Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zztong" data-source="post: 7755772" data-attributes="member: 6943414">Hanging out with friends is always fun. The game? I would say I was just as happy throwing dice and moving pieces as I would have been with any other RPG. I would have been equally happy with D&D 1e, 2e, 3/3.5e, or PF1e. I've only played D&D 5e once, but it would probably fine too.Hehe. Normally my go-to character for a first game is a Ranger. I couldn't make a Ranger concept work well enough in PF2e, plus we needed a Wizard for a balanced party. The PF2e Universalist Wizard seemed close to the PF1e Universalist Wizard.I only cast cantrips because I wasn't sure how far the other PCs could go without rest. The cantrips took 2 actions (of 3) to cast. 1 action for verbal, 1 action for somantics. (I hope I got that right.) I could cast and move, which was the same as PF1. I could have not moved and extended the range of a spell by 30 feet, which would have been nice for Color Spray, but I didn't need to cast it. The DM (who played at GenCon) said he had seen Wizzy's casting two spells: an attack and then Shield. I had not put Shield in my spellbook, so I didn't have that option.I don't recall a point where any of the other players were tripped up by the action system. There were points where there was discussion of options that were different. One noticeable difference was that 1st level characters could attack more than once. Another noticeable difference is that Criticals are much more common and I don't think I like that. Time will tell. We didn't see the dying/death system work, so I don't know how that will affect how people act.</blockquote>

Verification