Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JmanTheDM" data-source="post: 8595541" data-attributes="member: 6791902">I've never played PF1.&nbsp; but I have played and run a lot of 5e.&nbsp; sorry if this is a bit off topic.&nbsp; for me, the balance is found most strongly in the encounter difficulty guidelines.&nbsp; PF2 works.&nbsp; like, its some kind of magic - when compared to 5e.&nbsp; my strengths as a GM are not in running optimized monsters.&nbsp; in fact, I suck at this.&nbsp; I constantly miss abilities, synergies, powers, and capabilities. in 5e, encounter balance guidelines are always way under represented of what happens at my table.&nbsp; put another way, I've had to create a bit of a &quot;feel&quot; around my own encounter balance to make fights even moderately difficult, and I invariably end up with encounters many times the size of what the DMG recommends.&nbsp; did I mention I suck at running monsters?&nbsp; in pf2, even though I still suck at running monsters, an &quot;extreme&quot; threat is still a bloody hard near TPK thing - every. single. time.&nbsp; I can only imagine that with a competent GM who is good at tactical combats, those will truly be &quot;Extreme&quot; from a player POV.so - for me - having encounter guidelines that appear to work, that I know if I want a moderate encounter I have a very clear way to build one that feels moderate at my table, with my flaws as a tactical GM - makes PF2 SO MUCH FUN.Cheers,J.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JmanTheDM, post: 8595541, member: 6791902"] I've never played PF1. but I have played and run a lot of 5e. sorry if this is a bit off topic. for me, the balance is found most strongly in the encounter difficulty guidelines. PF2 works. like, its some kind of magic - when compared to 5e. my strengths as a GM are not in running optimized monsters. in fact, I suck at this. I constantly miss abilities, synergies, powers, and capabilities. in 5e, encounter balance guidelines are always way under represented of what happens at my table. put another way, I've had to create a bit of a "feel" around my own encounter balance to make fights even moderately difficult, and I invariably end up with encounters many times the size of what the DMG recommends. did I mention I suck at running monsters? in pf2, even though I still suck at running monsters, an "extreme" threat is still a bloody hard near TPK thing - every. single. time. I can only imagine that with a competent GM who is good at tactical combats, those will truly be "Extreme" from a player POV. so - for me - having encounter guidelines that appear to work, that I know if I want a moderate encounter I have a very clear way to build one that feels moderate at my table, with my flaws as a tactical GM - makes PF2 SO MUCH FUN. Cheers, J. [/QUOTE]

Verification