Pathfinder 2E Is this a fair review of PF2?

[Celtavian]

You clearly haven't played with people who can't do quick additions and subtractions. I know a few - I know because I've gamed with them.

I have played with some people who are slower at it than others, but never a person who couldn't learn it. That would indeed surprise me.

 

[FrozenNorth]

1. As noted in my earlier post, there are three bonus or penalty types:

Status: Usually due to magic or some other condition like frightened or sickened. They don't stack. You use the highest number bonus or penalty.

Circumstance: Cover, flanking, using a shield. Don't stack. Use the highest number or penalty.

Item bonus: +1 sword or what item bonus from item. Don't stack. Use the highest number. Usually worked into the stat block prior.

A few unnamed bonuses for something like bloodline spell damage bonus.

Technically, a character could have : a status bonus, a circumstance bonus, an item bonus, an untyped bonus, a status penalty, a circumstance penalty, an item penalty and a MAP penalty.

The enemy the character is trying to hit could also have a status bonus, a circumstance bonus, an item bonus, a status penalty, a circumstance penalty and item penalty.

Frankly, I think it is more productive to speak in terms of actual play. From my experience (<4 level and characters that didn’t use a lot of buffs or debuffs), every turn there were 2 or 3 effects in play + MAP.

 

[BigZebra]

Technically, a character could have : a status bonus, a circumstance bonus, an item bonus, an untyped bonus, a status penalty, a circumstance penalty, an item penalty and a MAP penalty.

The enemy the character is trying to hit could also have a status bonus, a circumstance bonus, an item bonus, a status penalty, a circumstance penalty and item penalty.

Frankly, I think it is more productive to speak in terms of actual play. From my experience (<4 level and characters that didn’t use a lot of buffs or debuffs), every turn there were 2 or 3 effects in play + MAP.

Well you could include the MAP in the numbers on the sheet, by having three lines for each weapon strike entry. I know the official sheet doesn't support that, but could be a good idea.

 

[CapnZapp]

I am on the 5th module of Age of Ashes and the second of Extinction Curse running as a DM and playing in a 3rd campaign. I have not noticed that the game runs poorly if you miss an occasional modifier or ability. So not sure what you mean by fast and loose, but I'm certainly not recommending ignoring modifiers. I am stating that if you forget one here or there, you won't break the game or ruin the challenge. The game does not require you remember every number every round without fail or the game runs poorly. That isn't the case at all.

Okay.

But how does "you won't break the game by forgetting a modifier" counter my claim?

You still want to remember to add most of them, and just because you forgot once doesn't mean you'll want forget about them entirely.

It's not as if the game offers an "easy" mode. You are absolutely expected to spend entire strategies on how to slap a -1 on your enemies, since that has a real effect.

 

[CapnZapp]

No.

This game clearly expects it's customers to have no problems doing math in their heads, to a significantly higher level than 5th Edition.

Claiming anything else is just misleading.

There's enough exceptions that the "three weapon lines" idea didn't pan out in practice for us. Part of the fun of playing a weapon wielder is the feats that let you vary your routine.

Then there's special weapon traits that come across as incredibly petty for a 5E gamer, but here are clearly intended to be a meaningful addition to your offensive.

Take Sweep for instance. If you switch targets with an axe, you get a +1. In practice, this means you make one attack at +0 then a second at -4 instead of -5.

Definitely don't play a Ranger if you plan on having one line for every possible attack modifier. You can easily end up with three weapons (two melee, one ranged) and all the numbers change depending on whether the target is marked, you're making a twin takedown, using agile weapons, weapons with different fundamental runes, etc etc etc.

Then you have all the conditions imposed on you by poison, disease, curses and the like. Being hit with -1 to attacks, or mental saves, or physical maneuvers is not rare at all. Once past the lowest levels, it happens every session.

Resistance and weakness to damage is not uncommon. Calculating damage as (3d8+12+1d6)X2+1d8+10 is not just something I just made up, it can definitely happen, several times in a single combat round in fact. (A greater striking weapon with an acid rune dealing a crit with a fatal weapon against a monster with weakness 10, in this particular case. Some of the variables can be pre-calculated, but most are cirumstancial and change for every attack)

It's just so much more honest to be upfront with the math demand.

tl;dr: I don't have a problem with 23+3-1+2-1+1 type calculations (except when late at night and my brain is mush), but if your friend does, do him a favor and stick to 5E.

Cheers

 

[Philip Benz]

I remember back in the 70s when one of nthe selling points for parents was "Sure, your kid is playing D&D, but at least he'll get a lot of practice in math."

All of this niggling about situational bonuses is a feature, not a bug. My players think it's fun to try to use the situation to wring another +1 or +2 out of their tactics, or inflict a similar penalty on their enemies.

If they were forced to play using a game system that didn't give situational bonuses and penalties, they would not be happy campers. I understand that DD5 is often perceived in that light, but can't comment from personal experience.

 

[CapnZapp]

I remember back in the 70s when one of nthe selling points for parents was "Sure, your kid is playing D&D, but at least he'll get a lot of practice in math."

All of this niggling about situational bonuses is a feature, not a bug. My players think it's fun to try to use the situation to wring another +1 or +2 out of their tactics, or inflict a similar penalty on their enemies.

If they were forced to play using a game system that didn't give situational bonuses and penalties, they would not be happy campers. I understand that DD5 is often perceived in that light, but can't comment from personal experience.

Sure.

I'm not trying to say math = bad.

I just don't believe in selling PF2 as something else than a deeply deeply crunchy system, where -1s and +1s pop up everywhere you look. Much like how D&D used to be pre-5E, in fact.

 

[Puggins]

The OP asked whether there are as many mods as there were in PF1, though, not whether the system is crunchy or not- it very clearly is.

compared to PF1, though, it is extraordinarily clean and mod-lite. PF1’s combat system required me to use a spreadsheet by 8th level to track all the modifiers involved. My paladin at 8th level routinely headed into combat with at least 6 and sometimes ip to ten or more spell and ability buffs that lasted minutes (or rounds in some cases). I can name 7 or 8 of them off my head, but there were at last 10 or so others that might or might not be in effect and might or might not overlap other buffs. This is BRFORE getting to combat modifiers or status effect, which were no less varied in PF1. I stand by my first post- PF2 is far, far simpler than PF1, and is, at the same time, definitely more complexthan 5e.

 

[Lefi2017]

So what are the m,odifieres that can apear or be rfreate in comabt_

Buffes condions andx placing

how much dose PF2 lends it slerf to thearther of the mind_

 

[Retreater]

So what are the m,odifieres that can apear or be rfreate in comabt_

Buffes condions andx placing

how much dose PF2 lends it slerf to thearther of the mind_

I would say that I couldn't run it at all as intended without a battle grid. Some could, but there is not official guidance in the Core Rulebook to do so.
There are many, many modifiers, as well 40+ conditions that can come up in combat.