Your Attention Level During Online Games?

[Retreater]

I'd gotten the impression they'd had good luck with Daggerheart, so I'm not sure why they're still fighting their way through PF2e, which they've consistently had a bad experience with.

I'm in two groups. One, in person, has enjoyed Daggerheart. The second group, online, is playing Pathfinder 2, which is a struggle for me. But I've tried to soldier on because I like the folks playing and don't want to crash their campaign if I leave.
But maybe it's time.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If this is happening and your group is less than like... 7 players... something is definitely wrong and you should talk to your DM. That's an incredible waste of time for everyone! My group only gets 2 hours a week at the moment and combat like that would straight up ruin everything for us.

I've seen combats that could run that way in some games; it was usually the combination of fairly detailed combat systems, and a lot of individual participants on both sides (usually superhero games). I know I keep saying this, but this just baffles me with PF2e (I mean, I can understand how it can happen but even with picky players I wouldn't expect it).

(Though that said, two hours just wouldn't cut it for me for playtime. I tend to find the four hours some people have not enough. I think with less than that I'd just find something else to do. But don't take this as my telling you what has to work for you).

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm in two groups. One, in person, has enjoyed Daggerheart. The second group, online, is playing Pathfinder 2, which is a struggle for me. But I've tried to soldier on because I like the folks playing and don't want to crash their campaign if I leave.
But maybe it's time.

TAke it from me, as someone who pulled the plug on playing with a group I'd literally known and played with for decades, if its making you that unhappy, it probably pays to go. You're unhappiness is probably not invisible to the others playing, even if they aren't saying anything.

 

[Whisper-Kitten]

I've seen combats that could run that way in some games; it was usually the combination of fairly detailed combat systems, and a lot of individual participants on both sides (usually superhero games). I know I keep saying this, but this just baffles me with PF2e (I mean, I can understand how it can happen but even with picky players I wouldn't expect it).

(Though that said, two hours just wouldn't cut it for me for playtime. I tend to find the four hours some people have not enough. I think with less than that I'd just find something else to do. But don't take this as my telling you what has to work for you).

Some players can be giant a-holes to play with. I played with a guy that had to argue every point, no matter how pointless it was to the current game. Like when he had to argue that ghosts could not be critted. Guess what we weren‘t fighting that session?

 

[Thervin]

I've had rounds take so long that I once briefly fell asleep in my chair before my turn came around. I stopped having this problem when I left d&d / pathfinder and adjacent systems and moved on to better games.

 

[Planescape]

I've had rounds take so long that I once briefly fell asleep in my chair before my turn came around. I stopped having this problem when I left d&d / pathfinder and adjacent systems and moved on to better games.

Nice first post!
But you forgot to tell us what the games you switched to are.

 

[Whisper-Kitten]

I've had rounds take so long that I once briefly fell asleep in my chair before my turn came around. I stopped having this problem when I left d&d / pathfinder and adjacent systems and moved on to better games.

Power gamers certainly inhabit those systems. Especially when you get into P1. I've had to limit the game to just the core rulebook because of some players that I have had. And by some I mean one.

 

[Lanefan]

I get that the modern design concept is to prevent PC death during combats, but the end result is combat has become a boring time sink.

This is the root of the problem, right here.

Make combat more likely to produce loss conditions (death, broken or destroyed possessions, long-term debilitating injury, etc.) unless the characters flee or bail out, and players will a) try harder to find other not-combat ways to solve problems and b) pay lots more attention during play if-when combat does occur.

And you then have to back it up by actually, in a harsh but fair manner, allowing those loss conditions to happen if-when warranted.

 

[Thervin]

Power gamers certainly inhabit those systems. Especially when you get into P1. I've had to limit the game to just the core rulebook because of some players that I have had. And by some I mean one.

I don't have any problem with power gamers, and I encourage my players to try to make good decisions instead of bad ones. These gameplay issues are entirely eliminated by using systems that drop the grid and have good, simple, elegant rules instead of trainwrecks that are amalgamations of random BS from the last 50 years that have never actually been playtested.

There were at least two feats in PF1 that didn't even do anything. That level of apathy in any product being sold for money is inexcusable.

 

[LordEntrails]

These gameplay issues are entirely eliminated by using systems that drop the grid and have good, simple, elegant rules instead of trainwrecks that are amalgamations of random BS from the last 50 years that have never actually been playtested.

I disagree with the grid comment. But do strongly agree with the comment about trainwreck rules.

I play with a group of technical players, and playing with a grid and maps is much easy and faster for us than TOTM. We run into all sorts of problems with miscommunication and other issues when not using grids. People are people, and we are all different and do better with different tools.