Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2E or Pathfinder 1E?

[Ancalagon]

If every 5E class used warlock-style invocations and ASI/feats were more common... Also, are there even 2000 feats in PF2?

That I agree with as well. I would have thought that the sheer popularity and positive reception of the Arcanist would have taught them otherwise.

There are 2000 feats and 1200 traits, or vice versa, according to the srd site.

 

[Aldarc]

There are 2000 feats and 1200 traits, or vice versa, according to the srd site.

For Pathfinder 2?

 

[Ancalagon]

For Pathfinder 2?

No, PF1

 

[Ancalagon]

Someone made a comment about wizards in 5e being hobbled by attunement slots and concentration, but I can't find it...

I think that this is a necessary step to reduce the linear fighter, quadratic caster problem.

 

[chunkosauruswrex]

Someone made a comment about wizards in 5e being hobbled by attunement slots and concentration, but I can't find it...

I think that this is a necessary step to reduce the linear fighter, quadratic caster problem.

Concentration isn't a terrible thing, but I wish that you could remove concentration by using higher level slots on lower level spells. Like say a 3rd level slot on a first level spell would remove concentration, so that you could do more stuff when you need to, but consumes more resources at the same time.

 

[Ancalagon]

Concentration isn't a terrible thing, but I wish that you could remove concentration by using higher level slots on lower level spells. Like say a 3rd level slot on a first level spell would remove concentration, so that you could do more stuff when you need to, but consumes more resources at the same time.

Seems like a meta magic feat solution would fit well in a PF game

 

[chunkosauruswrex]

Seems like a meta magic feat solution would fit well in a PF game

I agree on that point, but I was more talking about 5e where so many things are concentration

 

[CapnZapp]

Someone made a comment about wizards in 5e being hobbled by attunement slots and concentration, but I can't find it...

I think that this is a necessary step to reduce the linear fighter, quadratic caster problem.

Yes.

Or something.

I don't think 5E's particular solution is necessary.

My point is that 5E finally did something that actually fixes LFQW.

That is the necessary part: fixing it.

If someone doesn't think LFQW is a problem I have nothing in common with that person.

If Paizo fixes it another way that would be fine too. What is entirely insufficient would be the PF1 approach; claiming to have fixed 3E while in reality being indistinguishable from it in any way that counts.

Pre-5E such an argument could be dismissed. Not so now, when I know for a fact 5E has implemented certain comprehensive fixes to the D&D framework, without which no DnD game should ever be published.

Doesn't need to be the same solutions, as long as it's real solutions.

What I think there is a minimal market for, is a Pathfindery game with all the flaws and merits of PF1 while offering zero compatibility.

If you want a d20 game, Pathfinder 1 is for you. If you want PF compatibility, Pathfinder 1 is for you.

But if you want something new, you'd better realize we live in a post-5E world.

A PF2 game with all the pre-5E flaws regarding spells and magic would come across as horribly antiquated. A relic out of touch with current reality.

 

[Ancalagon]

I agree on that point, but I was more talking about 5e where so many things are concentration

I meant if you wanted to adopt the 5e concentration mechanism in a PF like game, but provide a way out, meta magic feats are the way to go.

Btw it should be *at least* 2 levels.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

You simply can't hold on to the real-life concern "I don't want to get stabbed, ever".

Why not? Captain America can. Conan the Cimmerian can. Media is full of people - not even magic people - who would really rather not get stabbed, even though they are perfectly aware of the fact that they can survive it.

A game where you have 140 hp doesn't work properly if you only get hurt on 20 on a d20. That's a design extreme that misses the sweet spot.

That would be true, if weapon attacks were the only way to interact with the game, but 95% immunity to weapon attacks is not even the same thing as 95% immunity to damage, let alone 95% freedom from consequences. As a tank, my job is to not get hit, and a failure rate of 30% is unacceptable. That's the one thing I do. We wouldn't bring a dedicated lock-picker into a dungeon, if they had a 30% failure rate at picking locks.

You need to abandon the idea that taking hp damage equals getting hit (while you play D&D): as long as you have most of your hp left, losing hp simply means you expend energy avoiding (dodging, parrying) serious injury.

Alternatively, I need to find a better game than D&D (such as Pathfinder 1E). If there's a game mechanic for determining whether an attempted attack lands a telling blow, which overcomes their Dexterity-based avoidance and their armor, then I expect it to do what it says. If someone makes an attack roll, and the result of either hitting or missing is that they didn't actually hit, then something has gone seriously wrong with this model.

By-the-by, since we're on the topic, how does Pathfinder 2E handle this? If you're beaten within an inch of your life, how long until every evidence of that has been erased?