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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The-Magic-Sword" data-source="post: 7818571" data-attributes="member: 6801252">I've been playing a test game for a few weeks now, leveling my players at an accelerated rate, we're going up to level 5 for this week's session, before this I was a 5e obsessed DM who had been running consistently for like three years or more.In Combat the game works well, the 3 action system is actually really cool to use in practice, and in tandem with the relative lack of OA's have made combat a very mobile, dynamic experience. The way actions are distributed during the turn really debunks with one of the big theorycrafted 'problems' with the math- the success rate of a given action might be lower, but you have a good chance of landing something on your turn overall, even against higher leveled monsters (which are pretty much always functionally bosses) across multiple actions- your overall chance to hit across two attacks at full MAP isn't 50%, it's 62.7% or so. There's a lot of nuance here where specific class feat comboes seem boring, but open a world of possibility in combat through interactions with MAP, for instance fighter class feat, double slice? has a 75% chance of hitting because the second slice happens before any MAP is applied, Power Attack tacks a bunch of extra damage onto your MAPless first attack (or at least your second, as I've heard people have been optimizing it.) Spells are powerful, but they don't feel dominant, at least at low levels. With how tight the math is, Solo's unquestionably work well, as a creature 3 levels higher than the party led to a desperate battle for survival, whereas that was something I'd had to massage in 5e.In Exploration the game's codification of exploration activities and guideline of using 10 minute increments to track time is actually really functional, some characters are looking for traps, some characters are detecting magic, other characters are recalling knowledge about everything. By making these activities 'modes' the game successfully dodges problems concerning the probability of five people all making the same check from which 5e suffers, it also helps to make dungeon crawls feel more active, we actually did a crawl on a grid and it was a lot of fun for them. Letting players use different initiatives by getting into things in different ways is genius as well, really adds a lot to the whole 'sneaking vs. not sneaking' thing. This also benefit from skill feats, but I'll talk about that in my character building heading. Overall, the game seems like it could do a better job than 5e at simulating actual dungeon crawls, without losing utility outside of that.In Character Building the game is a treat, in that coming from 5e I feel spoiled for choice, some people complain about micro feats, but in reality, many feats are clearly designed to benefit specific playstyles- giving natural through lines (here's the free hand duelist package, here's the dual wielder package, etc), but you can take different things to adjust your overall build. My players have loved building specific characters, and one of my new players (a 5e baby) let me know that they actually liked pf2e better for this, because their choices allowed them to feel more invested, and gave them a more direct sense of what they could do (rather than the wall of text you just get given from a relatively few choices in 5e.) Skill feats being separate from class feats is genius, because it stops you from having to pick between combat and non combat, now everyone can be good at both- and my players are using it quite a bit, one player has the lie to me gambler feat and uses it, another player has crafting feats and is using them.In GMing the game gives a lot of useful guidance for running a consistent and balanced game, the monsters I've run have had lots of cool powers- last session they fought a wyvern whose dive and momentum abilities kept my players running across the battlefield after it and their grabbed friends. Treasure is easier to handle than in 5e because it gives you steady wealth by level, and everything you need to adjust it. Creating a 'haul' for each level has been fairly easy. The game uses a rarity system and then locks off all the problematic options behind it, giving the GM the power to decide if the players can get it or not- so you don't have to ban things, just not include them- this is true for say, resurrection magic, alignment detection, teleportation, and other features known to complicate the GM's day.Edit: It just hit me the biggest thing coming from 5e, is the fact that Pathfinder Second Edition uses Vancian Spell Casting a lot of my players don't like the idea of playing prepared casters (matching each spell to a slot you use to cast it at the day's beginning) at all, especially after 5e's simplified spontaneous approach. That being said, I expect players to variously either come to accept it, develop a preference for the spontaneous classes, or focus on the martial options. It seems like a pain point, but not an insurmountable option, especially if your players are the types who might enjoy the crafting system, which allows you to craft scrolls and wands- used properly a prepared caster shouldn't have any trouble, but it certainly requires more skill (and book keeping) to play a wizard here.</blockquote>

Verification