Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8393604" data-attributes="member: 70468">I ran a sandbox hexcrawl for about a year before (eventually) shifting-to/rebooting-in Worlds Without Number. I never thought there was anything about Pathfinder 2e that was particularly problematic. My burnout was due more to realizing I was just tired of certain features of “modern” D&amp;Ds and wanting to run something more OSR-adjacent than it was to any (mis)feature of PF2 (aside from being a “modern” D&amp;D, which is presumably non-negotiable).I ran PF1 APs for a long time. They are time-intensive to prep because they’re not designed to be used at the table by the GM. I also think they lean a little too heavily on curated encounters for my tastes, but it’s the prep burden that’s the real turn-off for me. I don’t have a problem with adventures that set themselves up as useful tools for the GM.I feel similarly about our transition to WWN. We liked the unchained action economy in PF1 (using Pathfinder Unchained), but the 3e-style action economy in WWN seems more our speed. It gets rid of bad ideas from 3e like the full attack action while adding some tactical actions. It just flows better for us (especially with side-based initiative allowing PCs to coordinate with each other). If the party needs to take down a heavily-armored foe, they can Make a Swarm Attack. If the party loses initiative, and they’re in danger of getting clobbered, they can Make a Snap Attack to attack out of turn and try to bring down the enemy before it can harm anyone. But they could also use Total Defense to try to make the attack miss and avoid shock damage. There’s a tactical element without needing to be really sophisticated about it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenada, post: 8393604, member: 70468"] I ran a sandbox hexcrawl for about a year before (eventually) shifting-to/rebooting-in Worlds Without Number. I never thought there was anything about Pathfinder 2e that was particularly problematic. My burnout was due more to realizing I was just tired of certain features of “modern” D&Ds and wanting to run something more OSR-adjacent than it was to any (mis)feature of PF2 (aside from being a “modern” D&D, which is presumably non-negotiable). I ran PF1 APs for a long time. They are time-intensive to prep because they’re not designed to be used at the table by the GM. I also think they lean a little too heavily on curated encounters for my tastes, but it’s the prep burden that’s the real turn-off for me. I don’t have a problem with adventures that set themselves up as useful tools for the GM. I feel similarly about our transition to WWN. We liked the unchained action economy in PF1 (using [I]Pathfinder Unchained[/I]), but the 3e-style action economy in WWN seems more our speed. It gets rid of bad ideas from 3e like the full attack action while adding some tactical actions. It just flows better for us (especially with side-based initiative allowing PCs to coordinate with each other). If the party needs to take down a heavily-armored foe, they can Make a Swarm Attack. If the party loses initiative, and they’re in danger of getting clobbered, they can Make a Snap Attack to attack out of turn and try to bring down the enemy before it can harm anyone. But they could also use Total Defense to try to make the attack miss and avoid shock damage. There’s a tactical element without needing to be really sophisticated about it. [/QUOTE]

Verification