Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="zztong" data-source="post: 7828217" data-attributes="member: 6943414">PF2 is a decent and playable game. The compelling reasons that I see are:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">If you're into Golarion, you can continue to enjoy new Paizo APs without having to convert them.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The action economy is expressed a little clearer and has a couple more options that you might use.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">You get better balanced classes and more predictable mathematical ranges.</li>
</ul>After that, I think it becomes more a matter of taste and harder to get a consensus of opinions. You may find a slightly smaller skill list appealing, for instance, but not everyone does.Locally speaking...One of my groups stayed with PF1 didn't even consider PF2. That game has lots of continuity. Reading the playtest rules was enough to tell us we would have had a lot of material and characters to convert. We're content with PF1.My other group bailed on PF2 for 5e, and is still very much searching for an easier system for our newer less-mechanically oriented players. After about a 15-18 months of PF2 (including the playtest), folks weren't happy for reasons of taste and not because the system was unplayable.My suggestion is give PF2 a try with some free resources or a limited investment. Even if you choose to stick with PF1, I think you might still find a few mechanics that you liked and its possible that those mechanics appeared as options in PF1 so you can bring them back.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="zztong, post: 7828217, member: 6943414"] PF2 is a decent and playable game. The compelling reasons that I see are: [LIST] [*]If you're into Golarion, you can continue to enjoy new Paizo APs without having to convert them. [*]The action economy is expressed a little clearer and has a couple more options that you might use. [*]You get better balanced classes and more predictable mathematical ranges. [/LIST] After that, I think it becomes more a matter of taste and harder to get a consensus of opinions. You may find a slightly smaller skill list appealing, for instance, but not everyone does. Locally speaking... One of my groups stayed with PF1 didn't even consider PF2. That game has lots of continuity. Reading the playtest rules was enough to tell us we would have had a lot of material and characters to convert. We're content with PF1. My other group bailed on PF2 for 5e, and is still very much searching for an easier system for our newer less-mechanically oriented players. After about a 15-18 months of PF2 (including the playtest), folks weren't happy for reasons of taste and not because the system was unplayable. My suggestion is give PF2 a try with some free resources or a limited investment. Even if you choose to stick with PF1, I think you might still find a few mechanics that you liked and its possible that those mechanics appeared as options in PF1 so you can bring them back. [/QUOTE]

Verification