Quote from: Rhedyn;1098060I'll take the bet against PF2e overtaking 5e in 2 years.

I'll go farther and bet that PF2e dies down after one year. Not quite to Starfinder levels but enough that "Uncategorized" and Call of Cthulhu soundly beat it on the Roll20 number of campaigns report for 2021.

5e is feeding people into other games based on all available data while still pulling in enough new people that it seems like people just play d&d.

At this point with PF 2E it maybe too little too late.

I concede it is too early to say yet 5E fixed many of the flaws of 5E while also realizing that one rpg will not please everyone and they would run the risk of losing some of the fanbase. Pf 2E too me tries to be everything for everyone and I['m not sure if that is the right way to publish an rpg as sometimes one can't please everyone. Then again I went from saying that PF 1E would die the first year and never play it. To it lasting longer than my predication and playing only that version of D&D.

I would also bet against it overtaking 5e. It is a good system for those who like relatively complex grid combat games but I think a simpler system has more mass appeal. I think if D&D did lose popularity the playerbase would fragment toward OSR and more narrative games as well as things like PF2.

Personally I liked the system and gave them a lot of detailed feedback on the problems I found while playtesting. Looking through the new books, they at least tried to address those issues and fix the most obviously broken things. They also tweaked things that didn't need to be tweaked, and added complexity to things that didn't really need it. If the overall goal was a system with 12 balanced classes, I think they failed. But I still think the system is very interesting.

I'll post a cheerleading-lite review on here soonish, that hopefully people will find to be helpful and objective.

Quote from: Conanist;1098097It is a good system for those who like relatively complex grid combat games but I think a simpler system has more mass appeal.

How tied is PF2 to the grid? Is it like 3.5e and PF 1 where many abilities depend on using the grid, or can it easily be played "theater of the mind" without losing anything like 5e?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1098105How tied is PF2 to the grid? Is it like 3.5e and PF 1 where many abilities depend on using the grid, or can it easily be played "theater of the mind" without losing anything like 5e?

You certainly could play it theater, but I think you would lose a lot. The Paladin can take a free attack against an enemy within reach who attacks one of their comrades within 15'. So in theater is that always available? Flanking provides a large buff (generally +2 to hit and +10% to crit)...which characters are flanking which enemies at which point in the round? The Monk has a deep pile of combat tricks via stances and different weapons that are really effective but might not seem that way in the theater style.

Quote from: Conanist;1098115You certainly could play it theater, but I think you would lose a lot. The Paladin can take a free attack against an enemy within reach who attacks one of their comrades within 15'. So in theater is that always available? Flanking provides a large buff (generally +2 to hit and +10% to crit)...which characters are flanking which enemies at which point in the round? The Monk has a deep pile of combat tricks via stances and different weapons that are really effective but might not seem that way in the theater style.

I've grown away from using tactical maps for positioning in my games, so this is a big strike against PF2 for me and I'm much more likely to stay with Shadow of the Demon Lord and D&D5e for my fantasy games.

Quote from: Conanist;1098115You certainly could play it theater, but I think you would lose a lot. The Paladin can take a free attack against an enemy within reach who attacks one of their comrades within 15'. So in theater is that always available? Flanking provides a large buff (generally +2 to hit and +10% to crit)...which characters are flanking which enemies at which point in the round? The Monk has a deep pile of combat tricks via stances and different weapons that are really effective but might not seem that way in the theater style.

How is 'take a free attack against an enemy within reach' not TotM?  If that is not TotM then how is anything TotM?

I took a quick look at the Monk stances and I could only see one which ignores 1 square of difficult terrain that might even need a tactical map.  Nothing else in the first ten levels of stances though.

Quote from: sureshot;1098086Very highly debatable. This is the same company who when told the flaws of their gun rules during playtest left them in when the final rules were released. The company instead of releasing an optional book on fixing the flaws of 3.5. instead sat on their collective asses and let their main competitor learn from their mistakes and take away their market share and fanbase. To the point that they needed to release a new edition. I concede a good rpg developer the smartest not by any stretch of the imagination. If he was the company would not be getting woke and possibly broke. I just ordered their new Sandpoint book and from what I see in the reviews on Amazon Sandpoint is now thee equivalent of an SJW. Diveristy and Inclusivity aside everyone seems to get along. Including the new Goblin population in town.

If Paizo does a good job of converting the Gunslinger would that convince you to give it a go?

Quote from: Shasarak;1098040I just made a character and I can assure you that it does not take 4 hours to make and your choices are more then a +2 to ride.

You can really tell who has not even bothered looking at Pathfinder 2.

I'll accept that Pathfinder 2 at the moment lacks the complexity of Pathfinder 1 for character options, but I don't think they've shown an ability to restrain themselves from publishing additional new sub-systems and multitudes of options.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does mean that you can spend a lot of time reviewing options and most of them don't REALLY matter.  

I just looked at backgrounds and it appears that there are 103 of them.  

Here's one:

QuoteCourier
Couriers are messengers, often selected for their quick feet. Couriers are found in castles and cities. A variant of the courier is the town crier, who travels from place to place to publicly deliver news.

Alignment: Any, usually lawful or good
Skills: Choose 2 of the following skills as class skills. If a skill you select is already a class skill, you receive a +1 competence bonus on checks using that skill.
Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Knowledge (geography), Knowledge (local), Knowledge (nature), Linguistics, Ride, Survival
Bonus Feat: Choose either Animal Affinity or Run

That's only one part of the character, and yes, I used hyperbole.  I might have gotten +1 to ride and +1 to another skill.    And a feat.

My experience with Alpha Playtest, Beta Playtest, and the game after it was released is that you can spend a lot of time reading through hundreds of options when you're only supposed to choose one.  I like options, but one of the major problems with 3.x is that a 'standard character' would get 7 feats over 20 levels (and most games ended by 10th level) so you had thousands of feats to consider, but only a few slots to use.  All of Pathfinder feels like that to me.  

Quote from: Shasarak;1098129How is 'take a free attack against an enemy within reach' not TotM?  If that is not TotM then how is anything TotM?

I took a quick look at the Monk stances and I could only see one which ignores 1 square of difficult terrain that might even need a tactical map.  Nothing else in the first ten levels of stances though.

Are you bullshitting us?  

How is it that you don't understand that the monk and the paladin could be standing next to each other and it won't be clear if the attacker is threatening both or not?  Clearly the attacker could choose to move to a position where he can't get attacked by both.  So even if you're not drawing it out, you're needing to specify things.  There are ways you can make abilities less dependent on specific positioning.  I doubt Pathfinder is interested in doing that.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098033I'd take that bet.  Pathfinder is more complex without that complexity paying off.  You spend 4 hours on character options to end up with a +2 to ride checks you don't care about.  I don't care for either system, but Pathfinder came out at the perfect time.  They had a lot of good will and some of that has eroded.  They have the same fans they had for Pathfinder, but not a lot to draw in new interest.  This is a cash infusion as they stumble on in a death spiral.  They can keep milking those superfans for a long time, but age and inevitable disagreements will take their toll.

Character effectiveness is everything. "How well do I do X?"

5e only marginally does this. Pathfinder ANSWERS this question, during chargen. All the colors you want to paint a character with an improved action economy that winks at Martials.

Yeah, Casters are better but, casters are better in any rpg. They save the party.

Shadowrun casters are primal. WoD casters are dominant. Choose a game and the casters are KING.

It's not a DnD thing - casters are great EVERYWHERE.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098141I'll accept that Pathfinder 2 at the moment lacks the complexity of Pathfinder 1 for character options, but I don't think they've shown an ability to restrain themselves from publishing additional new sub-systems and multitudes of options.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does mean that you can spend a lot of time reviewing options and most of them don't REALLY matter.  

I just looked at backgrounds and it appears that there are 103 of them.  

Here's one:

That's only one part of the character, and yes, I used hyperbole.  I might have gotten +1 to ride and +1 to another skill.    And a feat.

My experience with Alpha Playtest, Beta Playtest, and the game after it was released is that you can spend a lot of time reading through hundreds of options when you're only supposed to choose one.  I like options, but one of the major problems with 3.x is that a 'standard character' would get 7 feats over 20 levels (and most games ended by 10th level) so you had thousands of feats to consider, but only a few slots to use.  All of Pathfinder feels like that to me.  

To use your language: Are you bullshitting us?   3rd party rules for Pathfinder 1e, really?

Can you at least look at the Pathfinder 2e rules before you make comments about the Pathfinder 2e rules.

QuoteAre you bullshitting us?  

How is it that you don't understand that the monk and the paladin could be standing next to each other and it won't be clear if the attacker is threatening both or not?  Clearly the attacker could choose to move to a position where he can't get attacked by both.  So even if you're not drawing it out, you're needing to specify things.  There are ways you can make abilities less dependent on specific positioning.  I doubt Pathfinder is interested in doing that.

Do you even play TotM?  How is it not clear to you if the DM says that the monster is moving away from the Paladin to attack the Monk that it is no longer within Striking range of the Paladin?  Ok lets say it is not clear to you so you say "Hey DM, are they within 15 feet and am I in range of the monster to make a Strike?"

Gawd, do you need a tactical map to try and parse that?

Zero chance PF2 overtakes D&D 5E. Zero

But it doesn't have to overtake D&D to be a success. If even 20 per cent of 5E players buy the Pathfinder core books and a couple adventure paths, it will be a profitable game for Paizo and keep the lights on. Nothing is going to beat D&D in today's market. But being the #2 or #3 RPG isn't a failure in the booming tabletop scene.

I just stumbled across this 'early impressions' video of PF@, in case anyone here is interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhw_jqdqX_M

Quote from: Shasarak;1098136If Paizo does a good job of converting the Gunslinger would that convince you to give it a go?

I still plan to probably purchase PF 2E core af least. Thst being said  I have zero faith that  the Paizo devs will listen ttol feedback. They ignored the feedback on ther own initial playtest. Lied to their fans about actually listening to the feedback. While pulling a last minute bait and switch with the final gun rules.

I am watching with curiosity the debacle that is parrying provoking an AoO and the Iajitsu feat that lets you draw and attack as a single action also provoking an AoO.  It appears that they have added the [manipulate] tag in some ways that cause unplanned interactions.

Edit
Here's the Link

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098310I am watching with curiosity the debacle that is parrying provoking an AoO and the Iajitsu feat that lets you draw and attack as a single action also provoking an AoO.  It appears that they have added the [manipulate] tag in some ways that cause unplanned interactions.

Edit
Here's the Link

Only Fighters get those kind of Aoos right?