Pathfinder 2E PF2E like D&D 4e?

[Celtavian]

What I liked about 4e:

• swarms, minion, standard, elite, & solo monsters: giving monsters depth of challenge at each level.
• monster roles
• easy to make killer encounters and not worry if the players could take it.
• powers in general (exploits, tricks, spells, prayer, etc.) and "basic" attacks (we are looking at adding them to our 5e game)
• AEDU structure and then the options to not use that structure too (Essentials line)
• spells by character level
• stances
• healing surges (which we expanded and called heroic surges - great concept, just need to be pushed further, we use these in our 5e game)
• skill challenges (I like the concept, but the explanation & execution needed work, we still use these)
• action economy (though I prefer some aspects of 5e & PF2e now)
• character paths (epic destinies, etc.)

What is AEDU? Don't even recall that. At the same time I don't need or like any kind prescribed structure. I did not like the Controller-Defender-Damage dealer structure at all.

Monsters weren't terrible, though eventually became weak as my players mastered the game.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

What is AEDU? Don't even recall that. At the same time I don't need or like any kind prescribed structure. I did not like the Controller-Defender-Damage dealer structure at all.

Monsters weren't terrible, though eventually became weak as my players mastered the game.

At-will, Encounter, Daily, Utility.

 

[Alzrius]

I don't know how much help it is determining its similarities to 4E, but Endzeitgeist's review of the Pathfinder 2E Core Rulebook is definitely worth reading.

 

[Celtavian]

At-will, Encounter, Daily, Utility.

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

 

[dave2008]

What is AEDU? Don't even recall that.

As @Eyes of Nine stated: At-will, Encounter, Daily, & Utility

At the same time I don't need or like any kind prescribed structure.

In general I don't either, that was on thing I like about the flexibility of the AEDU armature - it made it easy to do away with the rest of the structure. I mean, I prefer to not have classes all together.

I did not like the Controller-Defender-Damage dealer structure at all.

In general I agree, but you can see that philosophy throughout D&D and Pathfinder. One thing that was nice about 4e was most Archtypes had a variety of options on the roles they cold play. You could play a "defender" fighter or a "controller" fighter or a "striker" fighter.

Monsters weren't terrible, though eventually became weak as my players mastered the game.

The evolution of monster design as it the game progressed was interesting. By the time the MM3 came about they had definitely improved somethings. However, 4e monsters suffer from the same issue 5e monsters do, the don't do enough damage. Once you adjust for that, even high level solos can be quite entertaining.

 

[dave2008]

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

In generally I really enjoyed it; it really began to sing for us when we add heroic surges (aka healing surges). We allowed you to recharge an encounter power by spending a HS or a daily power by spending two. It tied you ability to do exploits into your endurance / exhaustion / healing mechanic. Made the most sense to me of any D&D mechanic ever really.

EDIT: content removed as it is not relevant in a PF2e thread

 

[vpuigdoller]

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

That was my favourite part about it. Lol. To me Pf2 feels very different than D&D4e but been honest I really like both.

 

[Teemu]

One major trait of 4e was that everyone got things in the same way at the same pace. You all got 4 powers at 1st level, a utility at 2nd, an encounter at 3rd, etc.

In 4e, everyone's AC, saves, and attack bonuses advanced at the same pace as you leveled. A low level goblin could never hit a high level PC, even if that PC was naked and blind, because the math scaled automatically. It's very similar in PF2. Because the GM never has a reason to let you face a 'normal' goblin at high level, you get this odd situation where anybody you DO face at that level is just as powerful as you, and you never get a chance to actually feel powerful. Your numbers are going up, but the narrative effect of those numbers is minimal.

Not all 4e classes get powers at the same levels. Classes like thief, slayer, knight, hunter, scout, and elementalist don't get daily powers. Some classes like bladesinger don't get additional encounter powers, or get power points to be used with at-will powers, like ardent and psion. Some classes get additional features at higher levels. Your class could grant you a feature power at level 1, so you might get more than 4 class powers at level 1, like divine classes and channel divinity, or warden or druid or wizard or scout, etc. So no, you don't get everything at the same pace in 4e.

A naked level 12 fighter in 4e, with 13 Dex (because of heavy armor), would have an AC of 17, but blinded you grant combat advantage, so the enemy has a +2 to attack rolls. A level 1 goblin sniper minion has a +8 attack bonus, which would be +10 with combat advantage, so the measly level 1 goblin minion is hitting the naked and blind level 12 fighter most of the time.

PF2 has the bigger differences between high and low level creatures, since it's got the +1 per level. 4e only has +1 every other level.

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

Do you play 5e? It has the same recharges: at-will, short rest (encounter), and long rest (daily).

 

[dave2008]

Not all 4e classes get powers at the same levels. Classes like thief, slayer, knight, hunter, scout, and elementalist don't get daily powers.

I don't remember all of those, but some of them are from 4.25e (aka Essentials). I lot of people forget or didn't know about those revisions and how they made the game more similar to older editions. It doesn't sound like @Celtavian is very familiar with 4e, let alone the Essential revisions.

Do you play 5e? It has the same recharges: at-will, short rest (encounter), and long rest (daily).

He/she did, but left it for PF2e (or earlier). All D&D games, including PF1 & 2 have at-will and long rest (daily) abilities.

 

[dave2008]

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

I get you, I had a similar reaction to 3e/PF1 and now I fear PF2. I am really trying to fight those first impressions though by immersing myself in these threads and seeing what people think of the game. Particularly those you play it. I hope to give a good try at some point.

As a player, I have a question for you (and @CapnZapp and @Campbell and anyone else who is playing PF2e): How do rogues/thiefs play in PF2e? That is the class I pick 90% of the time and I really haven't heard about anyone playing one in PF2e. Just curious. Thanks!