Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zztong" data-source="post: 7497054" data-attributes="member: 6943414">I'm playing in a playtest group and we just played again last night. We're not fast enough to keep up with the playtest schedule. We also have trouble keeping up-to-date on the rules Updates. Its a pain in the butt to sort through the rules PDF and 3 update PDFs.I'd say that folks are more interested in just playing a game than actually playtesting. The table is a mix of veteran players and new folks.Resonance hasn't been an issue for us. I suspect it is because most of the players don't know the rule exists and the GM isn't bothering to check on it. Hero Lab tells me that I'm using 2 of 5 available Resonance. I suspect Paizo could delete the Resonance rules and we'd never notice. We also didn't care about folks having many CLW wands in PF1. I'd suggest they cut the rule because of its irrelevance.I've not seen many third attacks at the table unless a character had nothing else to do, then they don't mind throwing the die and hoping to get lucky. It usually applies to the melee folks and those folks usually want to raise a shield. Even my Monk/4 raises a Shield (via the Shield Spell) because of his Wizard Feat. These combinations pretty much have defined my play:Shield - Move - FlurryFlurry - Stunning AttackMove - Ray of FrostShield - Ray of FrostThe Math is interesting, but last night it really didn't work out so well. We were fighting the Manticore in the second part. It could regularly critically hit us multiple times a round and take people from healthy to dying in a round. The Cleric could take them from dying to healthy in one round too. The poor Ranger spent the combat falling down and standing up. The Cleric spent the entire combat healing.I see the system faltering with critical successes being too common and magic items throwing in extra damage dice. The DM describes the system as more "swingy." That is, damage comes in over a greater range. I suppose that creates tension at some level. What I see is it leads to a much different story being told than PF1.While I'm not a fan of a fantasy game being about Superheroes, I know that's what most people want and what Paizo is trying to deliver. Thus far, PF2 doesn't feel like a game of super heroic fantasy. It feels more like a game of incompetents that are vastly superior to pathetically incompetent commoners. This is partly a result of the odds of successfully beating a DC and partly because of the opponents.Overall, if PF2 is what the group eventually decides to play, I'll keep playing to hang out with my friends. I don't like making PF2 characters so far. Pretty much each part of character generation feels wrong. I hate picking between a bunch of meaningless stuff or things that make no sense or things that don't help me advance my character concept.You suggest +Level/2 instead of Level. I'd go for that, or +Level/4. Without that kind of change, changes to the critical hit system, and a major revamp of character creation, there's zero chance I run PF2. Right now, its just not a system that will enable me to tell the stories that interest me.</blockquote>

Verification