• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

PF2 Pathfinder Second Edition: I hear it's bad - Why Bad, How Bad?

ParanoydStyle

Villager
Basically thread title = thread topic but I'll clarify a little bit.

So I'm not asking this just to stir up smiley face emojii smiley face emojii smiley face emojii smiley face emojii but it IS a curiosity question for me. I would describe myself as having "settled comfortably" on D&D 5E, it's what everyone in my area knows how to play and it's good enough that I don't see myself going anywhere even were this thread to somehow convince me that PF2E is the proverbial second coming of Gary Gygax.

That said, the general impression I get about Pathfinder 2E...the very much AT A GLANCE impression I get, is that most people don't like PF2E. Esp. Pathfinder fans. I was curious what's wrong with it (or if you like it, I guess what are percveived to be its flaws) and just how bad the problems were.

(Plz be civil with each other.)
 

Jer

Explorer
Has anyone actually seen the final product yet? I thought it wasn't out until GenCon?
 

DragonBelow

Explorer
It's not out yet, this is pure speculation. This kind of thread just fuels the misinformation. Give it a go and then give your opinion, or at least get the opinion from folks that have actually used it.
 

zztong

Explorer
I didn't care for the Playtest rules. I worry my playtest experience has colored my opinion of the yet unreleased Pathfinder 2 rules. I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I admit I struggle with that on boards like this, Reddit, and on the Paizo website. I'm sure a friend will bring back a copy of the rules from GenCon and that I'll get a chance to play the final version of PF2. What I cannot predict is how much play it will get.

My biggest complaint with the playtest was character creation. Ultimately, I didn't enjoy making or leveling characters. The process felt like being forced to make a great many pointless choices.

My next biggest complaint was the skill system. They trimmed the skill list down a little too much for me. The DCs were out of whack, though I'm aware they've addressed that. I preferred spending skill points over just getting +1 per level and having to deal with the proficiency system.

The 3-action system was okay. Its easier to learn than PF1's system and it cleans up multiple attacks nicely.

The +10/-10 critical system did nicely with spells, but I didn't care for it with melee.

I don't want to short-change it. Some folks are going to really like it. I just don't think it will be my system of choice when its my turn to run, but it is too soon to tell.
 
Last edited:

mewzard

Explorer
Well, while we don't have the finished product, what we have seen leading into it makes me think it's a game I could enjoy. Going to have to do a few games with my group, see if we enjoy it more or less than Pathfinder as is.

Hoping it finds that sweet spot between Pathfinder 1st Edition and D&D 5E that I need in my life.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
The only people who have seen the game are under NDA.

I liked some aspect of the playtest rules, and didn't like other things. But I knew it was a playtest, not a ruleset, and included exaggerated examples of things and a very specific set of adventures geared towards stress testing.

I'm sure Paizo knew that the playtest process would turn off some people, but would make for a better game, and the overall reaction when it's released will overwhelm that in the same way we all remember the 5E playtest documents in great deal. Which we don't.

TL;DR. It comes out at Gen Con. Wait and see what people say then.
 

Retreater

Explorer
I have only run the Playtest and played in a few demo events at cons, so my experience might be limited. I actually enjoyed the character creation as something different. What I didn't care for was the organization of the Playtest rulebook (which I think can be fixed) and the death and dying mechanics (which might have been clarified). What I truly hated was the three action economy for monsters. As a GM, I could tell that the inflation of actions on monsters made it increasingly lethal. A swarm of goblins with suddenly 3 attacks each (even with worse probability of hitting), is a devastating encounter. This gives every enemy encounter an unfair advantage over the PCs. Sure the PCs get 3 attacks, but they're going to be overwhelmed in no time. Most enemies only need to survive a few turns in a single combat; most characters would like to survive 4-5 encounters in a day.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
I am curious whether there is a worrisome demographic to this day composed of people who refuse to play D&D 5E because they didn't like the playtest document back in 2014 or whenever it was. I suspect... the playtest document really won't be a thing anybody remembers in a couple of months' time. But hey, I might be wrong. Those 2014 diehard D&D Next playtest doc haters might still be out there harbouring their grudges about a game that never existed!
 

Retreater

Explorer
I am curious whether there is a worrisome demographic to this day composed of people who refuse to play D&D 5E because they didn't like the playtest document back in 2014 or whenever it was. I suspect... the playtest document really won't be a thing anybody remembers in a couple of months' time. But hey, I might be wrong. Those 2014 diehard D&D Next playtest doc haters might still be out there harbouring their grudges about a game that never existed!
I disliked D&D Next. I never even tried the Next Adventures (Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle?) I didn't like HotDQ when it came out. For me, it didn't start to click until Lost Mines of Phandelver.

All I can say is that I didn't like the Pathfinder 2E Playtest. I want more information before making a decision about purchasing the full rules. I'm at a "soft pass" currently.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
I disliked D&D Next. I never even tried the Next Adventures (Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle?) I didn't like HotDQ when it came out. For me, it didn't start to click until Lost Mines of Phandelver.

All I can say is that I didn't like the Pathfinder 2E Playtest. I want more information before making a decision about purchasing the full rules. I'm at a "soft pass" currently.
I think you I just agreed with me. In 5 years time you’ll barely remember this playtest.
 

Retreater

Explorer
I think you I just agreed with me. In 5 years time you’ll barely remember this playtest.
Well yeah. My comments have just been on "current state of things." I'm not excited enough to rush out and purchase day one, so I'm currently passing until I get more information.

And I hope to put that Playtest behind me. Not a great experience. Haha.
 

Jer

Explorer
For me, it didn't start to click until Lost Mines of Phandelver.
Honestly, while I might be checking in on the Pathfinder 2e news and flipping through the books when I see them, I doubt that even with major positive reviews I'll be jumping on board until a new Beginner Box comes out for it. There's just something about a good intro product to get me on board for a system even though I've been gaming for almost 40 years (good Lord that can't be right, can it? Yes, yes it is...) And I've quite liked both of Paizo's Beginner Boxes (Pathfinder and Starfinder).
 

muppetmuppet

Explorer
It looked pretty good to me but I have not actually played it. My group seem pretty settled on 5e. They hated 4e although I preferred it.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
If it indeed has more involved PC generation and leveling choices than 5e I will give it a go.
 

Jacob Lewis

Explorer
This seems pointless. The product isn't even out yet. Most of us have only the playtest material to go on, which Paizo has suggested was radically different from the final product. Anyone with any real substantial exposure and experience with the finalized product cannot openly discuss it. But let's go ahead and discuss how terrible it is already not knowing anything except how to speculate wildly and form opinions for everyone else so we won't need to come up with our own ideas. Heavens forbid!

Also, I hear a lot of people actually like it. They're just not usually as vocal or emotional about it. Or bound by NDAs.
 

Aldarc

Explorer
Also, I hear a lot of people actually like it. They're just not usually as vocal or emotional about it. Or bound by NDAs.
Same. I have also heard a number of people who were initially critical of the PF2 playtest who have since become enthusiastic about it either from trying out a more polished version or simply from reading the changes from the playtest that have since been slowly revealed. I'm cautiously optimistic.
 

zztong

Explorer
I will play PF2. Another person in my Tue/Wed game will bring it back from GenCon and run it. It will get its chance. What I don't know is if we'll stick with it. If the rules are close to the Playtest, I doubt it.

I'd certainly hate to see Paizo suffer for a lowsy playtest. They've been a good company. I have compassion for their staff. But I would point out they did have options with how they conduct the playtest. We got through 6 revisions to the rules in the playtest. The PF2 playtest started with predetermined dates for printing and release. They adopted a schedule that came with the risk of not settling on satisfactory rules by their self-imposed deadline. I can certainly understand if there were business reasons for doing so, and well... they rolled the dice. We'll see if it got enough time to finish baking.
 

TheWayofPie

Villager
They released level 1 monk "how to build a character" article yesterday. Got me excited to try it out. Lots of fun character options. I just hope skill feats don't put me to sleep like they did during the playtest.
 

Nebulous

Explorer
I played the final version of PF2 at Origins a couple weeks ago. I have run 5e exclusively for the past 5 years. I ran 3.x extensively back in the day, but I have never played PF 1e and own zero Paizo products except for those wonderful flipmaps. From what I saw of PF2 in the brief 2 hour demo, i DID enjoy it. It was crunchier than 5e, and while I do like 5e I also feel like it has been oversimplified in many ways. I will be picking up the core PF2 and Monster Manual in August, and there's a good chance I will run two campaigns, one 5e, the other PF2.

EDIT - by final version I mean the pre-made characters they gave us. There was no core book to see and we did not get to read rulesets, but we had the GM explain things to us and I think there was a cheat sheet.
 

Advertisement

Top