Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jsaving" data-source="post: 7814028" data-attributes="member: 16726">PF2 is quite a bit easier on the player than PF1 was, with 4e-style "guard rails" on player choices clearly visible.  A lot of the more mathematically complex options in PF1, like 3e-style multiclassing and skill points, were resolved by simply scrapping the options entirely and replacing them with alternatives that are much less flexible but much easier to calculate.  Overall the system is pretty similar to what a lot of people initially expected 4e to be, a system that retains a lot of mechanical similarities to 3e while paying greater attention to game balance and hand-holding than 3e did.  Whether that's a good or a bad direction for Pathfinder to take is very much in the eye of the beholder.  However there are some aspects of the new ruleset I think will be broadly popular, such as the new occult power source and the fact that you can now be a spontaneous divine or nature caster without having to jump through the sometimes-bizarre idiosyncrasies of the oracle.  Other changes were probably needed for game balance even though they can be painful for certain builds, like the nerfs to sneak attack and summons/companions.   Is PF2 "worth it"?  I think that depends on what you were hoping to see in a Pathfinder sequel.  If you're the kind of player who adopted PF1 while taking a fair amount of inspiration/ideas from 4e, then you'll probably be happy with PF2 as it provides a happy medium between those two rulesets.  However if you fled D&D for PF1 because you disliked the forced simplicity of 4e, then you may not be as enthusiastic about the 4e-style guardrails on player choice that PF2 provides and you might be tempted to either stick with PF1 or else move to 5e.  But it's important not to be too "over the top" either way" because PF2 is still recognizably a Pathfinder game.</blockquote>

Verification