Pathfinder 2E Regarding the complexity of Pathfinder 2

[Aldarc]

Well that seems a resounding no, so what system do people recommend that allows varied mechanical character builds, reasonable tactical combat and a nice choice of character options on level up, while still maintaining a semblance of balance?

Not interested in OSE stuff, tried em and we found stepping back too jarring, 13th age was ok but as I DM I hated the icon integration, and shadow of the demon lords setting wasn't our style. Am I heading back to the almost impossible task of 4e ( playing without an electronic character builder is so much fun)

Don't let some of these comments discourage you. I would also consider asking around about the system on Paizo's forums, if you have not done so already. This forum leans pretty heavily to the 5e side of things. That said, you have listed a number of the adjacent "d2010" games: e.g., 13th Age, SotDL, etc. So I would consider looking in a similar vein of d2010 games.

There is the Cypher System by Monte Cook Games. It's super easy to run as a GM. Tactical options are more limited from the player abilities than what you find in D&D. The greater tactical options come from the single-use Cyphers (e.g., scrolls, potions, talismans, etc.) that players may find in their journeys.

Rob Schwalb is working on Shadow of the Weird Wizard, which will be less of a love letter to Warhammer and more of a lover letter to Greyhawk. I would point you to some of the changes in a blog post, but according to playtesters in Discord, a number of those blog posts are obsolete in the latest versions. The setting for SotWW is less fiery explosive diarrhea and more Gygaxian gonzo.

You may also want to look into the AGE system. It's easy to run and play. It's a 3d6 game where 1 die is a different color than the other (i.e., the Stunt die). If the PC rolls doubles on any of the two dice, the player gets Stunt points equal to the value on the Stunt die. Stunt points can let the characters do different things: e.g., double-attack, armor penetration, bonus damage, etc. There are even Magic, Social, and Exploration Stunts. There are three classes in Fantasy AGE, and it's classless in Modern AGE.

 

[Nilbog]

Don't let some of these comments discourage you. I would also consider asking around about the system on Paizo's forums, if you have not done so already. This forum leans pretty heavily to the 5e side of things. That said, you have listed a number of the adjacent "d2010" games: e.g., 13th Age, SotDL, etc. So I would consider looking in a similar vein of d2010 games.

There is the Cypher System by Monte Cook Games. It's super easy to run as a GM. Tactical options are more limited from the player abilities than what you find in D&D. The greater tactical options come from the single-use Cyphers (e.g., scrolls, potions, talismans, etc.) that players may find in their journeys.

Rob Schwalb is working on Shadow of the Weird Wizard, which will be less of a love letter to Warhammer and more of a lover letter to Greyhawk. I would point you to some of the changes in a blog post, but according to playtesters in Discord, a number of those blog posts are obsolete in the latest versions. The setting for SotWW is less fiery explosive diarrhea and more Gygaxian gonzo.

You may also want to look into the AGE system. It's easy to run and play. It's a 3d6 game where 1 die is a different color than the other (i.e., the Stunt die). If the PC rolls doubles on any of the two dice, the player gets Stunt points equal to the value on the Stunt die. Stunt points can let the characters do different things: e.g., double-attack, armor penetration, bonus damage, etc. There are even Magic, Social, and Exploration Stunts. There are three classes in Fantasy AGE, and it's classless in Modern AGE.

Thank you, some interesting suggestions, shadow of the weird wizard sounds good, I hope it gets good vtt community support, I could see myself going for that.

I played dragon age and quite enjoyed that, so that's another potential, a bit of a pain teaching the group another new system but better than being stuck with such a flawed one I suppose.

 

[CapnZapp]

The 3 action economy is such a double-edged sword. On the one hand, there's clarity, otoh, I find it can really cramp a more improvisational game. It's the 4e problem, let me take the actions (or, in 4e's case, use the powers) that I have. One defaults to the buttons they have.

I would argue this is more a symptom of skill actions = trying to regulate every little thing you can do (and then requiring to to take feats to do it without ridiculously ungenerous limitations).

It isn't a function of "let's give characters three actions".

---

By the way, you're touching upon the most perplexing design decision of all - even more perplexing than that of having thousands of feats.

And that is, why on earth go for a design that players will compare to 4th edition?

For the life of me I cannot understand how anyone at Paizo thought it a good idea to not actively distance their game as far away from 4E as possible...

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, this thread does nothing if not show how different the perceptions and experiences of a game system are.

Hopefully it also gives you clear and objective understanding of why PF2 falls far short of Paizo's hopes and goals for the game.

That is, if your take away is "some like it, some don't, just like every other game, so PF2 is probably about equal to 5E in that regard" I consider that a colossal failure to communicate on my part.

 

[Nilbog]

Hopefully it also gives you clear and objective understanding of why PF2 falls far short of Paizo's hopes and goals for the game.

That is, if your take away is "some like it, some don't, just like every other game, so PF2 is probably about equal to 5E in that regard" I consider that a colossal failure to communicate on my part.

Well your posts have certainly convinced me to switch to another system, so I owe you for saving me wasted energy

 

[Retreater]

Well that seems a resounding no, so what system do people recommend that allows varied mechanical character builds, reasonable tactical combat and a nice choice of character options on level up, while still maintaining a semblance of balance?

Not interested in OSE stuff, tried em and we found stepping back too jarring, 13th age was ok but as I DM I hated the icon integration, and shadow of the demon lords setting wasn't our style. Am I heading back to the almost impossible task of 4e ( playing without an electronic character builder is so much fun)

When I ran 13th Age, I largely ignored the icons. Might be something to consider if you like the system overall.

I've also run 4e somewhat recently. If you are otherwise good with the system, maybe just stick with the Essentials material to simplify character creation?

It's still in development, but keep an eye out for Legendary Games' "Corefinder," which they describe as Pathfinder 1.5.

Also, how would you feel about adding a subsystem of character options to 5e to give it a little more tactical depth and mechanical variety? There are PDFs on DriveThruRPG that convert 4e powers to 5e (I'm posting a link to the martial powers, but there are other power sources as well.) Martial Exploits - Dungeon Masters Guild | DriveThruRPG.com

 

[Thomas Shey]

Hopefully it also gives you clear and objective understanding of why PF2 falls far short of Paizo's hopes and goals for the game.

That is, if your take away is "some like it, some don't, just like every other game, so PF2 is probably about equal to 5E in that regard" I consider that a colossal failure to communicate on my part.

Your failure, if there is one, is not in conveying that. Its in convincing me its true.

 

[Thomas Shey]

D

You may also want to look into the AGE system. It's easy to run and play. It's a 3d6 game where 1 die is a different color than the other (i.e., the Stunt die). If the PC rolls doubles on any of the two dice, the player gets Stunt points equal to the value on the Stunt die. Stunt points can let the characters do different things: e.g., double-attack, armor penetration, bonus damage, etc. There are even Magic, Social, and Exploration Stunts. There are three classes in Fantasy AGE, and it's classless in Modern AGE.

Though I will note that I didn't find AGE (at least DAGE and FAGE) held up well over time; some of the design decisions that worked okay at the first six levels started to show bad cracks around level eight.

 

[Aldarc]

Though I will note that I didn't find AGE (at least DAGE and FAGE) held up well over time; some of the design decisions that worked okay at the first six levels started to show bad cracks around level eight.

Agreed. I lay that on the fact that DAGE was designed piecemeal. It was initially released in a box set for levels 1-5. Then a supplement expanded it from 6-10. And then finally from 11-20. So I don't think that it ever really had a chance for proper playtesting for what became its final form. This is why I have said before that AGE could use a Second Edition ground-up revision that better accommodated the strengths/limitations of the AGE 3d6 engine.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Agreed. I lay that on the fact that DAGE was designed piecemeal. It was initially released in a box set for levels 1-5. Then a supplement expanded it from 6-10. And then finally from 11-20. So I don't think that it ever really had a chance for proper playtesting for what became its final form. This is why I have said before that AGE could use a Second Edition ground-up revision that better accommodated the strengths/limitations of the AGE 3d6 engine.

Yeah, that's been my assumption in the past too; the bottom levels got proper playtesting, the 6-10 levels got less, and the 11-20 levels got almost none.