunch, but like the d20.

But I'm curious: How should PF2 be different, to better compete with 5e in your oppinion?

 

[Mistborn]

No game can compete with D&D 5e. This has nothing to do with the quality or strategy of the publisher.

 

[amethal]

Of course, nobody has to transition from the old timeline to the new one even if they do advance to the new rules. This is, honestly, kind of a silly complaint.

And even if they do feel they have to use the current timeline, I have no doubt Paizo will come up with lots of new villains, threats and crises.

And how many groups of players are heavily invested in defeating "Villain X", when their characters have never even met them? I doubt anybody in my group can even name such a villain, with the possible exception of the Whispering Tyrant.

 

[Nilbog]

They need tidying up before being unleashed on the public. But when I’ve done that, sure. I’ll post them here.

Thank you, that would be fantastic

 

[TwoSix]

Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by "compete with 5E". I would say that PF2e being D&D-like but much crunciher, more tactical and with way more options is definitely competing with 5e.

I'd argue the point that by the time PF2 was being worked on (2017 into 2019); everyone was well aware that 5e was a massive success. The design team could have iterated on PF1 and borrowed many of the popular design evolutions of 5E.

Making a system with a large amount of customizable pieces and then making those pieces meaningful without making the combat calculation require 4-6 modifiers per attack is certainly a difficult target to hit, but that would be the requirement to make a meaningful upgrade on PF1 while borrowing some of 5E's simple tableside play.

 

[AndromedaRPG]

Of course, nobody has to transition from the old timeline to the new one even if they do advance to the new rules. This is, honestly, kind of a silly complaint.

I think the point being made in the video, as Puffin didn't play the first edition, was reading about the current lore (not knowing it was an AP at the time) and realizing the issue was solved instead of it being a plot hook. I personally understood his reaction, thinking of it from that perspective.

I think he was thinking of going cback in time" to do an AP, but the conversation work was to much of a time consumption.

NOTE: I am not Puffin, and I am not trying to put any words into anyone's mouth. The above is my own personal opinion only!