Pathfinder 2E Never give up on PF2

[dave2008]

I'd be happy to list some positives.
In no particular order...

• Encounter balancing system works.
• Fantastic implementation on Foundry VTT.
• Guidelines for awarding magic items.
• Guidelines for starting a character higher than 1st level.
• Archives of Nethys is a wonderful (and free) resource.
• Pathbuilder is a wonderful (and free) resource.
• Paizo is friendly to 3PP, giving out so much content to use (which also helps Archives of Nethys, Foundry, and Pathbuilder)
• Wide variety of adventure content (esp. if you consider PFS adventures)
• The Lost Omens books are great setting tomes.
• Pathfinder Society is great for organized play.
• Can adjust monster difficulty with Weak and Elite templates.
• Hardcover, PDF, pocket editions, and free access to Archives of Nethys allows gamers of various financial means to play the game.
• Paizo is good at promoting their games so you know what new releases are coming out - and there's usually synergy if you want crunch, lore, and adventures all tied together.
• Their splat books use public playtest feedback.
• Their employees have a union, so it feels more fair.
• They use good paper quality. Their books are generally of high production value.
• Paizo helped keep the OGL fight going, ensuring open gaming for around two decades.

Interesting list. So few of these are actually about the game system - a bit surprising.

 

[Retreater]

Interesting list. So few of these are actually about the game system - a bit surprising.

I guess only about 4-5 of them are specifically about Pathfinder 2.
To be fair, I also like collecting Starfinder (which I haven't even had a chance to play yet - and likely won't before SF2 is released).

Of the contemporary (post-2000) d20-style games, I'd rank PF2 as my favorite.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I guess only about 4-5 of them are specifically about Pathfinder 2.
To be fair, I also like collecting Starfinder (which I haven't even had a chance to play yet - and likely won't before SF2 is released).

Of the contemporary (post-2000) d20-style games, I'd rank PF2 as my favorite.

Is it fair from my reading of this latter that you generally just don't like the thrust of the modern D20-adjacent design compared to older systems?

 

[Retreater]

Is it fair from my reading of this latter that you generally just don't like the thrust of the modern D20-adjacent design compared to older systems?

I'm not especially a fan of the OSR either.
I guess my statement was because I find it difficult to compare PF2 to OSR games, TSR-era D&D, or games like Fabula Ultima, Powered by the Apocalypse, Call of Cthulhu, etc. However, there is an easy comparison between 5e, PF2, 4e, etc.

 

[Velderan]

I guess only about 4-5 of them are specifically about Pathfinder 2.
To be fair, I also like collecting Starfinder (which I haven't even had a chance to play yet - and likely won't before SF2 is released).

Of the contemporary (post-2000) d20-style games, I'd rank PF2 as my favorite.

I like what I've seen so far in Starfinder, which is a handful of books I picked up in a Humble Bundle which prompted me to buy the Beginner Box. Sadly I haven't had time to run the Beginner Box yet and as we get closer and closer the SF2e playtest, it's looking less and less likely I ever will unfortunately. I do plan to look more into SF2e when the playtest material is out though, not having to learn another game system to play a different genre is definitely a bonus.

 

[Retreater]

I like what I've seen so far in Starfinder, which is a handful of books I picked up in a Humble Bundle which prompted me to buy the Beginner Box. Sadly I haven't had time to run the Beginner Box yet and as we get closer and closer the SF2e playtest, it's looking less and less likely I ever will unfortunately. I do plan to look more into SF2e when the playtest material is out though, not having to learn another game system to play a different genre is definitely a bonus.

I think part of the issue is that Starfinder 2 won't have the breadth of what is available in Starfinder 1 (similar to the switchover from PF1 to PF2). And I'm not necessarily interested in playing a "re-skinned" version of PF2 - I could've done that myself.
So unfortunately, I have to rate my interest in Starfinder 2 as "almost nil."

 

[Staffan]

• I really don't like how counteracting works. Basically my complaint about it is if the player doesn't heighten the casting of a spell to a high enough spell rank to remove a condition, they might not be able to remove the condition even if they roll high enough to beat the DC. It just feels like a mechanic that didn't require tinkering from how it was handled in previous editions of PF and D&D. To me the DC is sufficient enough bar to overcome, you don't need to add the level of the poison/disease/what have you to the equation.

I get this. I think part of the issue is that in 3e, once you got a spell to deal with a condition, that condition lost its edge since you could deal with it with spells that were eventually low enough level not to matter – particularly if you could also stock up on cheapish scrolls so you didn't have to prepare the spells. So in PF2 they made sure that if the issue was caused by a powerful enough source to matter, you needed to use your strongest magic to fix it.

This is a thing I can sympathize with, but the problem is compounded by overspecialized condition relief spells. Fear, paralysis, poison, disease, ability-affecting conditions, curses, and blindness/deafness all use different spells, so if you wanted to prepare for all of them you basically needed to dedicate your top 2-3 levels of spells to them – and Sarenrae forbid you're a spontaneous caster! For clerics, Channeled Succor helps a bit by letting you trade in your bonus heals for some condition relief spells, but that (a) requires that you are a cleric, and (b) that you spend your 8th level feat on that.

The remaster fixes this somewhat by reducing the condition relief spells to four: cleanse affliction, clear mind, sound body, and sure footing. They each also do something when they fail to counteract something, unless you were using something very underpowered. My preference would have been to collapse them even more, but it's at least a step in the right direction.

 

[Velderan]

I think part of the issue is that Starfinder 2 won't have the breadth of what is available in Starfinder 1 (similar to the switchover from PF1 to PF2). And I'm not necessarily interested in playing a "re-skinned" version of PF2 - I could've done that myself.
So unfortunately, I have to rate my interest in Starfinder 2 as "almost nil."

I can see that, at least at the start. It won't need a flood of material for me to be interested in playing it though, it likely won't ever be more than the 3rd string game I run behind PF2e and Call of Cthulhu. Just something to run on occasion for different themed adventures without requiring me to learn a new ruleset. I doubt I'd even ever buy an AP for it, I don't really have the mental bandwidth to run multiple full campaigns. lol

 

[Retreater]

I doubt I'd even ever buy an AP for it, I don't really have the mental bandwidth to run multiple full campaigns. lol

No kidding. I was running multiple full campaigns, weekly, in different systems for a few years. Luckily, I've started cutting back.
My brain is fried from the experience. (And probably a big part of the reason I've been so grumpy on here.)

 

[Velderan]

I get this. I think part of the issue is that in 3e, once you got a spell to deal with a condition, that condition lost its edge since you could deal with it with spells that were eventually low enough level not to matter – particularly if you could also stock up on cheapish scrolls so you didn't have to prepare the spells.

That makes a lot of sense. I'm sure you're right that the designers saw a problem and this was their attempt to fix it. I probably would dislike the way it's handled less if they narrowed the ways to remedy a condition down further as you've suggested.