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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9383255" data-attributes="member: 7026617">To the degree I'm attracted to D&D-sphere games at all (I put in that qualifier because even though I'm running one right now (13th Age 1e), D&D-sphere games are not my first choice, and most of them I'm pretty uninterested in), the benefits of PF2e are a few-fold.1. Engagement: This is probably the opposite of some people, but PF2e not only permits a great degree of engagement, it almost demands it.  Almost every class and build has a lot of meaningful choices to make in combat, some of them very situational and dependent on the other PCs nature and actions.  I really am uninterested in a game I can go through just rolling my hit and moving on.2. Functional simplification.  I know some people will make the exact opposite argument to this, but this is mine. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I think PF2e simplified a number of features of D&D3e/PF1e in a way that makes it much more manageable than those two.  There's some legitimate complaints to be had about the number of conditions, but that's mostly an artifact of reducing the number of one-off effects various monsters and spells in prior version.  They reduced the number of modifier types to keep the mod hunting down to a dull roar, while not going to the (to me) really silly 5e approach.  They simplified some elements of monster/opponent construction and operation such that I have some faith I could run an upper level encounter without losing my mind.  And for all the hand-wringing about the total number of feats in the game, they're siloed so that most of them never matter to, and can be ignored by, most players while generating and advancing their characters.3. They have done the nearly miraculous trick of pushing the classes together, specifically the casters and non-casters and make both actually serve a purpose.  I know there's a considerable negative reaction from some people coming from some other related games about how spellcasters play, but to be blunt, a lot of that is them being used to being the big dogs in most situations, so when that isn't as reliably true makes them feel bad.  Since the price of that was frequently to make martials only there to buy casters time to solve the problem, I just can't work up any sympathy.(This does not mean that, at least prior to revised there may not have been some problems with specific ones there, but--I watched someone play a sorcerer through three campaigns, two of them 1-20 runs, and a cleric through two of those, so an attempt to tell me that, generically,. spellcasters are ineffective is going to be a hard sell).4. It also, for the most part, still manages to give characters a pretty fair range of options (even more if the common free Archetype is in use).  You can make an argument there's not quite as many as there were in PF1e/D&D3e, but the price of that was that you had bunches of really overtuned combos and, at the same time, a lot of trap options (some not immediately obvious) and at the other end over tuned combos.  While you can't give options without some issues there, it actually requires effort to build a PF2e character that isn't at least functional, there's only a small number of dead ends (and often you can steer out of them) and at the other end, even the tightly built characters won't make anyone else likely wonder why they're there.Most any complaints with the system I have (though I can understand some other people's complaints) are things I have generically with D&D-sphere games (I'm just never going to be a massive fan of heavy exception based design, and D&D and its kin have been stuffed with that from day one).Hope that's useful.</blockquote>

Verification