Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2E's reception?

[dave2008]

Once I get a chance to try out some (currently vague) ideas for incorporating MMO-style boss mechanics into PF2, I want to post those (probably) in the GM thread.

That is interesting. In one of the PF2e threads there was some discussion about making boss monsters/battles. Personally I was advocating bringing over something like 5e's legendary actions and to a lesser extent legendary resistance. There is already some precedent for "legendary" actions. The hydra for example. There is another PF2e monster I referenced, but I can't remember it off the top of my head.

 

[dave2008]

PF2 isn't like DD4. No healing surges or per encounter powers.
The Paizo boards aren't knocking PF2. Far from it. It's true that there are at times heated discussions there - people don't agree on how many hands you need for the Battle Medicine feat (the rules are unclear) and many don't like the crafting system (which is not unclear). But participation is strong, and there are clearly a lot of folks becoming invested in PF2.

There are so many great things about this game. The 3-action system. The 4 levels of success and failure. The cool things you can inside and out of combat with skills. The varied options of character creation and advancement. The cool things you can do with multiclass dedications.

I know people don't all agree on how wonderful PF2 is. No problem. I don't want to disparage other game systems, be it DD5, PF1, Runequest or Tunnels & Trolls. Any RPG can give a fulfilling, rewarding game experience to DMs and players. But I do enjoy PF2. So do my players, who have all played PF1 and DD3.5 for years. I wrote about our first session in my blog, if anyone is interested. And the French RPG community is slowly coming round to PF2. Black Book Editions published the Core Rulebook in French just before Christmas, and will soon give us the Bestiary, and some crazy bloke has even published a 3pp adventure for PF2 in French. More and more 3pp are putting out material for PF2 in English and although it isn't an avalanche, I think any prophecies of Paizo's demise are wildly exaggerated.

We don't agree, but we can have civilized discussions about aspects of these games that we like or don't like without resorting to ad hominem attacks. There may be some 12-year-olds on these boards, but that doesn't mean we have to post like one.

You making me wish I didn't have to cancel my planned to trip to France (Nice) this spring. Oh well, it wasn't going to play PF2e there anyway

 

[Philip Benz]

That's a good point. As far as I know,they don't have one on there schedule yet. I think the first one for PF1 came 2 years in? I think they should improve on that for PF2e. It is completely different game and PF1 had a huge base of knowledge coming from 3e.

That's precisely the reason why I decided to publish a series of tutorial adventures for PF2. Now also available in French. PF2 has a number of mechanisms (initiative, stealth, poison, etc) that are different enough that a DM new to the game needs a little guidance.

I'd love to see a beginner's box for PF2. It's definitely a useful tool that they should put on their agendas.

 

[CapnZapp]

PF2 isn't like DD4. No healing surges or per encounter powers.

True, but in addition to not being like D&D4 (to pick a third example, its magic system is much more like PF1 or D&D5 than D&D4), it is also very much like D&D4.

Yes, things can be complicated like that.

It offers dozens if not hundreds of build choices at each level (called feats rather than powers) with the "no wrong choice" design philosophy (that can alternatively be characterized as "your choices don't matter", since most/all paths to creating an outstanding character has been locked down) that let the publisher spam each new supplement with dozens if not hundreds of new feats. Exactly like D&D4.

And its magic items are, with the notable exception of fundamental runes, very much like D&D4 magic items: providing highly circumstantial and small benefits (in stark contrast to PF1 and D&D5 magic items, again with certain exceptions of course).

Believe it or not, I can - at the same time - very much like PF2 (for its balance and monster design) and very much dislike PF2 (for its "feat hell" and sometimes insultingly bland magic item design ("read "talismans")).

Not simply hating or loving a game (turning a blind eye to its strengths or weaknesses) makes, I think, for much more fruitful discussion than if we put politeness or brand loyalty first.

Tl;dr: In my opinion, Paizo has create a game deserving of high praise. They have also created a game with certain design elements I find outright execrable. Please let me know if I'm only allowed to take one side.

 

[Philip Benz]

With that yardstick, you could claim that PF2 is like any game that you wish to mention.

I think the jury is still out on talismans. The original idea was to make "scrolls for martials" and at that, at least, they have succeeded. Whether of not I'd spend gold pieces (cough, cough) or silver pieces on one as a PC, is another question entirely. But it does give low-level treasure options for the scheming DM to drop.

"Feat hell". There's a lot of angst in that. Our experience with feats in PF2 is very different.

 

[BryonD]

With that yardstick, you could claim that PF2 is like any game that you wish to mention.

That is true.
But it matters why any two games are similar. And it also matters why any two games are not alike.

To me, the way healing surges were baked into the game was a fatal flaw in 4E. I could house rule around it, but they were so fundamental to the game that by the time you worked around it you were just better off playing a better game. There is nothing equivalent here in PF2E. They are completely different.

I rather loathe talismans. And they don't give me any pause because that is something I can house rule around without the slightest bump.

Plus level (or half level as it may be) is also a fatal flaw to me. And, here, in both cases this is a fatal flaw baked into the games foundation. House ruling around it is possible, but just not worth it with better games already available. Here PF2E and 4E may as well be exactly alike.

You can say that PF and PF2E are exactly alike because they are both D20 system games with wizards. So by that yardstick, yes.

So it comes down to what yardstick is important. If something is a fatal flaw to someone, then that particular yardstick is going to get a lot more attention for them. It doesn't mean the other yardsticks are not there. But trying handwave them away by saying "you could claim that PF2 is like any" is a failure to give the perspective of someone else the merit it deserves.

I respect that +level is no big deal to some people and is even AWESOME to some people. I have no issue with that and I'm all for those people having a great time playing their game of choice. But that never seems to be mutual.

In the end, one guy may be a short red-headed engineer, and another guy a tall blond baker. But they are also cousins, and when you see them together, that is what you notice is that they are clearly family.

 

[kenada]

That is interesting. In one of the PF2e threads there was some discussion about making boss monsters/battles. Personally I was advocating bringing over something like 5e's legendary actions and to a lesser extent legendary resistance. There is already some precedent for "legendary" actions. The hydra for example. There is another PF2e monster I referenced, but I can't remember it off the top of my head.

I started the write a lengthy post explaining my ideas so far, and then I realized I did mostly just reinvent legendary and lair actions.

The big differences with what I want to do is I don’t actually want the things that make legendary and lair actions what they are. I want bespoke boss actions, but I want to keep them within the game’s action economy. I want to push what you can do with the three action economy before deciding I need to go beyond it. For example, an ogre warlord could stomp as an action to knock someone in the air then use his reaction to hit them with his club like a baseball (into the party for more damage, preferably).

For lair actions, I don’t care about the environmental effects. The idea I want to take from MMOs is having distinct phases and bringing the environment (traps, adds, etc) into the fight to prevent the PCs from just focusing on the boss. I ought to be able to do something like this boss and its invulnerability phases pretty easily in PF2, though I should want to teach my players about the phases during the dungeon.

This is all contingent on not pulling my players too far out of the game (another reason for respecting the action economy). If I can make things interesting without doing that, then I think I’ll have succeeded.

 

[dave2008]

The big differences with what I want to do is I don’t actually want the things that make legendary and lair actions what they are. I want bespoke boss actions, but I want to keep them within the game’s action economy. I want to push what you can do with the three action economy before deciding I need to go beyond it. For example, an ogre warlord could stomp as an action to knock someone in the air then use his reaction to hit them with his club like a baseball (into the party for more damage, preferably).

Well legendary actions are really just a type of reaction, the trigger is just really generic: the end of another creatures turn. However, though what you describe is cool, for me the issue is that it is all happening on the boss' turn (it is just using its reaction on its turn). Here are my thoughts:

1. PF2e already gives some monsters the "Multiple Opportunities" which is a version of 5e's "Reactive" trait or "Legendary Actions." I would give some version of this to the boss monster so I can do some things off-turn.
2. Boss monsters often have phases, often changing part of the way through the fight. Something I did in 4e that I think works here is to have multiple stat blocks, one for each phase of the monster. If you want for Boss to be a 400HP monster you could make it up of two 200HP stat blocks, or 4 100 HP stat blocks and then changes the abilities and changes between its stat block. When stat block 1 is reduced to 100, you replace with stat block #2 and the new powers and traits along with it.

 

[Philip Benz]

For example, an ogre warlord could stomp as an action to knock someone in the air then use his reaction to hit them with his club like a baseball (into the party for more damage, preferably).

IMHO, that would have to be a separate normal action, since the PC would be in the air during the ogre's turn and fall to the ground on the ogre's turn as well. Or you could make in a two-action sequence. It would certainly be hilarious.

bringing the environment (traps, adds, etc) into the fight to prevent the PCs from just focusing on the boss.

You can do this easily enough by placing traps, haunts or environmental dangers in specific places on the map, or with specific triggers in a given area. There are a lot of good examples of traps in the PF2 CRB. Another way is to give a boss a spellcasting minion or two whose role is to buff the boss and debuff the PCs.
This said, it's beginning to look like a critter that is 2-3 levels above the PCs is already very, very tough without having to pull many shenanigans.

 

[Dragonblade]

I don't have any experience with PF2, but I was a huge 4e fan. One of my favorite aspects of 4e was the balance was so tight that as DM, I could tell my players to make any PC they wanted and I never had to review it for broken combos or exploits. In fact, having players surprise me in fights with smart and clever power usage was a joy. Likewise, I could run my monsters to full affect, doing everything in my power as the monster to "win" the fight and could completely trust in the math to work out in such a way that the players were threatened but could triumph through smart gameplay not just lucky rolls. Nor would lucky rolls on my side result in a TPK or the infliction of deadly save or lose conditions. It was a masterpiece of design. If PF2 can come close to that, then that is a great achievement and I would give PF2 a deeper look.

5e I enjoy for its simplicity, and it is nicely balanced. I can trust my PC's with 5e as well, but I don't feel like the tactical depth is there. Nor do I feel like I can just cut loose with the monsters without a possible TPK. The other thing 4e did that I miss was entirely self-contained monster stats. If PF2 can do these things, its definitely worth a look from me. But if DMs still need to look up feats and spells before running monsters in PF2, thats going to be a hard pass from me. 3e and PF1 just became too burdensome on me, and I abandoned them for 4e and then 5e. I just don't want to deal with that. 5e I at least tolerate that aspect of it because the game is otherwise so simple and using D&D Beyond helps.