Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2E or Pathfinder 1E?

[Zardnaar]

And not just you.

I agree so far as: IF they break compatibility, which they seem firm on, they better make a game that appeals to customers used to 5E sensibilities.

As you yourself illustrate, just appealing to PF1 fans might not be good enough, especially given the lack of backwards compatibility.

PF2 doesn't need to be 5E, but I think they need to take a page from the more simple math of 5E, or even the OSR games. Things like micro feats, prestige classes, and perhaps magic item mart need to stay in but some items need to be trimmed or errated. Wands of CLW either don't exist or are custom items. PFS still a thing (in terms of people actually turn up and play).

 

[amethal]

Wands of CLW either don't exist or are custom items.

Wands of CLW don't bother me in the slightest. If they did, I would ban them.

What would bother me is a design paradigm that:

* required 4 encounters per day,
* every encounter needing to be a life or death struggle (most Paizo adventures have encounters against powerful opponents that won't negotiate, and always attack on sight),
* against enemies capable of dishing out significant amounts of hit point damage in a single round (so characters often take serious damage through no fault of their own),
* with no reliable way of ensuring you are at close to full hit points when the fight starts.

If you want to keep the last part, then you need to amend at least one of the others e.g. expect the ten minute adventuring day.

 

[Erekose]

Wands of CLW don't bother me in the slightest. If they did, I would ban them.

What would bother me is a design paradigm that:

* required 4 encounters per day,
* every encounter needing to be a life or death struggle (most Paizo adventures have encounters against powerful opponents that won't negotiate, and always attack on sight),
* against enemies capable of dishing out significant amounts of hit point damage in a single round (so characters often take serious damage through no fault of their own),
* with no reliable way of ensuring you are at close to full hit points when the fight starts.

If you want to keep the last part, then you need to amend at least one of the others e.g. expect the ten minute adventuring day.

This contrasts acutely with when I started role playing with (basic) D&D where my group would stop for the night when the (in game) day was over rather than any sense of resource management. Needless to say I had to do a lot of rescaling encounters to stop a TPK each day. Still prefer that kind of approach to it being a micromanagement tactical game. Not that there aren’t some lessons that need to be learned about preparing appropriately for the day

 

[Aldarc]

PF2 doesn't need to be 5E, but I think they need to take a page from the more simple math of 5E, or even the OSR games. Things like micro feats, prestige classes, and perhaps magic item mart need to stay in but some items need to be trimmed or errated. Wands of CLW either don't exist or are custom items. PFS still a thing (in terms of people actually turn up and play).

This likely ties into how and why PF2 developed as it did. 3.X had a lot of moving parts and subsystems (e.g., skills, feats, classes/PrCs, alt. racial/class features, etc.). Pathfinder took those and then introduced more (e.g., archetypes, traits, more class features, hybrid classes, etc.). Pathfinder 2 at least seems to be an attempt for Paizo to step back and ask, "Okay, how we do take all these various moving parts we have accumulated that are lying around and synthesize them into a more coherent whole." And the math will likely simplify (somewhat) as a natural result of trying to smoothen out the various moving parts of the d20 system. I suspect that attacks and saves will be the biggest beneficiaries from streamlining the numbers soup.

 

[Zardnaar]

This likely ties into how and why PF2 developed as it did. 3.X had a lot of moving parts and subsystems (e.g., skills, feats, classes/PrCs, alt. racial/class features, etc.). Pathfinder took those and then introduced more (e.g., archetypes, traits, more class features, hybrid classes, etc.). Pathfinder 2 at least seems to be an attempt for Paizo to step back and ask, "Okay, how we do take all these various moving parts we have accumulated that are lying around and synthesize them into a more coherent whole." And the math will likely simplify (somewhat) as a natural result of trying to smoothen out the various moving parts of the d20 system. I suspect that attacks and saves will be the biggest beneficiaries from streamlining the numbers soup.

I don't really see myself getting into PF 2 that heavily but I'll buy the PDF and if I like it grab the core books and the new Runelords AP if its good. WAR art drives me nuts though I can't stand it now, to cartoony and anime for my tastes. Didn't think it was good 10 years ago. I don't see anyone locally wantin to play it over 5E though is a bigger problem I could get 2-3 potential players vs a dozen or 2. I'll get the PDF regardless, take a look.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't really see myself getting into PF 2 that heavily but I'll buy the PDF and if I like it grab the core books and the new Runelords AP if its good. WAR art drives me nuts though I can't stand it now, to cartoony and anime for my tastes. Didn't think it was good 10 years ago. I don't see anyone locally wantin to play it over 5E though is a bigger problem I could get 2-3 potential players vs a dozen or 2. I'll get the PDF regardless, take a look.

Having played through a lot of the 3.X system and Pathfinder, I have a soft spot for the system framework. I may dabble in PF2, but I don't see that myself going heavily into PF2 either. Not because of 5E, but because I have other games on my shelves that tickle my fancy more.

I am nevertheless hoping that PF2 does well because I loathe the hegemony that 5E is increasingly exerting on the TTRPG market. More people are playing TTRPGs, but D&D 5E is stifling a lot of creativity and brain drain in the market. It feels like we are living in the 3.X days when everyone was converting their games, whether an appropriate fit or not, to the d20 system. And some of the best innovations to the TTRPG world (IMHO) came outside of these leading giants.

 

[Staffan]

I don't really see myself getting into PF 2 that heavily but I'll buy the PDF and if I like it grab the core books and the new Runelords AP if its good.

Point of order: Return of the Runelords is the penultimate PF1 adventure path and has already been released. The first PF2 adventure path will be Age of Ashes, which will apparently have a dragon as the BBEG.

 

[CapnZapp]

PF2 doesn't need to be 5E, but I think they need to take a page from the more simple math of 5E, or even the OSR games. Things like micro feats, prestige classes, and perhaps magic item mart need to stay in but some items need to be trimmed or errated. Wands of CLW either don't exist or are custom items. PFS still a thing (in terms of people actually turn up and play).

Actually, my players would love non-simple math.

The math simplicity should first and foremost apply to the DM's side of the table. As a DM I have plenty on my plate as it is. I don't need PC-levels of complexity for my NPCs. I don't need monster stat blocks that are incomplete and need to be supplemented with choices for magical gear and buff spells.

The main thing my players feel is lacking in 5E is charbuild crunch. Let's give that to them without giving me, the DM, any corresponding crunch.

 

[Zardnaar]

Actually, my players would love non-simple math.

The math simplicity should first and foremost apply to the DM's side of the table. As a DM I have plenty on my plate as it is. I don't need PC-levels of complexity for my NPCs. I don't need monster stat blocks that are incomplete and need to be supplemented with choices for magical gear and buff spells.

The main thing my players feel is lacking in 5E is charbuild crunch. Let's give that to them without giving me, the DM, any corresponding crunch.

Sounds like the best thing you can do is design your own D&D using the 5E engine. Microfeats, prestige classes etc are not part of 5E, whining here won't change that. As I have said my personal D&D has been an on/off thing going back 5 years or even 10 years when I looked at fixing 3.X. 3.X can be fixed but you need to rebuild it form the ground up and using 5E/OSR with microfeats was about the best idea I could come up with for my personal D&D. I have a small Bestiary (30 odd monsters), 50 odd feats, 5 classes out of 8 planned in various states of tweaking (just gonna focus on level 1-10).

We all know you won't do that though as you expect everyone else to do the work for you. Problem is the world doesn't work like that, you don't seem genuinely interested in PF2 either. You're doing the equivalent of complaining about 5E based on early playtest documents.

I'm not following PF2 that much but even I know the playtest was bad, they have indicated some things like resonance are gone burger. Just have to wait and see how it turns out, Paizo tends to sell cheap PDFs (around $10 IIRC) so there you have it. If you can't or won't pay $10 for a PDF of a core book (even $20 $10 was 2009 IIRC) you may be in the wrong hobby.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Sounds like the best thing you can do is design your own D&D using the 5E engine. Microfeats, prestige classes etc are not part of 5E, whining here won't change that....You're doing the equivalent of complaining about 5E based on early playtest documents.

Have I waxed cynical about the way people meet complaints early in a playtest with "it's too soon, don't worry, it'll be fine" and then, at some point, a switch flips, and it's "well it's too late, now! you should have said something earlier," but it's never, ever the right time to be complain?
I'm sure I have.

I'm not following PF2 that much but even I know the playtest was bad, they have indicated some things like resonance are gone burger.

One of the things I liked, of course (I also liked Attunement in 5e, but they miraculously kept it, anyway).

The way I see it, 5e has gone all old-school TSR, DM-centric.
PF(2) doesn't need to change focus from player to DM because 5e did, let alone try to be 'rules lite' because 5e pretended too.