Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7886985" data-attributes="member: 12731">I'm comparing 5E and PF2 at launch. I'm not one of those guys that doesn't accept criticism against an edition because some later book did something (not mentioning version numbers since this isn't about that). The core launch books are critical to a game's reception and I can't find any successful example where a publisher managed to right a ship launched badly.So I do not exclude the Monster Manual when I talk about &quot;5E&quot;.I find that I have already found several PF2 monsters that have a) fun b) unexpected c) powerful abilities to a degree that far outshines my experience with 5E. And I'm still at level 8 monsters only! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I guess I would sum it up as &quot;include only stuff that matters&quot;. I like a monster who can do a small number of distinctive things well enough to matter in my game. (Everything is relative of course - PF2 is a complex game, and I would understand if the pf2 stat block still is too cluttery for some people)The PF2 Bestiary is still far from perfect. First and foremost, the lack of &quot;NPC monsters&quot; is catastrophic (that is, a couple dozen examples of &quot;bandit&quot; &quot;cultist&quot; &quot;guard&quot; &quot;acolyte&quot; or &quot;barbarian&quot;, say). Next, again we have an edition just dumping spell lists for caster creatures. Sigh. I really long for the time where stat blocks are complete with abbreviated spell effects. (Remember PF2 contains loads and LOADS of spells, and not a single one works exactly as you remember from d20 or 5E)The general level of competence is very refreshing and much appreciated, however. While the default rule (&quot;level to proficiency&quot;) absurdly quickly leaves low level staples like goblins in the dust, I expect not adding level to proficiency fairly painlessly make that particular issue go away.ZappPS. I guess I should mention the elephant in the room - not making monsters follow PC chargen rules. That is of course critical to making a game DM-able. The experience of spending an hour to craft a high-level spellcaster that died in the first combat round without taking a single action was the definitive reason why I dropped d20 and 3rd Edition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7886985, member: 12731"] I'm comparing 5E and PF2 at launch. I'm not one of those guys that doesn't accept criticism against an edition because some later book did something (not mentioning version numbers since this isn't about that). The core launch books are critical to a game's reception and I can't find any successful example where a publisher managed to right a ship launched badly. So I do not exclude the Monster Manual when I talk about "5E". I find that I have already found several PF2 monsters that have a) fun b) unexpected c) powerful abilities to a degree that far outshines my experience with 5E. And I'm still at level 8 monsters only! :) I guess I would sum it up as [B]"include only stuff that matters"[/B]. I like a monster who can do a small number of distinctive things well enough to matter in my game. (Everything is relative of course - PF2 is a complex game, and I would understand if the pf2 stat block still is too cluttery for some people) The PF2 Bestiary is still far from perfect. First and foremost, the lack of "NPC monsters" is catastrophic (that is, a couple dozen examples of "bandit" "cultist" "guard" "acolyte" or "barbarian", say). Next, again we have an edition just dumping spell lists for caster creatures. Sigh. I really long for the time where stat blocks are complete with abbreviated spell effects. (Remember PF2 contains loads and LOADS of spells, and not a single one works exactly as you remember from d20 or 5E) The general level of competence is very refreshing and much appreciated, however. While the default rule ("level to proficiency") absurdly quickly leaves low level staples like goblins in the dust, I expect [I]not[/I] adding level to proficiency fairly painlessly make that particular issue go away. Zapp PS. I guess I should mention the elephant in the room - not making monsters follow PC chargen rules. That is of course critical to making a game DM-able. The experience of spending an hour to craft a high-level spellcaster that died in the first combat round without taking a single action was the definitive reason why I dropped d20 and 3rd Edition. [/QUOTE]

Verification