Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder Second Edition: I hear it's bad - Why Bad, How Bad?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 7638740" data-attributes="member: 5834"><p>It's more like 5E than 4E. 4E was very video gamey like you were punching buttons every single fight because you had powers based on encounters.</p><p></p><p>Pathfinder 2 more like 5E, but not quite as bad. In 5E once you had advantage and <strong>bless</strong>, you were pretty much done using buff powers. Advantage by any means and <strong>bless</strong> was pretty much the most powerful combo in the game. Then just pile on damage with your advantage and <strong>bless</strong> bonus, rinse and repeat. It didn't matter if the ability giving you advantage was martial, magic, divine, or what not. At the end of the day it was just getting advantage. That's just super boring. I hate DMing 5E because of how boring it is, but I don't mind playing it if some DM wants to run it.</p><p></p><p>Pathfinder 2 doesn't go that far, so that was good. It's more that the powers, feats, and abilities are very low level, moderate bonuses. A great deal seems to be based on proficiency for every class. Certain classes like the paladin has been basically neutered from its PF1 form. It's no longer the powerful force against evil. It's more like a fighter with some divinely powered abilities. I think the paladin was the most disappointing class from PF1 to PF2. </p><p></p><p>The reason we're willing to give it a shot is because some of the base elements were pretty interesting. The new invisibility/unseen rules are more specific and work well with the action system. You just spend an action to attempt to locate an unseen creature. You can still attempt to attack it or move towards it. Really, the action system is the shining and fluid part of Pathfinder 2. It allows for more flexibility of action by the PCs that can drive story and seems like a more pseudo-realistic way to spend time. It was super nice to not have to move, attack, and maybe use a quickened action or immediate action. Instead you get 3 actions to spend as you wish. So you can raises a shield and cast a two action spell. You can move and a cast a two action spell. You can seek, move, attack. You can pick up magic rock, examine it, and put it in your pouch in one round without disrupting any combat flow and still have a reaction to shield block. It's a very nice action system. It is what sold us on trying the game.</p><p></p><p>The rest of it was hard to see. It's obviously powered down from Pathfinder 1. We want to see how the characters play once we run a campaign.</p><p></p><p>They got rid of power attack and the like. That was a huge plus. Those abilities scaled insanely and made crits nuts. Crits are flat double damage. You can do decent crit damage, but it's less than it was at higher levels.</p><p></p><p>So far monsters using the new action system are also more interesting. You can have a monster swoop in, attack with a single attack, and swoop out without a special feat or ability. Or use a spell like ability from afar, then move stealth into the bushes in the same round.</p><p></p><p>So far the monster scaling along with the action system seems better designed to challenge a higher level party and make monsters more interesting to play.</p><p></p><p>And they don't have pop up healing like 5E, PF1, or even old iterations of D&D. It can be hard to get back into the fight even with healing. I liked that quite a bit. Forgot about that part. You no longer are healed and automatically wake up. Instead if you get knocked to zero, you make a save. If you miss, you get closer to dead. Even if you get healed above zero, you have to make a save to become conscious. Your body is still messed up from getting downed and is trying to regain consciousness. This usually takes a minimum of 2 rounds once you're healed to 1 or more hit point. Once you're conscious if you lose the dying condition at 1 rank per round. So if you were close to dead, you may a take a while of being up to shake that off. That part was cool. Brought some of the lethality back without having to resort to just save or die or straight death at a certain hit point count.</p><p></p><p>Pathfinder 2 has a lot of interesting changes. Some of them seem very fun and should enhance the game. I'm hoping once we play the final product, classes will seem more fun. One class I did like more was the monk. Monk seemed like a lot more of a straight up badass martial artist than the mystical dude he was before. The modular system has made the monk more interesting. You can make many types of monks now. That was one class superior to Pathfinder 1.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celtavian, post: 7638740, member: 5834"] It's more like 5E than 4E. 4E was very video gamey like you were punching buttons every single fight because you had powers based on encounters. Pathfinder 2 more like 5E, but not quite as bad. In 5E once you had advantage and [b]bless[/b], you were pretty much done using buff powers. Advantage by any means and [b]bless[/b] was pretty much the most powerful combo in the game. Then just pile on damage with your advantage and [b]bless[/b] bonus, rinse and repeat. It didn't matter if the ability giving you advantage was martial, magic, divine, or what not. At the end of the day it was just getting advantage. That's just super boring. I hate DMing 5E because of how boring it is, but I don't mind playing it if some DM wants to run it. Pathfinder 2 doesn't go that far, so that was good. It's more that the powers, feats, and abilities are very low level, moderate bonuses. A great deal seems to be based on proficiency for every class. Certain classes like the paladin has been basically neutered from its PF1 form. It's no longer the powerful force against evil. It's more like a fighter with some divinely powered abilities. I think the paladin was the most disappointing class from PF1 to PF2. The reason we're willing to give it a shot is because some of the base elements were pretty interesting. The new invisibility/unseen rules are more specific and work well with the action system. You just spend an action to attempt to locate an unseen creature. You can still attempt to attack it or move towards it. Really, the action system is the shining and fluid part of Pathfinder 2. It allows for more flexibility of action by the PCs that can drive story and seems like a more pseudo-realistic way to spend time. It was super nice to not have to move, attack, and maybe use a quickened action or immediate action. Instead you get 3 actions to spend as you wish. So you can raises a shield and cast a two action spell. You can move and a cast a two action spell. You can seek, move, attack. You can pick up magic rock, examine it, and put it in your pouch in one round without disrupting any combat flow and still have a reaction to shield block. It's a very nice action system. It is what sold us on trying the game. The rest of it was hard to see. It's obviously powered down from Pathfinder 1. We want to see how the characters play once we run a campaign. They got rid of power attack and the like. That was a huge plus. Those abilities scaled insanely and made crits nuts. Crits are flat double damage. You can do decent crit damage, but it's less than it was at higher levels. So far monsters using the new action system are also more interesting. You can have a monster swoop in, attack with a single attack, and swoop out without a special feat or ability. Or use a spell like ability from afar, then move stealth into the bushes in the same round. So far the monster scaling along with the action system seems better designed to challenge a higher level party and make monsters more interesting to play. And they don't have pop up healing like 5E, PF1, or even old iterations of D&D. It can be hard to get back into the fight even with healing. I liked that quite a bit. Forgot about that part. You no longer are healed and automatically wake up. Instead if you get knocked to zero, you make a save. If you miss, you get closer to dead. Even if you get healed above zero, you have to make a save to become conscious. Your body is still messed up from getting downed and is trying to regain consciousness. This usually takes a minimum of 2 rounds once you're healed to 1 or more hit point. Once you're conscious if you lose the dying condition at 1 rank per round. So if you were close to dead, you may a take a while of being up to shake that off. That part was cool. Brought some of the lethality back without having to resort to just save or die or straight death at a certain hit point count. Pathfinder 2 has a lot of interesting changes. Some of them seem very fun and should enhance the game. I'm hoping once we play the final product, classes will seem more fun. One class I did like more was the monk. Monk seemed like a lot more of a straight up badass martial artist than the mystical dude he was before. The modular system has made the monk more interesting. You can make many types of monks now. That was one class superior to Pathfinder 1. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder Second Edition: I hear it's bad - Why Bad, How Bad?
Top