Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9745335" data-attributes="member: 7026617">And you'll note that's a situation that's, shall we say, a little abnormal, right?  Having only one character who could hold a line at all is probably a pretty abnormal outlier, and oddly enough, nothing produces degenerate play (in the sense of doing things not typical for a game) like outliers.  I'm assuming the others were all spellcasters and ranged specialists (though even a lot, though not all (I know about that, having played a Gunslinger in the third campaign) should be able to engage if they have to)?  How large is the group?  (If its less than four characters its probably impossible not to get odd results; I'm not sure groups that small produce anything but odd results in any D&Doid I've ever seen).Entirely possible.  It might depend on how the opponents were converted, too.  If they tried to use them straight rather than using their 2e equivalent, I could see that creating some problems.I've got to say though, as I played a sword-and-board Fighter up to 6th level, and while the strike-strike-raise shield was my bread and butter, there were any number of times other things were better to do.  In particular as I referenced in another post, tripping was useful on several occasions, as were various other action-denial things (and as I think you reference, repositioning to provide flanks).  And that's considering that a sword-and-board Fighter has less tools to work with than a lot of characters.  And that's not counting things like fling javelin-advance-raise shield and the like.Two of the three campaigns were 1-20 level games, where we were playing approximately 8 hours every two weeks (one was a Champion/Bard hybrid (because we had a small group and that was Age of Ashes which was overtuned in spots so the GM thought we could use a leg up), the other Gunslinger (the most disappointing of the three characters because of the combination of guns being intrinsically swingy and with a two guns user, you spend waaay too much time reloading).  The third, earliest was 1-6, with the same kind of time frames (we started playing during COVID and continued with PF2e until after the third campaign when I took over with my current 13th Age game).This is why I really have trouble taking it seriously when people talk about, essentially, playing PF2e on autopilot being the natural way to play; its not only not intrinsically attractive (most classes have too many situational toys to play with), it quite clearly would have been, well, kind of dumb play in too many situations I was in over the last few years.  And that was just with the Fighter, let alone the Champion/Bard or the Gunslinger.</blockquote>

Verification