Pathfinder 2E Regarding the complexity of Pathfinder 2

[!DWolf]

What I was hoping someone would share is a link to a breakdown of encounters by difficulty. Book 1 has X severe, Y moderate, etc. I don’t have the books, and I’m not going to buy them just to look at what the spread of threats are in their encounters.

I don’t have a link. I do have Age of Ash’s first book. For level 1:

Spoiler

There are 13 encounters:
7 of them are low,
4 moderate, and
2 severe.
Both of the severe encounters and one of the moderate encounters (and the only encounter to have a level 3 creature) have text specifically indicating that they can be resolved socially (and some of the creatures in those encounters may join the pcs to help them).

I can also do the same for the level 2 and 3 encounters if anyone finds it useful.

 

[kenada]

I don’t have a link. I do have Age of Ash’s first book. For level 1:

Spoiler

There are 13 encounters:
7 of them are low,
4 moderate, and
2 severe.
Both of the severe encounters and one of the moderate encounters (and the only encounter to have a level 3 creature) have text specifically indicating that they can be resolved socially (and some of the creatures in those encounters may join the pcs to help them).

I can also do the same for the level 2 and 3 encounters if anyone finds it useful.

Thanks, it’s really helpful to see what the actual distribution is. I’m curious what the other encounters are like, but not if it’s a hassle to compile the information.

My gut tells me players are perceiving moderate-threat encounters as more dangerous than they really are. In particular, I feel like moderate is the lowest level of threat where someone is likely to drop during the fight (though actually dying is unlikely). Consequently, when someone goes down to a big hit, that gets perceived as difficulty. At least, that’s been the case at my table. A few sessions ago, the ranger was down some hit points then took a hit for 40+ and dropped, and everyone was like (even though the party wasn’t really in danger unless they did something stupid). I’m curious what other people’s experiences are like.

 

[Campbell]

So in my experience players who are not accustomed to PF2 often freak out when they get dropped when dropping the first time in a fight is fairly normal and not all that dangerous. It can be a fairly normal part of play. It is not unusual to see a PC get knocked unconscious in a moderate fight even if there is not a significant chance of losing the encounter. That's just part of playing a game where damage going out relative to the amount of hit points is high for both monsters and PCs.

 

[!DWolf]

Thanks, it’s really helpful to see what the actual distribution is. I’m curious what the other encounters are like, but not if it’s a hassle to compile the information.

It’s not a hassle.

Level 2:

Spoiler

This level has 9 encounters:
4 low encounters
5 moderate encounters
One of the low encounters (a level 3 creature) is not meant to be fought - instead it is used to attack other creatures on the level. One of the moderate encounter explicitly lists surrender conditions. And one moderate encounter can be resolved socially (and is adorable)

Level 3:

Spoiler

There are 10 encounters total, but the first three are in the dungeon and then there is an exploration/rp section with one encounter and then a mercenary camp. Total there are:
2 trivial
4 low
3 moderate
1 severe
The three moderate encounters have multiple ways to bypass them listed. Two low and two trivial encounters are mercenaries that might call reinforcements and become a higher threat encounter. They can be dealt with socially somewhat. The severe encounter is the end of the level boss fight. One of the low encounters is just a trap.

Level 4:

Spoiler

This level only has 5 encounters:
1 trivial
1 low
1 moderate
2 severe

The trivial and low encounters can be befriended. One sever encounter is the end of the module boss fight. The other is a level 7 creature that can TPK the party. It can be dealt with socially (appeasement) but most players won’t do it - especially since it doesn’t seem as dangerous as it is. This seems the only “overturned” encounter though.

 

[Celtavian]

PF2 isn't difficult. But it does have a lot of little rules to remember. You don't really need to run them all like some codified law to make the game work. I generally handwave medicine checks when time is not limited.

As far as combat, it runs quickly and easily.

I think PF2 is mostly a happy medium between PF2 and PF1 and 5E. 5E was too simplified for my tastes. PF1 reached a point of excessive power and complexity making it incredibly difficult to run. Whereas PF2 is very easy to run across lvl 1 to 20.

Subsystems like crafting are optional and easily overlooked by doing the Earn Income activity if you choose.

Medicine is an expenditure of 3 or 4 feats to make out of combat healing absent magic or magic items simple, believable, and fluid.

PF2 isn't going to appeal to those looking for a 5E type of simplicity. I don't think is designed to appeal to that audience. PF2 was designed for those players looking for a more robust, customizable, and complex experience. PF2 players don't desire 5E simplicity and if PF2 ever became that simplified and lacking in customization would quit the game and find something new.

I played the red D&D box years ago. That simple, early game was great for the 8 year old kid playing D&D. But for the older man looking for a game that allows a lot of customization, it's good to have a game that offers more.

 

[CapnZapp]

While others, such as my group, play more “old school” - heavily focused on resolving encounters using non-combat or clever means, retreating if necessary and the like. And I can totally see why you get annoyed with the healing system (if you are indeed playing as previously described) it is an interruption to the game flow. To me on the other hand, it is what enables the game flow - healing is slow or uses resources, so lets do everything we can to bypass/negate encounters, or at least stack the odds in our favor, so that we can avoid wasting time or resources healing (which is why time pressure is good for me because it leans into that and it removes certain options that the players would otherwise take that could negate most of the challenges of the dungeon).

If I felt that official APs in any way were written with that play style in mind, I would be more forgiving of the system.

As it is, my view is that you're playing the game one way. A perfectly good way, mind you.
Just like I've said earlier, there is nothing inherent in the rules that's necessarily bad. Remember, I've GMd a sandbox of my own creation. For my own encounters, I wasn't even close to the relentless difficulty level of official adventures. And there Treat Wounds weren't such a big issue. With far fewer very hard encounters, the healing rate was much closer to the group's needs. (The Medicine rules were still far too cluttery for my taste, but that's a separate issue).

But the complaint remains. Treat Wounds is poorly calibrated towards the play style I believe Adventure Paths are geared towards. (Remember, these adventures stick closely to the encounter building guidelines of the CRB, so it's not that it's simply a case of an adventure writer going off script. Also, these adventures are official product from the manufacturer itself, not some obscure third party product. They are clearly meant to showcase the system!)

I consider it a real and profound problem if you like to keep things RAW, and are hesitant to explore house rules and variant rules.

Why couldn't the team writing encounter guidelines and the team writing Treat Wounds talk and play well together?

 

[CapnZapp]

The app, the websites, the headers for the feats - it's not like it's hidden information.

I have never suggested there was. My thesis is that a game where you want or need to use computerized assistence is complex.

The question is: did the game really have to be this complex?

Many gamers do not wish to bring phones or laptops to their tabletop roleplaying experience.

 

[CapnZapp]

Ah... I misread what you said. I thought you meant "all new players will read all the feats" which would be a barrier to entry if true.

It seems whet you really meant is "more than zero new players will feel the need to read all the feats" - which is of course true, although I'm not sure counts as a barrier to entry. After all, players self-imposing things that make the game more difficult isn't really a critique of the game.

I hope you really aren't contesting a claim such as "opening the rulebook to see pages and pages of catalog listing of feats is a barrier to entry".

Cheers

 

[Celtavian]

If I felt that official APs in any way were written with that play style in mind, I would be more forgiving of the system.

As it is, my view is that you're playing the game one way. A perfectly good way, mind you.
Just like I've said earlier, there is nothing inherent in the rules that's necessarily bad. Remember, I've GMd a sandbox of my own creation. For my own encounters, I wasn't even close to the relentless difficulty level of official adventures. And there Treat Wounds weren't such a big issue. With far fewer very hard encounters, the healing rate was much closer to the group's needs. (The Medicine rules were still far too cluttery for my taste, but that's a separate issue).

But the complaint remains. Treat Wounds is poorly calibrated towards the play style I believe Adventure Paths are geared towards. (Remember, these adventures stick closely to the encounter building guidelines of the CRB, so it's not that it's simply a case of an adventure writer going off script. Also, these adventures are official product from the manufacturer itself, not some obscure third party product. They are clearly meant to showcase the system!)

I consider it a real and profound problem if you like to keep things RAW, and are hesitant to explore house rules and variant rules.

Why couldn't the team writing encounter guidelines and the team writing Treat Wounds talk and play well together?

Aren't you playing Extinction Curse? I'm surprised your players haven't found a lot of AoE opportunities in that AP. I'm playing the same one and they have way more AoE opportunities than Age of Ashes. Extinction Curse is a more cohesive series of modules with a good mix of hard and average encounters that allow martials and casters to shine. The first module was a little rough, but 2 and 3 are well set up for AoE and caster shining. From what you have said you seem to be a martial heavy party that gave up on casters a while back. My druid has been obliterating module 2 and 3, while being the main healer and medic.

 

[Celtavian]

I have never suggested there was. My thesis is that a game where you want or need to use computerized assistence is complex.

The question is: did the game really have to be this complex?

Many gamers do not wish to bring phones or laptops to their tabletop roleplaying experience.

Why would you need computerized help? I wonder what you're table looks like. I run things very quickly. I use a pencil to quickly keep track of conditions and modifiers. It takes some memorization, but PF2 is more of a priority list than a need a computer to track everything.

The way you describe the game is so foreign to my actual play experience. Any player coming from PF1 would be so used to tracking an enormous number of rules and proficiencies that PF2 would seem like a walk in the park for tracking. I can see a player coming from 5E having trouble tracking everything, but PF1 players are probably having a very easy time tracking this small number of modifiers. You used to have track probably 10 or more different types of modifiers. It was nutty.