Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 8407457" data-attributes="member: 12731">I now understand enough to say that when I responded to you in the first place, I was talking about what Pathfinder 2 offers. I now realize you mentioned this &quot;strain&quot; thing already back then, but I didn't intend to reply to that part. I replied to the audience - what Pathfinder 2 offers in terms of longer-term attrition than the single encounter, is conditions. CheersMy point was to make clear that the traditional approach, to shave off a couple of hit points to make the next fight more exciting doesn't work in this game. You gotta go conditions. It's the only tool Paizo provides for attrition that keeps the combat reasonably well calibrated. (And no, the gamesmaster advice does not tell you this in a clear and direct way. I just did, though.)I have nothing to add when you start talking about &quot;challenge ratings&quot;. It's a D&amp;D term not part of Pathfinder 2.I know Paizo sells this game as &quot;just another D&amp;D game&quot; (with the implication you can use it for all sorts of game styles, much like how 5E or OSR or AD&amp;D can lend itself to other playing styles)... buuut hard nope - that's just not the case at all. PF2 is spectacularly inflexible in a surprising number of regards. Any time you need something significantly different than the house &quot;combat as sports&quot; dungeons of the APs, that is, gameplay focused around strings of individually challenging combat encounters, I think you are MUCH better off using a different game as your starting point. There are just way too many game choices (like feats) that get invalidated (sometimes with you not realizing it until much later) as soon as you try to play it significantly differently.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 8407457, member: 12731"] [I]I now understand enough to say that when I responded to you in the first place, I was talking about what Pathfinder 2 offers. I now realize you mentioned this "strain" thing already back then, but I didn't intend to reply to that part. I replied to the audience - what Pathfinder 2 offers in terms of longer-term attrition than the single encounter, is conditions. Cheers[/I] My point was to make clear that the traditional approach, to shave off a couple of hit points to make the next fight more exciting doesn't work in this game. You gotta go conditions. It's the only tool Paizo provides for attrition that keeps the combat reasonably well calibrated. (And no, the gamesmaster advice does not tell you this in a clear and direct way. I just did, though.) I have nothing to add when you start talking about "challenge ratings". It's a D&D term not part of Pathfinder 2. I know Paizo sells this game as "just another D&D game" (with the implication you can use it for all sorts of game styles, much like how 5E or OSR or AD&D can lend itself to other playing styles)... buuut [I]hard nope[/I] - that's just not the case at all. PF2 is spectacularly inflexible in a surprising number of regards. Any time you need something significantly different than the house "combat as sports" dungeons of the APs, that is, gameplay focused around strings of individually challenging combat encounters, I think you are MUCH better off using a different game as your starting point. There are just way too many game choices (like feats) that get invalidated (sometimes with you not realizing it until much later) as soon as you try to play it significantly differently. [/QUOTE]

Verification