Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 8638582" data-attributes="member: 90374">As somebody &quot;weird&quot; who doesnt like it (but doesnt hate it either) perhaps I can explain. It is not a simple phrasing of the experience. It's not that people expect moderate to actually be easy, or severe to be moderate. It's the predictability of the fights and your inability to strategize for them. Assuming a troll, ogre, or hobgoblin solider all have the same CR in PF2, you know exactly how those fights are going to go. It's predictable because the math is dialed in precisely. You know that abilities X, Y, and Z are likely to be successful. Step that encounter up to a dragon, giant, or froghemoth, and suddenly X/Y are off the table and you have to do with Z. The fight is also entirely predictable. This makes playing and gamemastering easier than in the past.Folks like myself see the unpredictable CR of the past as a feature. You dont know how the fight is going to go. It might be in that CR moderate place, but abilities of the enemy can vary giving it unpredictability. The math wasnt so tight that it limits abilities. More options are on the table so that PCs can punch above their weight. This is offloaded to combat tactics in PF2 instead of strategy.Basically, it comes down to a combat as war vs combat as sport. For many the smooth running balanced game is highly desirable and seen as &quot;fixed&quot; but others see it as an unwelcome obstacle to out of the box thinking. Its not as simple as it runs good so you must be blind to not like it as folks often assume. Lot of these disagreements happened back in the 3E/4E transition as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="payn, post: 8638582, member: 90374"] As somebody "weird" who doesnt like it (but doesnt hate it either) perhaps I can explain. It is not a simple phrasing of the experience. It's not that people expect moderate to actually be easy, or severe to be moderate. It's the predictability of the fights and your inability to strategize for them. Assuming a troll, ogre, or hobgoblin solider all have the same CR in PF2, you know exactly how those fights are going to go. It's predictable because the math is dialed in precisely. You know that abilities X, Y, and Z are likely to be successful. Step that encounter up to a dragon, giant, or froghemoth, and suddenly X/Y are off the table and you have to do with Z. The fight is also entirely predictable. This makes playing and gamemastering easier than in the past. Folks like myself see the unpredictable CR of the past as a feature. You dont know how the fight is going to go. It might be in that CR moderate place, but abilities of the enemy can vary giving it unpredictability. The math wasnt so tight that it limits abilities. More options are on the table so that PCs can punch above their weight. This is offloaded to combat tactics in PF2 instead of strategy. Basically, it comes down to a combat as war vs combat as sport. For many the smooth running balanced game is highly desirable and seen as "fixed" but others see it as an unwelcome obstacle to out of the box thinking. Its not as simple as it runs good so you must be blind to not like it as folks often assume. Lot of these disagreements happened back in the 3E/4E transition as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification