Pathfinder 2E Is this a fair review of PF2?

[The-Magic-Sword]

Yes, thank you.

Pathfinder 2 is built upon an acceptance of 3E or 4E levels of complexity.

But this should not be taken for granted. Not after the year 2015.

The question Paizo and its fans need to answer: "does D&D need to be this complicated?"

Yes, and the reason I say that is because if you want simple, Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition isn't actually the way to go. The industry has many truly simpler RPGs that are probably better than DND for their sensibility, titles like Dungeon World, or Masks: A New Generation, or Kids on Bikes/Brooms. None of those have the brand recognition of DND, so unfortunately, they're perfect for a bunch of people who have no idea they exist.

We've seen a lot of growth over on the 2e subreddit, and it seems like there's a strong conversion factor from 5e of people who are dissatisfied with 5e's lack of customization, and somewhat backwards mechanics. Stagnant-Bounded-Accuracy (as opposed to 2e's growing bounded accuracy) wound up having massive drawbacks for encounter balance as well.

My own group is one of those, and even my most resistant players when we switched over have changed their tune, finding this more fun. One of my players even thinks that while there's "more there" its simpler, because of how the 3 action system works.

Whether its smaller than the one 5e is drawing on remains to be seen (and may never, brand recognition is a hell of a drug) but there seems to be a definitive market niche for 2e that answers your question in the affirmative.

Which kinda makes sense, even if we accept that many people prefer 5e, different products exist for different people with differing tastes, why would we want every game ot be like 5e, when we already have 5e?

 

[dave2008]

How is it "considerably" more complicated? What is it that you find so complicated in pf2 to describe the entire game as so much more complicated than 5e?

Just about every step and turn of PF2 requires more decisions and/or knowledge than 5e. Here are some examples:

• more conditions
• tags for everything
• feats for everything
• more classes
• degrees of success / failure (tracking the modifier and the feature)
• just more rules

That is just off the top of my head, quite sure there is more, but these things come up every level of character creation and pretty much every roll of the die. That, IMO, is a lot more complexity.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Why does, or even should, 5e actually matter in this discussion? Shouldn't the actual issue of importance be the relative complexity when compared with the "parent" 3E or PF1 systems?

I disagree. Puffin, the maker of the original video, first started D&D in 4th edition before moving on to 5th.

If your target market is only former 3.5 and Pathfinder players, then it makes sense to limit the comparison to those two systems. However, it seems to me that the 4th and especially 5th edition player base dwarfs the 3.5/Pathfinder player base, so comparison to the current edition is what makes sense to me.

 

[billd91]

Just about every step and turn of PF2 requires more decisions and/or knowledge than 5e. Here are some examples:

• more conditions
• tags for everything
• feats for everything
• more classes
• degrees of success / failure (tracking the modifier and the feature)
• just more rules

That is just off the top of my head, quite sure there is more, but these things come up every level of character creation and pretty much every roll of the die. That, IMO, is a lot more complexity.

Yeah, and it's not like previous posts in this thread haven't gone over some of this territory before. PF2 is more complex in many ways. And as I said before, that complexity isn't necessarily bad... if it does what you're looking for it to do. I can see how elements like the degrees of success/failure and the variability between 1 action/2 action/3 action spell casting can add to the game if it's scratching your itch. But they undeniably add complexity as well.

 

[FrozenNorth]

How is it "considerably" more complicated? What is it that you find so complicated in pf2 to describe the entire game as so much more complicated than 5e?

I feel that you are being somewhat disingenuous here.

On the assumption that you are not, dave2008 has provided a partial list.

To complement it (while trying to avoid duplication), let me add:

• MAP;
• 3 types of bonus that do not stack;
• Class feats with extremely circumstantial triggers (Exacting strike, which can’t be used on your first strike, and generally can’t be used on your 3rd strike);
• Skill feats that provide minor bonuses in situational circumstances;
• 3 levels of Stealth;
• Each character having to manage more skill feats, more racial feats and more class feats that individually have a smaller incidence on the game;
• extensive use of numerical bonuses rather than the advantage/disadvantage system;
• use of countdown timers for several systems (frightened for instance)
• basic rulebook that is twice the length of the 5e rulebook;
• reliance on purchasing/crafting/finding items/magical items of the proper level;
• more complicated death and dying rules (incorporating a variable count-up);
• multiple subsystems that you cannot “opt out” of (Repair subsystem, Healing subsystem)

 

[FrozenNorth]

Oh, I forgot. The large number of keywords with minor effects for weapons means that a dual-weapon wielding build could end up with having to recalculate a different bonus on the fly for each attack.

I feel like the original video made this point and was derided for being unrealistic.

 

[LotsOfLore]

wow what a list. I guess I never thought of anything on that list as being "overly" complicated, as you want to convince me they are, because I was busy having fun with the game.

 

[FrozenNorth]

wow what a list. I guess I never thought of anything on that list as being "overly" complicated, as you want to convince me they are, because I was busy having fun with the game.

Hey, if you like it despite (or even because of) its complexity, good for you. But you aren’t doing potential players any favours when you claim it isn’t considerably more complicated than 5e.

 

[dave2008]

wow what a list. I guess I never thought of anything on that list as being "overly" complicated, as you want to convince me they are, because I was busy having fun with the game.

Nothing overly complicated, but it is clearly considerably more complicated than 5e. @billd91 did not say "overly" complicated, he said considerably. Bill91 was not making a value judgement, which you seemed to assume he was. Complicated may or may not be a good thing, but by saying overly you are implying it is a bad thing, which was not the intent. Whether you have fun playing PF2e or not has nothing to do with it being considerably more complex than 5e.

 

[Bravesteel25]

Nothing overly complicated, but it is clearly considerably more complicated than 5e. @billd91 did not say "overly" complicated, he said considerably. Bill91 was not making a value judgement, which you seemed to assume he was. Complicated may or may not be a good thing, but by saying overly you are implying it is a bad thing, which was not the intent. Whether you have fun playing PF2e or not has nothing to do with it being considerably more complex than 5e.

I guess I disagree in that I don’t think PF2 is even considerably more complicated. I would say it is a little bit more complicated. I know we are splitting hairs, but I think that 5E players that are heavily invested in the rules from a mechanical standpoint forget all the things there are to remember.