Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e: is it RAW or RAI to always take 10 minutes and heal between encounters?

[Thomas Shey]

Ok, I thought PF2 changed that from 3e/ PF1.

Well, don't take my word for it; I've read the encounter building guidelines, but since I'm not GMing they aren't likely to have stuck perfectly, and since I did run 3e many years ago, I may have conflated them.

Yes. The more levels the more gradual the progression can be. So yes, I feel we need at least 20 levels, maybe go back to the 36 levels of BECMI!

I'm guessing from the way you've phrased this that what you mean is that you can have progression be visible but minor (since, after all, you can have very gradual progression with ten levels--it just means you'd spend a long time at any given level).

I at least understand your position now; its not something I'd go to a level based system for at all, but when in the D&D sphere, that's what you're dealing with.

We play the whole range, so I feel we need it all. I guess we could cram it all into 10 levels, but then you get to much at each level, and that is not what I want.

I might have confused you with someone else I've been talking to; someone indicated they usually bailed after 12 levels.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Both PF1 and PF2 actually make similar assumptions when it comes to encounters. The difference is the math in PF2 actually works at pretty much all levels.

So I did more or less recall it right? I wasn't sure.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Let’s just say I don’t agree with their take on sandboxes. I don’t think it’s necessary to shoehorn everything into the traditional adventure structure, and I find it a bit exasperating how the traditional structure is taken to be the natural and default form of adventures.

Its probably an inevitable mindset from a company that got their start, and still makes a lot of their hay, from selling adventures and adventure paths. It wouldn't surprise me they aren't even conscious of it.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Well, there's another issue with sandboxes that was even true in the old days; how easy is it to retreat? Alternatively, how consistent is the warning that you're getting in over your head? Without these two being handled well, even a OD&D sandbox was a deathtrap looking for a place to happen.

I want to emphasize the second point: how obvious is it that you are over your head before people start dying? There are ways for a DM to signpost this, but doing it consistently can break verisimilitude.

 

[dave2008]

I might have confused you with someone else I've been talking to; someone indicated they usually bailed after 12 levels.

yes, I think that was @payn

 

[payn]

yes, I think that was @payn

That was me in 3E/PF1 era.

 

[dave2008]

Well I thought I would post something a bit more on the topic of the OP. If / when I GM PF2, I will be allowing heal up on 5 min. rests. Not feats or skills need. I might bring in something like 4e surges (which I also think PF2 could use) to do it too. That way you have easy healing, but not unlimited healing.

 

[payn]

Well I thought I would post something a bit more on the topic of the OP. If / when I GM PF2, I will be allowing heal up on 5 min. rests. Not feats or skills need. I might bring in something like 4e surges (which I also think PF2 could use) to do it too. That way you have easy healing, but not unlimited healing.

Yeah I've been toying around with the idea that short rest gets back to full HP, but are limited per day. I miss adventuring day as the resource limiter. 4E surges were good to be in this respect.

 

[kenada]

Its probably an inevitable mindset from a company that got their start, and still makes a lot of their hay, from selling adventures and adventure paths. It wouldn't surprise me they aren't even conscious of it.

I’d actually go a step farther and suggest that there’s a fundamental assumption at play (at Paizo and beyond) that of course RPGs are about telling stories. A structure that’s meant to create them is alien and/or hard to grok. Other things can be mined for ideas, but they need to be reworked into the traditional structure, since it is better (natch). I think that’s how one gets silly claims about needing curation for a story to be meaningful. Anyway, but I digress.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I want to emphasize the second point: how obvious is it that you are over your head before people start dying? There are ways for a DM to signpost this, but doing it consistently can break verisimilitude.

Maybe so, but I can't help but think a situation where you can walk into an encounter you're extremely unlikely to be able to either win or flee without warning is going to be attractive to a downright minuscule subset of players; hard to see almost any level of verisimilitude break including outright saying "You don't want to get into this one" is worse than that.