Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
My Pathfinder 2e Post-Mortem
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Teemu" data-source="post: 8870054" data-attributes="member: 30788"><p><strong>3-action economy & the GM</strong></p><p>My issue here is limited to encounters with mooks, meaning encounters with a large number of weak enemies. If you as the GM control 7 weak mook enemies, they all require 3 actions to resolve. Yes, often it can be a Stride and two Strikes, etc., but you will often also consider positioning and other tactical elements. Overall that's a lot for mooks compared to both 4e and 5e. In 4e for example minions in the large majority of cases only do 2 things on their turn: move and attack once. In most 5e games the same rule applies. But in PF2 even the -3 and -4 enemies get the full complement of actions, and no VTT removes the need for the GM to actually consider and execute those 3 actions. All combat encounters with a large cast of (mostly weak) enemies took so much longer to run, in real time, and it's definitely one of the system's weaknesses -- hence the introduction of troops, which have their own issues (too granular once again, their movement is a massive pain since you have to move a dozen tokens for a single creature!).</p><p></p><p>5e suffers from the same issue at high levels because the DM has to use CR 5+ creatures as mooks, and those higher CR enemies often have multiattack with 3 attacks and possibly complex auras and other traits. Only 4e with its dedicated minion rules does this rules aspect well, in my experience.</p><p></p><p>How does a VTT make the following tracking that much easier and faster and less cumbersome: 3 melee enemies have longswords, shields, and alchemical bombs. 2 ranged enemies wield crossbows and longspears. Now as the GM you're juggling 5 NPCs' handedness, crossbow load status, and shield condition. You also have to mark which of the melee enemies raised their shields. And what if 1 melee enemy sheaths their sword to toss a bomb, but maybe they don't have the actions left to throw it, just to draw it? And 1 ranged enemy engages in melee with their longspear, but they want to Trip because of flat-footed bonuses, so now you have to remember if they re-gripped the weapon after releasing it to Trip with a free hand. And so on. Very convoluted. Even on a VTT you may have to actually mark or click or whatever the gripping and releasing and the loading, which all add up for 5-9 creatures.</p><p></p><p><strong>Exploration Mode</strong></p><p>The problem here was that I had to stop using the rules as written because they were too cumbersome. Imagine a party of 4 are exploring an area or a dungeon. PC 1 is Searching, PC 2 is Investigating, PC 3 is Avoiding Notice, and PC 4 is Repeating a Spell (detect magic). First off, it's unwieldy to be asking after every encounter/scene what each PC is doing as they explore. Second, it's just another mental load for the GM to remember what each PC is doing -- because you are rolling any relevant secret checks! Better not forget that PC 2 was not in fact Searching as they went into the side room, so they don't get a Perception check for the hazard... Then of course the party changes tactics maybe 20 minutes later, and once again the GM has to remember what each PC is doing. </p><p></p><p>Towards the end I just handwaved it all. And one of the main issues with PF2 I have is the sheer amount of rules I had to handwave away because they got in the way of the flow of the session.</p><p></p><p><strong>Skills & Feats</strong></p><p>The rogue has a <em>class feat </em>that gives them a free Perception check even if they're not Searching as their exploration activity. Normally you cannot both sneak about and keep an eye out for danger. That doesn't feel good. The barbarian has a <em>class feat </em>that lets them attempt to Force Open a closed door or window other obstacle as part of a 2-action Stride -- a class feat! A barbarian cannot Demoralize enemies while raging unless they take Raging Intimidation -- a barbarian can't threaten enemies as they rage without spending a class a feat! You need a feat to read text upside down... A lot the worst stuff is from APG by the way.</p><p></p><p>I didn't slavishly abide by the skill actions. Again, it was another rules feature that I handwaved to improve the flow of the game but also to empower the players and let them feel good about their characters. No, you can't Demoralize because you're 35 feet away, the limit is 30 feet (I handwaved it and allowed it at longer ranges with a penalty). No, you can't Make an Impression on these 2 people in a single short conversation because you have to address each separately (handwaved away). You want to kick the enemy Prone? Nah, you need a free hand to Trip, duh! In the Pathfinder 2e world people can't kick their opponents prone (there could be feat for it though).</p><p></p><p>Again, I allowed the players much more freedom to use their skills, but these were house rules and more handwaving of established Core Rulebook rules. About 10 months into the game I realized just how much I had to change in order to improve the experience, but also how careful I had to be with some of the changes because PF2 is a complex, rich system with cascading effects once one thing is altered.</p><p></p><p><strong>Downtime</strong></p><p>This was a minor gripe all things considered. It's just a boring system without any stakes. If the party takes 5 days of downtime to... do a regular job (riveting), you're supposed to roll for each day. Each. Day. 5 rolls for each character. Is that the most engaging system? A single day is a single roll, with no real stakes for failure. Where are the stakes?! Why even roll to see if you make 5 silver or whatever? Just give them the coin (again, more handwaving).</p><p></p><p><strong>Filler Encounters in APs</strong></p><p>These could often be things like animals, elementals, constructs, or mindless undead that the party has to fight, with no other alternatives given. And these enemies have no bearing on the overall story of the AP, no stakes, no relevance. I don't mind the occasional low-stakes combat encounter, those can be fun, but they have to be occasional, maybe once per level or once per every other level. They are a constant in the Paizo APs I've run. Like I mentioned, I began to remove them entirely or changed them into more fun dynamic encounters where the players could interact with the opposition in a variety of ways.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Teemu, post: 8870054, member: 30788"] [B]3-action economy & the GM[/B] My issue here is limited to encounters with mooks, meaning encounters with a large number of weak enemies. If you as the GM control 7 weak mook enemies, they all require 3 actions to resolve. Yes, often it can be a Stride and two Strikes, etc., but you will often also consider positioning and other tactical elements. Overall that's a lot for mooks compared to both 4e and 5e. In 4e for example minions in the large majority of cases only do 2 things on their turn: move and attack once. In most 5e games the same rule applies. But in PF2 even the -3 and -4 enemies get the full complement of actions, and no VTT removes the need for the GM to actually consider and execute those 3 actions. All combat encounters with a large cast of (mostly weak) enemies took so much longer to run, in real time, and it's definitely one of the system's weaknesses -- hence the introduction of troops, which have their own issues (too granular once again, their movement is a massive pain since you have to move a dozen tokens for a single creature!). 5e suffers from the same issue at high levels because the DM has to use CR 5+ creatures as mooks, and those higher CR enemies often have multiattack with 3 attacks and possibly complex auras and other traits. Only 4e with its dedicated minion rules does this rules aspect well, in my experience. How does a VTT make the following tracking that much easier and faster and less cumbersome: 3 melee enemies have longswords, shields, and alchemical bombs. 2 ranged enemies wield crossbows and longspears. Now as the GM you're juggling 5 NPCs' handedness, crossbow load status, and shield condition. You also have to mark which of the melee enemies raised their shields. And what if 1 melee enemy sheaths their sword to toss a bomb, but maybe they don't have the actions left to throw it, just to draw it? And 1 ranged enemy engages in melee with their longspear, but they want to Trip because of flat-footed bonuses, so now you have to remember if they re-gripped the weapon after releasing it to Trip with a free hand. And so on. Very convoluted. Even on a VTT you may have to actually mark or click or whatever the gripping and releasing and the loading, which all add up for 5-9 creatures. [B]Exploration Mode[/B] The problem here was that I had to stop using the rules as written because they were too cumbersome. Imagine a party of 4 are exploring an area or a dungeon. PC 1 is Searching, PC 2 is Investigating, PC 3 is Avoiding Notice, and PC 4 is Repeating a Spell (detect magic). First off, it's unwieldy to be asking after every encounter/scene what each PC is doing as they explore. Second, it's just another mental load for the GM to remember what each PC is doing -- because you are rolling any relevant secret checks! Better not forget that PC 2 was not in fact Searching as they went into the side room, so they don't get a Perception check for the hazard... Then of course the party changes tactics maybe 20 minutes later, and once again the GM has to remember what each PC is doing. Towards the end I just handwaved it all. And one of the main issues with PF2 I have is the sheer amount of rules I had to handwave away because they got in the way of the flow of the session. [B]Skills & Feats[/B] The rogue has a [I]class feat [/I]that gives them a free Perception check even if they're not Searching as their exploration activity. Normally you cannot both sneak about and keep an eye out for danger. That doesn't feel good. The barbarian has a [I]class feat [/I]that lets them attempt to Force Open a closed door or window other obstacle as part of a 2-action Stride -- a class feat! A barbarian cannot Demoralize enemies while raging unless they take Raging Intimidation -- a barbarian can't threaten enemies as they rage without spending a class a feat! You need a feat to read text upside down... A lot the worst stuff is from APG by the way. I didn't slavishly abide by the skill actions. Again, it was another rules feature that I handwaved to improve the flow of the game but also to empower the players and let them feel good about their characters. No, you can't Demoralize because you're 35 feet away, the limit is 30 feet (I handwaved it and allowed it at longer ranges with a penalty). No, you can't Make an Impression on these 2 people in a single short conversation because you have to address each separately (handwaved away). You want to kick the enemy Prone? Nah, you need a free hand to Trip, duh! In the Pathfinder 2e world people can't kick their opponents prone (there could be feat for it though). Again, I allowed the players much more freedom to use their skills, but these were house rules and more handwaving of established Core Rulebook rules. About 10 months into the game I realized just how much I had to change in order to improve the experience, but also how careful I had to be with some of the changes because PF2 is a complex, rich system with cascading effects once one thing is altered. [B]Downtime[/B] This was a minor gripe all things considered. It's just a boring system without any stakes. If the party takes 5 days of downtime to... do a regular job (riveting), you're supposed to roll for each day. Each. Day. 5 rolls for each character. Is that the most engaging system? A single day is a single roll, with no real stakes for failure. Where are the stakes?! Why even roll to see if you make 5 silver or whatever? Just give them the coin (again, more handwaving). [B]Filler Encounters in APs[/B] These could often be things like animals, elementals, constructs, or mindless undead that the party has to fight, with no other alternatives given. And these enemies have no bearing on the overall story of the AP, no stakes, no relevance. I don't mind the occasional low-stakes combat encounter, those can be fun, but they have to be occasional, maybe once per level or once per every other level. They are a constant in the Paizo APs I've run. Like I mentioned, I began to remove them entirely or changed them into more fun dynamic encounters where the players could interact with the opposition in a variety of ways. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
My Pathfinder 2e Post-Mortem
Top