What gets me playing Draw Steel and not Pathfinder 2e?

[ffanxii4ever]

Indeed I would argue all classes are causal friendly in that they all have a reasonably effective fixed ability they could spam every round. One of the challenges with vancian spellcasters is that you can't just spam the same thing as you run out of them. 4ed had the same issue with regard to the "good stuff".

Yeah, most people playing RPGs have a frame of reference for having MP or some other resource to spend to use abilities. With that in mind, you can probably build a beginner/casual-friendly character in most classes (Fury or Elementalist is probably the easiest) and they focus on just using Signature Abilities and big, simple, effective Heroic Abilities.

Would they be as effective as a somebody who pays attention 100% of the time, uses smart positioning, watches for triggers, and tactically plans with everyone? No, but they could have a blast just charging in, swinging, and ripping through enemies left and right

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, most people playing RPGs have a frame of reference for having MP or some other resource to spend to use abilities. With that in mind, you can probably build a beginner/casual-friendly character in most classes (Fury or Elementalist is probably the easiest) and they focus on just using Signature Abilities and big, simple, effective Heroic Abilities.

Would they be as effective as a somebody who pays attention 100% of the time, uses smart positioning, watches for triggers, and tactically plans with everyone? No, but they could have a blast just charging in, swinging, and ripping through enemies left and right

The question always is, do they? That's always the issue with that sort of thing; in games where the game actually rewards tactical thinking, do the people who don't not care (in which case, as you say, it doesn't really matter as long as they're still getting things done) or do they notice the difference and kind of resent it (in which case there's a fundamental problem)? I've seen both occur.

 

[Zetesofos]

The question always is, do they? That's always the issue with that sort of thing; in games where the game actually rewards tactical thinking, do the people who don't not care (in which case, as you say, it doesn't really matter as long as they're still getting things done) or do they notice the difference and kind of resent it (in which case there's a fundamental problem)? I've seen both occur.

I suppose that's up to the person. A game system won't tell you someone's emotional disposition.

 

[cranberry]

Our group calls that module The Abomination Closets.

That's definitely an issue. I can't believe they stuffed a large monster in a 3x3 room on the second level (trying to avoid spoilers).

That really limits tactics.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I suppose that's up to the person. A game system won't tell you someone's emotional disposition.

No, but its not something you can ignore potentially being a thing. You won't even necessarily know in advance if you've mostly played games with limited tactical buy-in. Heck, they may not know if that's been what you've run in the past.

 

[Enrahim]

The question always is, do they? That's always the issue with that sort of thing; in games where the game actually rewards tactical thinking, do the people who don't not care (in which case, as you say, it doesn't really matter as long as they're still getting things done) or do they notice the difference and kind of resent it (in which case there's a fundamental problem)? I've seen both occur.

Well, I guess it is logically impossible to both have a game that rewards tactical play, and where the causal player is rewarded exactly as much as the tactical player. What is possible is to limit the reward gap so it is less noticeable for the player not caring so much, while still being noticeable for the one caring. This is a tricky balancing act, and I am not sure how well DS does it. But it seem to do it better than certain other games..