dave2008
Legend
I actually do think the 4 action economy of dc20 is better because it includes reactions. I was looking to make a 6 action economy, but that is needlessly complex / granular. I'm going to give the dc20 system a go I think
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Pathfinder 2E Never give up on PF2
- Thread starter Philip Benz
- Start date
Philip Benz
A Dragontooth Grognard
The important thing isn't whether you have one, three or four actions per round. It's reducing the incomprehensible variety of action types that we saw in DD3.5, PF1 and (some might argue) DD5e. I haven't tried dc20, so I'd be keen on hearing more about it.
UnplayedRanger
Adventurer
Oh, you mean the thing I've grown to despise the most about the system? Gosh, the the fact that this keeps getting touted as a good thing is almost as infuriating at this point. I've never been more stifled in a game then with this crap.
You typically play games with no restrictions on actions? Interesting.
the Jester
Legend
I'll be honest, I haven't tried PF2 and I don't have much interest in it. It is far too fiddly for my taste; it doesn't seem to have fixed the issues 3e had, and it seems to have imported the tight math that 4e had- which was both one of its best and worst features.
I AM, however, interested in Paizo's adventures. Even if I have to do some conversion, they have a very very good track record with adventures. Not sure about whole APs, but there are a few I'm planning on picking up one of these days.
I AM, however, interested in Paizo's adventures. Even if I have to do some conversion, they have a very very good track record with adventures. Not sure about whole APs, but there are a few I'm planning on picking up one of these days.
UnplayedRanger
Adventurer
That's not what i said, but we both know that.
I've never had any issues attempting what I set out to do in other game systems (5E, 4E. Savage Worlds, 13th Age, Dungeon World, etc). But PF2E goes out of its way (actions, feats, rules) to actively fight against you doing the 'thing'.
Savage Worlds: Pathfinder is probably the best way to play Pathfinder at the moment, if you want to run the APs or just like Golarion (imo, because its the internet and this isn't a fact).
How?That's not what i said, but we both know that.
I've never had any issues attempting what I set out to do in other game systems (5E, 4E. Savage Worlds, 13th Age, Dungeon World, etc). But PF2E goes out of its way (actions, feats, rules) to actively fight against you doing the 'thing'.
Savage Worlds: Pathfinder is probably the best way to play Pathfinder at the moment, if you want to run the APs or just like Golarion (imo, because its the internet and this isn't a fact).
In 5e, you get 3 actions, but they are slotted (Standard, and Bonus, if you have one), and you also get to move your speed.
In 4e, you get 3 actions, and they are also slotted (Standard, Move, Quick), and you can trade down.
13thAge is similar to 4e.
PF2E you also get 3 actions, but they can be whatever combo you want. Fewer limitations. I genuinely can't see how that is worse than the other 3 systems.
In PF2E, you can do the first 3 steps. If you're a class that uses a shield, you probably get a free reaction to raise shield at some point, but yeah, ok, this is a scenario where 5e is more flexible. It's not prescriptive for the rest of the game, I'd think, but point to you.
It is definitely a great system, and I think it does a lot of the things it sets out to do incredibly well. 5E is still my main game, but I do think PF2 has it beat when it comes to tactical combat, high level play, encounter building, crit fails and successes, and a few other things. It is incredibly well-supported on Foundry VTT, which is a huge plus as the automation eliminates much of the complexity which could otherwise be a drag on the system. So yeah, big 
for PF2!
for PF2!Similar Threads
