Pathfinder 2E PF2 house-rules / variant rules

[dave2008]

You might want to try the system anyway if you're going to work with it to 'develop' something new out of it, to better understand what you're altering.

Very good point - particularly because the books have been sitting on my digital shelf for a few years!

 

[kenada]

Ability Scores - Gradual Boosts​

This variant from the Gamemaster’s Guide giving boosts earlier but more slowly is used.

I really liked this one when using Proficiency without Level because it provides a sense of progression even though your proficiency is no longer going up every level anymore.

 

[BigZebra]

On Reddit I read about a very interesting house rule that some had great success with:

All 2-action spells was now a 1-action spell with Flourish. All 3-action spells was now a 2-action spell with Flourish. All 1-action spell stayed as is.

Because of Flourish you wouldn't be able to spam spells, but you would open up more tactically options for casters.
Comments?

 

[Philip Benz]

BigZ, it already seems frustrating when you have the actions required to do something, but can't do it. For example, a hasted character cannot throw two (2-action) spells, or do a sudden charge and then a power attack. So I can't help thinking that this house rule, dropping the action cost for spells across the board, wouldn't end up giving spellcasters a huge boost.

Just think about the action economy of summoning. Normally it's 3 actions to summon, then one action every round to sustain it. With this rule, you'd be able to pump out 2 summons, no problem, maybe three with the help of a special feat or hex.

IMHO, casters already have tactical options. The wizard player in my group often casts Fleet Step (to get more movement out of that spare action) or Fly, he makes heavy use of the few one-action spells he has (like force bolt) and has multiple options between buffing (haste on his pals), blasting and battlefield control. He may not be quite as mobile as the fighter or rogue in our group, but he's no statue.

 

[BigZebra]

Thanks for the reply Philp. I can see how it could be frustrating. Perhaps I will try it out, and see how it goes.

 

[kenada]

I always assumed that having spells (typically) require two actions was meant to make casters less mobile/flexible than martials. They’re already capable of changing reality on a whim. Do casters really need a boost?

 

[payn]

I always assumed that having spells (typically) require two actions was meant to make casters less mobile/flexible than martials. They’re already capable of changing reality on a whim. Do casters really need a boost?

For me debuffs seemed very weak, as in they rarely are successful (against anything but wimpy mooks of course). I wouldn't mind seeing a defense debuff at bloodied that might make spells more effective against severe/extreme enemies. I mean, bloodied was awesome and i'd like to see it make a return.

 

[Philip Benz]

Payn, I'm assuming that you're refering to significant combat penalties inflicted on combattants once their hit points fall below a given threshold.

Dangerous stuff, that. Unless your plan is for the penalty not to apply to PCs. Because additional numerical handicaps to PCs because their hitpoints are low will lead to far more frequent deaths and TPK events. I can recall many fights where the entire party (except perhaps the wizard) down in single-digit hit points when they finally managed to eliminate their adversaries.

RPGs, regardless of the game system, have a high degree of abstraction concerning the accumulation of wounds leading to unconsciousness or death. IMHO, it's best not to question such things too closely. A 1st-level character suffering 30 hit points of damage is going to be down and out, but for a 12th-level character, it's hardly a scratch.

If you really want fights to be deadly, I can recommend the ICE/Rolemaster/MERP/Arms Lore books from the early 80s. Pages & pages of super detailed (and super-debilitating) critical hit tables. Not as much fun as some might think.

 

[payn]

Payn, I'm assuming that you're refering to significant combat penalties inflicted on combattants once their hit points fall below a given threshold.

Dangerous stuff, that. Unless your plan is for the penalty not to apply to PCs. Because additional numerical handicaps to PCs because their hitpoints are low will lead to far more frequent deaths and TPK events. I can recall many fights where the entire party (except perhaps the wizard) down in single-digit hit points when they finally managed to eliminate their adversaries.

RPGs, regardless of the game system, have a high degree of abstraction concerning the accumulation of wounds leading to unconsciousness or death. IMHO, it's best not to question such things too closely. A 1st-level character suffering 30 hit points of damage is going to be down and out, but for a 12th-level character, it's hardly a scratch.

If you really want fights to be deadly, I can recommend the ICE/Rolemaster/MERP/Arms Lore books from the early 80s. Pages & pages of super detailed (and super-debilitating) critical hit tables. Not as much fun as some might think.

Not looking for fights to be more deadly, im looking for players' (particularly large parts of their skill and spell options) to be effective against tough enemies. Currently, most of them are a waste of time which is a huge bummer to me.

 

[Thomas Shey]

There's something to be said for a mechanic that allows badly injured opponents to be vulnerable to things they previously weren't; I've seen similar things in other games (13th Age comes to mind), and it has some virtues, since it allows certain operating procedures to be functional while still avoiding the old "spam takeout spells until it works" thing.

 

[Staffan]

For me debuffs seemed very weak, as in they rarely are successful (against anything but wimpy mooks of course). I wouldn't mind seeing a defense debuff at bloodied that might make spells more effective against severe/extreme enemies. I mean, bloodied was awesome and i'd like to see it make a return.

In my experience (as an 11th level primal sorcerer), debuffs are some of my main contributions – particularly to combats with stronger opponents. In many cases, they have an OK effect even if the opponent succeeds on their save.

 

[payn]

In my experience (as an 11th level primal sorcerer), debuffs are some of my main contributions – particularly to combats with stronger opponents. In many cases, they have an OK effect even if the opponent succeeds on their save.

Curious about that. In my game we got to level 5 and the wizard and druid were shut down to just a few spells that had annoying riders to slow the enemy down. Many spells simply did nothing at all. The math gave those spells about 10-20% chance. Also, Druid had intimidate which never worked for them so they gave up trying. Similar math. Just felt like spam cantrips and hope nobody gets crit down'd which was common since the enemy had very good chance of scoring crits on a regular basis.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Curious about that. In my game we got to level 5 and the wizard and druid were shut down to just a few spells that had annoying riders to slow the enemy down. Many spells simply did nothing at all. The math gave those spells about 10-20% chance. Also, Druid had intimidate which never worked for them so they gave up trying. Similar math. Just felt like spam cantrips and hope nobody gets crit down'd which was common since the enemy had very good chance of scoring crits on a regular basis.

Did you fight a lot of solo monsters?

 

[payn]

Did you fight a lot of solo monsters?

In AV solos came up often.

 

[kenada]

Sounds like another reason not to use level +3 or level +4 opponents very often. It’s a shame that’s so much a thing in APs. Hopefully future ones will be smarter about how encounters are designed.

 

[payn]

Sounds like another reason not to use level +3 or level +4 opponents very often. It’s a shame that’s so much a thing in APs. Hopefully future ones will be smarter about how encounters are designed.

My guess is that this was a side effect of mega dungeon play. Though maybe all APs are like that?

 

[kenada]

My guess is that this was a side effect of mega dungeon play. Though maybe all APs are like that?

Having not run any of the 2e APs, I’m just going by what people say about them. However, I wouldn’t expect a megadungeon to be full of level +3 and +4 creatures. That just strikes me as very tedious if the expectation is that you’re going to fight most of them. Even if you can find friends or allies, that still seems like a bit much to me. I think the approach discussed here of using more and lower level creatures would be more sensible for a megadungeon.

 

[Staffan]

Curious about that. In my game we got to level 5 and the wizard and druid were shut down to just a few spells that had annoying riders to slow the enemy down. Many spells simply did nothing at all. The math gave those spells about 10-20% chance. Also, Druid had intimidate which never worked for them so they gave up trying. Similar math. Just felt like spam cantrips and hope nobody gets crit down'd which was common since the enemy had very good chance of scoring crits on a regular basis.

At 5th, I think my main "spam" debuff was fear. I can't recall if I had gotten slow yet, but it's really good against individually powerful monsters. Giving up two of my actions for slow that will cost the enemy one of their actions is a good trade, considering I have about three allies who also get three actions each per round. Level 5-6 is also rough for casters, because you're really feeling your proficiency lagging (martials get weapon proficiency increase at 5th and casters get casting proficiency increase at level 7).

This is, however, one area where spontaneous casting is better than prepared casting. If the situation calls for it, I can cast slow round after round, but if I were a wizard I'd probably only prep one. And if we're fighting mooks, well, that's when the fireballs start flying (well, waterballs in my case. And now at higher levels, cones of cold.).

Another meta thing I've noticed is that when you're fighting "bosses", it's fairly common that they're fiends. Fiends often have magic resistance, giving them +2 or so to their already beefy saves, so even spells with decent effects on a successful save often fizzle. But do you know what's good against fiends and undead? Holy water. While holy water only deals 1d6 damage, it also triggers weaknesses against Good damage in fiends which can be substantial. And even a miss deals splash damage.

 

[Thomas Shey]

In my experience (as an 11th level primal sorcerer), debuffs are some of my main contributions – particularly to combats with stronger opponents. In many cases, they have an OK effect even if the opponent succeeds on their save.

The problem with debuffs in PF2e is that they're strong, but subtle; they tend to do some sliding around of numbers in areas where you only get to do a little bit, and where the critical/succeed/fail/fumble process is nontrivial (especially the first three), but because of how swingy a D20 is, it can not feel like there's much happening there.

 

[Thomas Shey]

And yeah, that can be pretty much a nonstarter if you're fighting all solos, especially uphill ones.