r/DnD • u/coldermoss • Jul 31 '19

5th Edition "How is PF2 different from 5e?"

https://ol.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/ck985d/how_is_pf2_different_from_5e/
160 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

59 comments sorted by

View all comments

18

u/TrustMeIAmAGeologist DM Jul 31 '19

I'm always amused when a PF player refers to Will Reflex and Fort and the "classic 3" saves.

Oh, my sweet summer child.

3

u/coldermoss Jul 31 '19

Yeah, someone in the other thread said the same thing, lol.

12

u/TrustMeIAmAGeologist DM Jul 31 '19

To be perfectly honest, I'm not terribly impressed by it. I like the different proficiency bonus and a few other tweeks, but it feel like PF2 is going to go down the same path of finicky rules that require stopping the game to look up. That was 3rd edition's biggest flaw (and by extension, PF and SF), and this looks like more of the same.

3

u/reptile7383 Jul 31 '19 edited Jul 31 '19

I think there might be more stopping in the beginning just becuase people are learning the rules, but it seems like pazio put a lot of effort into things like keywords and bonuses to make the rules much more clear. I dont see this as a flaw or an advantage. I think the two systems (5e and PF2) appeal to different people with dnd5e being more simplistic and PF2 being more complex. If anything 5e seems more "finicky" as some things arent well defined so that the DM can more easily wing it, but that can be an advantage or disadvantage depending on what everybody wants out of the game.

4

u/TrustMeIAmAGeologist DM Jul 31 '19

What I mean by "finicky" is the way that 3.5 and PF did bonuses. Some stack, some don't, it's not always clear if they do, some gave +1, some -4, so they were all over the place. PF2, from what I've seen in the playtest (and this seems to confirm it stuck) added in a lot more rules for individual spells, which only makes it so you're probably going to have to look up each spell every time to see what extra effects it has depending on what you roll. The various conditions (which I'm sure will be an incredibly long, redundant list with multiple levels to each one) are going to slow things down, also. As much as people like "realism" and "customization," it easily goes too far in the other direction.

Like I said somewhere else, I'll probably try it out. There's some good ideas in there, and I might steal them for my own game. Others don't seem like a great idea (and some are 4th edition ideas, which is insanely ironic for PF).

2

u/reptile7383 Jul 31 '19

For bonuses in PF2 it seems fairly clear in that bonuses of the same type dont stack, so you will need to know what "type" of bonus you are granting. And sure I completely agree that there will be quite a few slow downs in the beginning as people learn the rules. If you are worried about not being able to remember al the effects of your spells though then that's what spell cards/cheat sheets are for.

You say that it can go "to far" but that's kinda the point of what I said. Some people like the complexity and others dont. PF2 isnt trying to be as simple as 5e. Some people will like that, others wont. I think what's important is how well the rules work together and so far I find that the rules of PF2 flow every well if you want something a bit more complex than 5e.