Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retreater" data-source="post: 8393724" data-attributes="member: 42040">Yeah, I think so. I would also be better about designing adventures than I would've been before running Age of Ashes and Abomination Vaults.Here are a couple things I learned, that aren't really taught by the CRB (esp. if you're accustomed to 3.x/PF/5e design).1) Severe encounters are really severe. Even with good play, you can lose a character. Deadly encounters are TPK territory, easily.2) Attrition encounters don't work, because mundane healing is so easy to come by and limitless (not true in any D&D adjacent game - even 4e). PF2 is better suited to a handful of big encounters a day - but even, then, see Point #1.Yeah, there are certainly bells and whistles I don't care about: animated battlemaps, spell effects, soundtracks, etc. I had a nightmare moment when there was a unique creature I failed to automate in my Abomination Vaults campaign. He had comparatively high level spells (some of which were unique to that encounter), ridiculously high DCs, fast healing, resistances, several methods of dealing stacking persistent damage and bestowing a variety of conditions on the party. This was one side encounter in a 4th level adventure - and it just so happened to be the encounter that solidified the group's abandonment of the campaign and system. This was a single creature that could do all THAT. He was easily as complex as a party member of the same level, probably moreso. Now imagine running 2-3 enemies like that, tracking HP, regeneration, spell slots, status effects, different initiative for each of them (because you have to do that, or you break the game, as I was told when I failed at running Age of Ashes). I reiterate: this is a low level fight - a novice encounter, designed for beginning players and new GMs. I guess I'm not smart enough to run PF2 without automation.</blockquote>

Verification