Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Similarities 4E PF2?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 7635304" data-attributes="member: 19857"><p>I'm not sure if this is the same thing that you're saying or not, but...</p><p></p><p>My thought is that any "similarities" between PF2 and 4e arise because the developers of both are in similar headspaces - i.e. "the 3.5 D&D engine has certain balance issues that everyone knows about and make it hard to develop for - how can we fix the engine to make it more balanced so that it's easier to extend?" If you start from that and have certain things that you want to keep in the system, then it's kind of inevitable that you're going to end up with some similarities - they are fixing the same problem in the same way. For example, level based attack progression - the solution used in 4e is a natural extension to how 3e handled it - just give everyone the same progression and let something other than attack progression differentiate fighters from wizards. 3e already had the structure there to do this - adding feats to the game for fighters meant that you could do this by figuring how how to use feats to do that - but it wasn't done back in 2000 because the idea that different classes need different attack progression is something that was baked into D&D from the earliest editions. So it's natural that the PF developers would pick that up as a solution - it's not only the one that both 4e and 5e have adopted, it's an extension of 3e that seems reasonable if you want to make things simpler.</p><p></p><p>I don't think you're going to see PF devs intentionally lift things from 4e - it wouldn't make sense. Their player base exists because of people who didn't want to change from 3e to 4e - turning around and giving them a new 4e would just be stupid, and Paizo isn't stupid. But I wouldn't be surprised to see design choices that are similar to 4e because they're trying to solve the same problems that the 4e devs were trying to solve and they're trying to keep the same kind of feel that the 4e folks were trying to keep when they were trying to fix 3e. Fortunately for them they have another decade of game design under their belts and have the benefit of seeing how 4e went. I'm curious to see where they ended up with their final product in a few weeks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jer, post: 7635304, member: 19857"] I'm not sure if this is the same thing that you're saying or not, but... My thought is that any "similarities" between PF2 and 4e arise because the developers of both are in similar headspaces - i.e. "the 3.5 D&D engine has certain balance issues that everyone knows about and make it hard to develop for - how can we fix the engine to make it more balanced so that it's easier to extend?" If you start from that and have certain things that you want to keep in the system, then it's kind of inevitable that you're going to end up with some similarities - they are fixing the same problem in the same way. For example, level based attack progression - the solution used in 4e is a natural extension to how 3e handled it - just give everyone the same progression and let something other than attack progression differentiate fighters from wizards. 3e already had the structure there to do this - adding feats to the game for fighters meant that you could do this by figuring how how to use feats to do that - but it wasn't done back in 2000 because the idea that different classes need different attack progression is something that was baked into D&D from the earliest editions. So it's natural that the PF developers would pick that up as a solution - it's not only the one that both 4e and 5e have adopted, it's an extension of 3e that seems reasonable if you want to make things simpler. I don't think you're going to see PF devs intentionally lift things from 4e - it wouldn't make sense. Their player base exists because of people who didn't want to change from 3e to 4e - turning around and giving them a new 4e would just be stupid, and Paizo isn't stupid. But I wouldn't be surprised to see design choices that are similar to 4e because they're trying to solve the same problems that the 4e devs were trying to solve and they're trying to keep the same kind of feel that the 4e folks were trying to keep when they were trying to fix 3e. Fortunately for them they have another decade of game design under their belts and have the benefit of seeing how 4e went. I'm curious to see where they ended up with their final product in a few weeks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Similarities 4E PF2?
Top