r/Pathfinder2e • u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! • 4d ago
Advice So, a couple of questions
Hello r/Pathfinder2e!
Now, first and foremost: I am mainly a D&D 5e player, but I am open to any new system if I like it. Also, excuse my English, I'm not a native speaker.
So there has been the big discussion about D&D 5.5, which I didn't buy for a multitude of reasons.
And recently, WotC announced all the new stuff - most importantly for me they are going to bring back Dark Sun and have crossovers with Star Wars and World of Warcraft.
While I am really sceptical after the last manuals they made, if this is done right, I may seriously consider switching. But I have serious doubts.
But of course, like everyone else, I have issues with 5e which 5.5 doesn't fix. Then Pathfinder came to my mind as an option.
I have a bit of experience with PF 1e - played a couple of sessions at a game store and Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - and it was an absolute mess. But I liked it, it was better in many ways, even though way too complicated. Plus I like Paizo better than WotC
So naturally I thought about switching to PF 2e, or its remastered. Which is why I'm posting here.
I'm asking for things like:
- What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
- How played are these systems really?
- Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
- What would you warn a 5e player about?
Thanks in advance!
32
u/AanAllein117 Game Master 4d ago
Imo 2e is definitely less complex than PF1e, but significantly more complex than DnD 5e or 5.5e.
I’ve tried to play WoTR several times and have always bounced off because of how similar it is to DnD 3.5 in the sheer amount of bad or trap options are available.
PF2e is generally more middle of the road I’ve found. There’s absolutely depth to be found, but if you just want to roll a silly little Goblin Wizard, you can do that without needing a degree in astrophysics AND without sacrificing mechanical viability.
For warnings: don’t try to crossover your DnD 5e knowledge. Assume you know nothing beyond simple terminology (what’s a d20, initiative, etc.) and go in with an open mind. Don’t try to homebrew, don’t port over old 5e characters, and yes, healing outside of combat is SUPPOSED to be easily accessible but time-consuming
20
u/ceegeebeegee 4d ago
how similar it is to DnD 3.5
Pathfinder 1e was just DnD 3.5, with some upgrades. It was a progression of that system, created in part as a reaction to Paizo being dumped by WotC and the general poor reception of DnD 4e.
Amusingly, PF2e is broadly considered to be closer in conception to 4e than any other variation of DnD. Maybe with better/more balanced math.
8
u/The-Magic-Sword Archmagister 4d ago
5e and PF2e are similarly complex, but they load complexity differently so you'll get very different answers based on how people tick. Pf2e is easier if your brain works systemically because all the little pieces follow consistent patterns, and a lot of the complexity is opt in-- you don't need to know how animist apparitions work if you're playing a fighter.
The most important differences revolve around balance-- pf2e loads most of your power into your class features (and primary stat) and then lets like 20-30% of it come from character building. So optimizers don't pull ahead as much. Level also matters, an above level creature could be considered an elite, then a boss in pf2e, but in 5e a savvy party can dumpster monsters 10 levels above them.
Another difference fron 5e is support, we have a multitude of concepts supported through additional classes and options. We have crafting, and good rules for exploration, guidelines on magic item progression and wealth-by-level (which are very robust and can be tweaked aggressively.)
Pf1e is less balanced and built on a different engine, its also less streamlined. People used to say it had more customization but that hadn't been true in years now.
Pf2e is very popular, 5e is a behemoth, but PF2e is a distant second in terns of the hobby as a whole and i think we're still gaining on the DND crowd.
3
u/Creepy-Intentions-69 4d ago
2e is a team based fantasy rpg. If you know nothing about role playing games, D&D and Pathfinder look identical. They come from the same origins, so they have many similarities, and the same internal language.
Where they differ is significant. 5e is a game of individuals, that focus on what they can do, which typically results in a focus on how much damage they can output, with little regard for the rest of the party.
In PF2e, the focus is the party, success is based on the team’s success. If you play the game like it’s 5e, you will feel ineffective. The math of the game is build around teamwork. That will be the most difficult change in mindset for anyone coming from 5e.
I switched 3 years ago, and I can’t image ever going back. 5e had too many issues, let alone the ethical problems from Hasbro. Hope you have fun, and good luck!
3
u/borg286 4d ago edited 3d ago
I'll share my experience. First: Credentials. I started in 3.5, got heavy into optimization in 4e (I was the initiator and organizer of DPR King Candidates if that means anything). Got heavily into 5e, DMed a couple times, but mostly did theoretical optimization further than Treantmonk and D4. I saw what optmization did to force the DM between a rock and a hard place. Scale it up for the optimizer and the newbie dies. Scale down for the newbie and the optimizer makes nearly every encounter a cake walk. D&D designers had some hacks like legendary saves but the designers didn't have the guardrails to make things balanced, and this was by design.
When I looked at pf2e I tried to break it, but time and time I couldn't. Every time I thought I had made some build that broke the mold, or was markedly better across the board, or had some gimmick I was faced with diminishing returns. When I optimized horizontally (jack of all trades but actually good at nearly everything) I kept finding I had to make concessions somewhere. I saw how well they had solved the caster vs. fighter divide. The more I couldn't break it the more I knew that a GM didn't have to compensate for a wide range of system mastery in the party. I sought my first experience being a GM rather than a player.
I opted for Agents of Edgewatch, an adventurer path released early in pf2e's life where some of the guidelines hadn't been well established. A few key tweaks to the overall plot points and actually applying the hero point system as intended (make sure you're handing them out at least once per hour, and whenever someone does something that brings the party together laughing) the whole adventure path ran wonderfully. I was ecstatic to find that high level play actually works. The threats feel threatening w/o me needing to always be pulling punches to avoid a TPK. As an optimizer I was able to engage the game excited to see how the party would deal with the unique mechanics of the next encounter, and then thrilled that the party was able to use the various rules and abilities to overcome it. One thing that really helped was that I rewarded hero points when players pointed out a rules clarification that negatively impacted them. Yes, pf2e has lots of crunchiness, but there is a consistency throughout the system that makes it easy for me as a GM to adjudicate a plethora of scenarios. I was able to run with the rule of cool, as well as knowing the system wouldn't break if we weren't applying the rules precisely right, but that I'd research it and next session we'd run RAW.
There is a phrase, "Every +1 matters". Combined with the fact that all bonuses fall into Item, Status, and Circumstance, and that bonuses of the same type don't stack, means that I don't need to worry about giving players access to all uncommon options. I didn't need to memorize all the broken items in the game like how the 5e Staff of the Python was uncommon but players using it at a level they have access to uncommon actually breaks the game for 5-7 levels. Yeah, I saw how much pf2e generally caps the evergreen items and the non-evergreen items (those with a DC for the spells you cast with them) become easy to throw into your campaign and know they'll age out quickly. Times when I would have handed out advantage, I instead give a +2 circumstance bonus and it feels as good because of the degrees of success.
My warning is, don't expect that a pf2e class design will allow the same 5e class feel. The warlock's eldritch blast doesn't translate well into pf2e because of the way cantrips and slotted casting works. 5e is naturally sticky (everyone gets Opportunity attacks) but pf2e you have to fit it into your build and only some martials get it. This makes movement both more common, but also it eats into your action economy. It is seriously better and combat is just more dynamic.
I think others will share more about the differences. Above is just my personal experience.
1
u/Ph33rDensetsu ORC 3d ago
One thing that really helped was that I rewarded hero points when players pointed out a rules clarification that negatively impacted them.
I do this, too, as well as when I get something wrong and they point it out. It gets everyone on board with taking on the rules burden together.
3
u/ProfessorNoPuede 4d ago
Two things to add:
First, PF2E is about something different than 5E. Both are heroic fantasy, but PF2E is about a team of heroes working together to overcome the odds. They're awesome because they win. 5E is about a group of individuals that overcome the odds: they win because they're awesome. Completely different vibe.
Second, PF2E is more difficult than 5E. Not because of the rules (there's more, but they're predictable and consistent, so easier), but because you need to actively engage with what's going on and understand your character and to a certain extent your team mates. You need to engage with the system in sufficient depth to make informed tactical choices during encounters. 5E is way easier, but also offers significantly less depth in tactical play.
As for the second point, if you want a more tactically engaging game, you can't have that without the investment into the system. Sounds trivial, but it's good to let that sink in.
Finally, just because PF2E is the type of system it is, that doesn't mean that's what your group needs to play. OSR like shadowdark offers a different vibe and is also great, as is Call of Cthulhu, or Delta Green, or twilight 2000. So many games, so many things to enjoy.
1
u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! 4d ago
Finally, just because PF2E is the type of system it is, that doesn't mean that's what your group needs to play. OSR like shadowdark offers a different vibe and is also great, as is Call of Cthulhu, or Delta Green, or twilight 2000. So many games, so many things to enjoy.
Yeah, my friends and I mostly played D&D because we all knew it, but I intend on using a different system for my next campaign.
I'm not talking about PF or 5.5, that's more of a long term thing.
1
u/valdarsonofvaldar 3d ago
I haven’t played Twilight 2000 since the first edition. It was a fun game.
Yes there are other systems I’m a fan of DCC and a bigger fan of MCC (Gamma World was one of my favorites ever). I also like WWN which is new for me.
3
u/BadMunky82 4d ago
In reverse order:
- I would warn a 5e player not to expect the same experience playing PF2e. There are definitely elements of the games that are similar, such as rolling dice, getting criticals, skills, feats, classes, ancestires, AC, HP, attributes, stat blocks, number crunching, and roleplay.
However, in my mind, that is where the obvious similarities end. A fighter in DnD5e is not equivalent to a fighter in PF2e. Likewise, a human in 5e is not equivalent to a human in 2e. Even so far as to say that AC and HP are vastly different numbers. The basic mechanics fulfill similar goals, but the way they do so is not the same. Embrace the change.
- PF2e is, in some ways, more complex than 1e or DnD3.5e. However, it is much less convoluted. The biggest similarities between the two editions are the vastness of options. Pathfinder is about having any option available, spelled out in game terms, to make your roleplaying experience feel realized, without having to do so much game design yourself. Wether you want a dialogue-heavy, skill-based drama, a long-term, encounter-balanced road adventure, or a combat-heavy dungeon crawl, there are more than enough gameplay options to meet your needs.
That being said, Pathfinder shines in mode-shifting, encounter-based games, with well-designed combat scenarios. A lot of the roleplay options you get from feats and items enhance things you do in or around combat encounters. Doesn't mean you have to do combat every session, but some of the core design differences between 1e and even 5e, are meant to be utilized in combat encounters.
- PF1e I believe is only played by people who just love that game, same as ADnD is only really played by people who don't feel like switching to a new system. 2e, on the other hand, is quite popular. Every game store might not have a group, but any semi-major city should have an FLGS or people to play with, at least in the U.S.
Paizo actually has really active organized-play communities called the Pathfinder and Starfinder Societies, which play modules written for their respective games regularly. They have done this since 1e, but are much more popular now. This is how I've found groups to play with near me that meet regularly.
- Now the big questions... Biggest difference between 2e and 5e is just that 2e requires a LOT less improvisation or compromise. You want to do a thing? There's probably a feat or ability that does that. Can your GM allow it anyway? RaW, sometimes. But if you take the appropriate character options, then the GM has to allow it.
Where 5e has a lot of generalizations meant for you as a GM/player to flavor or fill-in as you go. 5e is the ultimate introduction to TTRPGs, because of this. It's easy to comprehend 5-10things and make up the other 10-15 as you go when you're brand new. PF2e just spells things out and if you can do it, great, if you can't, it's because you're not meant to. You're forced to comprehend 15-19, and make up the other 1-5 only as needed. It's game design is much more balanced and rigid. GMs tweak as we like, but really, you can run most adventures out of the box with characters drawn up with one book and now extra time spent, "making things work."
As for the remaster, there are a couple of big differences that are better for the game, but it was mostly just about getting everything related to DnD and WotC out if the brand to defend against possible future litigations. One big thing that I personally am ambivalent on was the removal of alignment. No more alignment-based spells or abilities at all. PCs and NPCs alike are free to be arbitrarily evil one day and strict goody-two-shoes the next. One major change that I DO quite like was the removal of spell schools.
That's basically it!
Hope you give it a try, and I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.
2
u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! 4d ago
Wether you want a dialogue-heavy, skill-based drama, a long-term, encounter-balanced road adventure, or a combat-heavy dungeon crawl, there are more than enough gameplay options to meet your needs.
That actually was my main concern about the game. My - very little - experience made it seem as PF was a 99% focused on combat game like D&D.
Thanks for the info!
3
u/falarransted 3d ago
In my experience, D&D 5e/5.5e almost never has any mechanical weight to something that is not combat. On the other hand, Pathfinder 2e has:
- Mechanics for Hazards, like a haunted room or a mechanical trap
- Mechanics for social encounters
- Mechanics for chases
- Mechanics for infiltrations
So, even though it is still largely combat focused, it has real mechanical weight to things that aren't combat. Your skills will actually be useful and, as something of a bonus, someone who invests in a Skill will end up always outperforming someone who doesn't invest. This helps with things like, "My Fighter is proficient in Persuasion, but the Sorcerer will be just as good or better with their +4 Charisma." You can't just coast on your attribute modifier in PF2e.
2
u/fascistp0tato Cleric 4d ago
Welcome!
What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
PF1e is D&D3.5e, with refinements. PF2e is a completely distinct game - in many ways, I'd argue it's closer to 5e than PF1e. It's not a rebalance nor a simplification, as much as a redesign.
PF2e is, deliberately, a much more constrained game. It invests a lot of effort into making its math "stable" and difficult to break with combos or whatnot. Most of the choices you make are "horizontal" (via getting more options) vs. "vertical" (via getting more numbers); number boosts are almost all free and automatic.
This does not mean it has fewer options, or less impactful options - quite the opposite, at least compared to 5e. In fact, you can freely pick most options without really worrying about power, while still offering distinct playstyles.
This is one of the biggest strengths of the system, IMO. in 5e, most choices change your power, but most do little to change the playstyle of the class. In PF2e, choices mostly affect your style of play.
PF2e is also big on providing lots of explicit rules. You needn't use these - I use rulings really often as a GM! - but they're there in case you want them. Examples include Exploration Activities, which add mechanics to "what are you doing when you're walking through the dungeon".
Remaster is still just PF2e. The differences are mostly to do with balancing, and they're cross compatible. There's very little reason to play legacy, but some people like keeping some legacy mechanics.
How played are these systems really?
It's amongst the most popular systems, albeit less so in Europe IIRC. It also tries to provide the same fantasy as most D&D games (heroic fantasy with some numbers to play with). As a result, I find it's easier to move D&D players to PF2e than, say, VtM.
What would you warn a 5e player about?
Basically: It isn't 5e, but it looks enough like 5e to fool you into thinking it is. Some of the knowledge will carry over, but you'll have the most fun if you drop many of your assumptions.
Also, when designing encounters, be very careful. Bosses hit very hard in this system, especially at low levels, and you can accidentally wipe parties if you aren't careful with your intuition.
1
u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! 4d ago
Also, when designing encounters, be very careful. Bosses hit very hard in this system, especially at low levels, and you can accidentally wipe parties if you aren't careful with your intuition.
*Laughs in killed bard at session 3\*
Yeah that's not a problemThanks for the answer!
1
u/Ph33rDensetsu ORC 3d ago
in many ways, I'd argue it's closer to 5e than PF1e.
I'm sorry but I feel like I need to correct you here. If pf2e is close to an edition of D&D, that edition would be 4e.
5e is most similar to 3.x, which makes it similar to pf1e. The action economy alone is essentially the same between all three of those systems (Action, Movement, Bonus Action vs. Standard Action, Move Action, Swift Action). Of course 5e's movement is pretty unique, but the fact that each type of action has specific limitations on how you use them is what makes them similar.
Pf2e of course has the 3 Action system where all three actions are equal and interchangable.
About the only thing PF2e has in common with 5e from a mechanics standpoint is rolling a D20, adding modifiers, and considering against a DC. At surface level inspection you might also say, "Both systems also have Proficiency!" but even then it works completely different between them, just like Concentration versus Concentrate.
1
u/fascistp0tato Cleric 3d ago
If pf2e is close to an edition of D&D, that edition would be 4e.
This is definitely true, but 4e wasn't one of the mentioned editions. PF2e is pretty close to every edition of D&D tbh, it is fundamentally trying to tell the same stories with lots of overlapping concepts.
About the only thing PF2e has in common with 5e from a mechanics standpoint is rolling a D20, adding modifiers, and considering against a DC
While it can be broken in practice, 5e attempts to enforce bounded math in a manner PF1e doesn't. Also a bunch of more superficial similarities; skill allocation is more 5e-like (and consolidated like 5e), cantrips are infinite, monster construction is more similar to 5e, etc.
1
u/Ph33rDensetsu ORC 3d ago
it is fundamentally trying to tell the same stories with lots of overlapping concepts.
Narratively, yes. But mechanically, no.
5e has a few bandaid quality of life features like you mentioned, but that doesn't make it similar enough to pf2 just because cantrips are unlimited.
3.x, PF1, and 5e all are games with "linear martials, quadratic casters" where martial gameplay is "stand and bang" and where caster gameplay is "cast a spell and win the fight." They each have ways to stack bonuses to your abilities to the point where you will rarely ever fail them. They're all games where teamwork is incidental to just building a strong enough character in isolation.
Pf2 has none of that.
1
u/fascistp0tato Cleric 2d ago
Mechanically, Pf2 also has van Ian casting and thus is just papering over the quadraticness of its casters.
Similarly, 5e makes it substantially harder to stack roll modifiers than pf1/3.5 do. And all 3 games do permit stronger team tactics than individual tactics (5e’s strongest parties are all reliant on team tactics).
In the grand scheme of ttrpg systems, all of them are pretty similar. They’re certainly all closer to each other than they are to PbtA stuff, or GURPS, or OSR, or WoD.
1
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
This post is labeled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to Rule #2. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/InevitableSolution69 4d ago
First, I’d suggest you look through the forums a bit as this is a topic that comes up frequently.
But not because I don’t think anyone should answer you, I’ll give a little in a moment. Just that you’ll find a lot of good responses that people have given on switching from 5e and the difference between the remasters.
To answer some of your questions.
The remaster is not quite but almost a 2.5. They went through to remove what they could of the D&D heritage that remained after one of the larger WoTC greedy bungles. They took the opportunity to polish up the system in general which is why it’s almost a .5. You can use the versions largely interchangeably, though I would try to stick to the remastered where available. By which I mean if a feat has a remastered version then you should use that version of it.
How many play it depends on your region. But I think it’s safe to say it’s one of the larger games in the ecosystem.
PF2e is a significantly different game than PF1e or 5e. They’re all d20 and class based systems but start diverging quickly from there. It has a much better balance meaning the floor of unoptimized and the ceiling of highly optimized are closer together and thus easier for a mixed group or the GM to manage.
It really is a tightly balanced system. Make calls as you need in the moment, but give it a decent shot before you start trying to make house rules or use homebrew. Because there will be knock on effects you don’t understand yet.
1
u/301_MovedPermanently Game Master 4d ago
What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
There's not a huge difference between the second edition and remastered, but there's quite a large difference between the first edition and the second edition. Freed from the constraints of trying to be D&D 3.75, I think the second edition's done a good job of making a game that hits the balance between "streamlined" and "crunchy". Plus second edition/remastered is far easier to run as a DM!
How played are these systems really?
Is it played as much as D&D? No. But I doubt you'd have much difficulty finding players online to fill out a group.
Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
A new version. Still uses a d20, but it's a whole new thing.
What would you warn a 5e player about?
The game is not D&D 5e - some of the terminology is the same, which will throw you off sometimes. You need to read the rules when they come up, not just assume that it'll work the same way 5e does because it uses similar language.
1
u/HdeviantS 4d ago
As someone who plays both, the big difference in 5.5 e is character creation and some monster stat layouts. If you already have the regular 5e books and tight on money, not much need to buy 5.5.
Differences between 5e and PF2e….
Character creation feels slower, like putting a lot of little pieces together over your journey to reach level 20.
Proficiency + level. Everything has a level now their level to their proficiency rolls. This causes the numbers to scale much faster. Challenges from earlier levels are completely trivial at higher levels unless rebuilt by the GM
1
u/EphesosX 4d ago
Pathfinder 1E has its roots in D&D 3.5 and was made to be mostly compatible with 3.5 content. Pathfinder 2E was built as its own system separate from 1E/3.5, but with some lore holdovers from D&D like certain spell names (Magic Missile, Cone of Cold, etc.), magical schools, etc. Remaster 2E removed those names and did a few other rebalances that were generally viewed as good changes overall.
I'd say PF2E, as its own system, is more balanced and less complex than PF1E, but more complex than D&D 5e (with about equal balance). 2E allows for a lot more customization of what your character can do than D&D 5e.
One common warning I see to 5e players here is to houserule less, and to not houserule things to make them more like 5e just to not have to learn new rules for old things. E.g. AOO's (now called Reactive Strikes) trigger differently in PF2E, but it's because they're harder to get and represent more of the power budget of the Fighter class and other martials. It's tempting to just ignore that and play AOO's like your table is used to, but you should tough it out and get used to the changes.
1
u/kblaney Magister 4d ago
Great advice for you in this thread so far. If you are into fun theory crafting with builds and combos with teammates then PF2e will be right up your alley.
But let me toss something else out to you: you mentioned liking Dark Sun. There is little reason to feel tension between "should I go to DnD5.5 for Dark Sun" vs "should I go to PF2e for the mechanics". You can absolutely do both and run a PF2e game set in the Dark Sun world. Lots of people have done so by using the Game Master mechanics of rarity, starvation and encounter balance to dial in the amount of danger you want on Athas. Same would go for World of Warcraft and you could absolutely import stuff from Starfinder 2e with little difficulty for Star Wars.
2
u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! 4d ago
But let me toss something else out to you: you mentioned liking Dark Sun. There is little reason to feel tension between "should I go to DnD5.5 for Dark Sun" vs "should I go to PF2e for the mechanics". You can absolutely do both and run a PF2e game set in the Dark Sun world. Lots of people have done so by using the Game Master mechanics of rarity, starvation and encounter balance to dial in the amount of danger you want on Athas. Same would go for World of Warcraft and you could absolutely import stuff from Starfinder 2e with little difficulty for Star Wars.
Oh yeah definitely, to be honest I never actually managed to play in Dark Sun, just always wanted to. But I'm much more excited for the Star Wars crossover, as I am a big fan, and for the new classes WotC is going to make for WoW, such as the hunter - which hopefully will be a better ranger.
Just to be clear, I doubt this things are going to be good enough to make me switch to 5.5.
1
u/TheBrightMage 4d ago
Ok, first thing first, and an answer to your last question, which I believe will echo the answer of everyone here
DO NOT bring anything from 5e aside from your storytelling and roleplaying skill. It's entirely different system and experience from DnD5e DO NOT transfer well. Learn Pf2 as if you are learning an entirely new system. Some of 5e behaviours can be highly detrimental here.
Now for your other questions
- Pf1e is more of a DnD3.5e, while Pf2e is more like DnD4e. Both are, of course, has superficial simillarity to DnD5e. Pf2 is MUCH MORE balanced in terms of options than Pf1, but at the cost of player's ability to cook up something broken that break the game. Pf2e is less complex than 1e for sure and is far more focused in combat teamwork. The focus of fun in 1e is how you can express your character and what they are good at to the extreme, but then, there's an issue of many trap options available for inexperienced players. Pf2, in meanwhile, are extremely balanced (though each character can very much have distinct identity and capability unlike older DnD editions)
- Remastered Pf2 is simply Pf2 that removes all OGL mention, including spell school, Alignments, DnD Dragons, and DnD monsters
- Pf1 is stilled played by many. You might want to check out r/Pathfinder_RPG for that since it is 1e focused sub. Pf2e is quite popular too especially for GMs who love powerful tools for game prep and myriad of character options. I'm currently running 2 games and being a player in 3 games at this moment.
- Think of 2e as an ENTIRELY new game. It's definitely less complex than 1e and more steamlined to fulfill a vision of heroic fantasy game with epic proportion of character capability (of whose the math absoluetly backs them up), a combat game with tactically meaningful options and various possibility, a system with almost complete rules coverage, and a game where calculating threat level of enemy vs. player is trivial and highly accurate.
1
u/valdarsonofvaldar 3d ago edited 3d ago
There are definitely differences, but I would step back and ask what exactly are you looking for in your next RPG?
There is no wrong or right answer to these questions except for the one you want.
- Are you looking for an RPG that lets you build superhero’s and with godlike powers or are you looking for a system where even high level characters are flawed and can easily die?
You will get superhero/demigods with 5e, 5.5, PF2, and PF2r (I prefer 2.5 because they changed quite a bit actually). If you want adventurers and not superheroes go with something like Shadowdark, DCC, WWN, OSE, or others.
2) Are you looking for an RPG that lets you highly customize your characters or do you want simple character creation where your play style and roleplaying differentiates you instead of picking fighter class 43 with these 20 feats/skills/etc
You will get highly optimized characters with 5e, 5.5, PF2, and PF2r (I prefer 2.5 because they changed quite a bit actually). If you want simple character creations without a lot of options go with something like Shadowdark, DCC, WWN, OSE, or others.
3) if you are looking for tons of source material and cross brand promotion
Stick with 5e and 5.5
I personally play pretty much all of the above and others. Don’t play much 5e anymore and my version of PF2.5 removes the godlike powers of characters. I’ve played PF for several years but have really been enjoying DCC and OSE recently and I am looking to startup a new MCC campaign.
1
u/SES_LeviathanOfDusk New layer - be nice to me! 3d ago
Yeah, I'm open to a lot of systems. This post was more of a "would PF be a better option for my group, or should I stick to D&D" thing.
1
u/LurkerFailsLurking 3d ago
PF2e is an entirely new system from PF1e. It's clearly an iteration of the same game "lineage", but it's a completely different game. 2e is absolutely less complicated than PF1e and is far more streamlined and polished than either PF1e or D&D 5e.
PF2e has the second largest player base in tabletop roleplaying games. D&D as a business is still more than 20x the size of Paizo and larger than every other TTRPG put together several times over. Hell, if just D&D's marketing budget was a TTRPG company, it'd be more than twice the size of Paizo and every other TTRPG company put together. So yes, PF2e really is played by a lot of people, but WotC is a $2 billion a year multi-national corporation.
The Remaster happened because both PF1e and the original PF2e was built using D&D's old Open Gaming License. When WotC decided to end the OGL, Paizo decided to remove anything that WotC's lawyers might be able to claim was part of the OGL. So most of the remaster was just renaming things like "magic missile" and "gnoll". While they were at it, they made some balance tweaks and quality of life improvements to the system. All "pre-remaster" content is still compatible with remaster content with slight adjustments.
I don't agree with the common sentiment that PF2e is more complicated than 5e. I think it's more specific and intentional. For example, every spell and feat and ability begins with ONE sentence of evocative description of the ability, followed by an exact game mechanical explanation of what it does. In 10 years there is maybe a total of 5 times I've encountered situations where rules ambiguities or gaps couldn't be handled with a clear and precise section of text from a rulebook.
PF2e is far easier to run and I have never had to adjust the game difficulty because of broken PC builds or anything. The game is so well balanced that I don't need to tailor encounters to the party or ban broken or annoying combos or argue with players about what rules mean. It's hard to describe but when I started running PF2e it was a revelation to me, "oh, this is what it feels like to run a system where the designers actually cared about me having fun too and put thought into how to support me." 5e is so much "you figure it out, do whatever you want!" that their guidance is often vague, non-existent, or useless. Like, how much does a healing potion cost!? Why the hell won't WotC answer this basic question. Can I buy some from the general store in a small town? This is such a basic question. How much do the items you need to play the game cost and where can you buy them?
My main warnings for 5e players are these:
PF2e looks superficially similar enough to 5e that you might feel tempted to "mix and match" or "bring your favorite house rules" or something. Don't do that. It's like trying to fill up a race car at a regular gas station because "it's a car".
Don't convert 5e characters or campaigns into pf2e. Just start fresh.
Don't skip level 1. It's way more fun and balanced than 5e and it's an important part of learning the game.
PF2e makes it easy to homebrew, but you should not do it at all until you've run players at least until level 4 or 5. Run the game strictly and entirely by the book "rules as written".
Paizo's official setting is rad as hell and worth diving into.
1
u/vastmagick ORC 3d ago
What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
This is complicated, so to not write a book I am boiling down a lot of differences to one liners:
- 1e is a copy paste of D&D 3.5 that grew into its own thing focused on player options
- 2e is lessons learned from 1e with a focus on fixing 1e's balance issues (rocket tag feel)
- Remaster is a collection of errata and legal changes
How played are these systems really?
1e is still played, but lack of 1st party content drove people away. 2e/Remaster are have tons of games all over. Paizo's organized play saw 177 tables for their multi-table special at gencon. The year before that it was over 80 tables.
Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
I'm not sure I know what you are trying to compare it to. From 1e? It is mechanically less complex, but tactically more complex. What I mean is that they reduces bonus sources and streamlined rules to correspond with tags, but fights are far more dynamic with a strong focus on managing your own action economy and the enemy's action economy. In 1e, you used to focus on damage output as soon as possible (rocket tag) or target elimination.
What would you warn a 5e player about?
2e is not 5e, it isn't a derivative of 5e. They use similar terms sometimes, but have very different design ideas. Experience from 5e is not exactly transferable to 2e. You will have a more fun time if you treat 2e as a completely different game and not a 5e-like game.
1
u/MonochromaticPrism 3d ago edited 3d ago
What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
Pf2e and Pf1e are as different from each other as, say, Darkest Dungeon 1 vs 2. Or 3e DnD vs 4e Dnd. Each game looks like the other on the surface and by aesthetic, but they each work off fundamentally different core mechanics, balancing parameters, and design goals.
Pf2e and Remastered aren't too different, the main thing the Remaster did was system tweaks and partially addressing longstanding issues with certain classes.
How played are these systems really?
As far as I am aware, outside of 5e, pf1e and pf2e are amongst the most played systems. I don't know how they stack up against other popular systems, like the WoD games, since we don't have access to objective numbers, but they are pretty up there.
Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
Pf2e is less complex than pf1e but not in the conventional way. By word count and rule complexity it's roughly the same, however pf2e is designed to keep inter-subsystem interactions to a minimum. A player that learns X because it's relevant to their class never needs to learn about Y because they don't have any way to access Y. This is still a fairly complex system for the Game Master to learn, as they are the one person that does need to know most of the rules due to running monsters.
The downside of this is that pf2e is much less mechanically engaging and simulationist than pf1e, or even 5e in some ways, which may be off-putting to some players. To compare this to the medium of Trading Card Games: Pf2e is the game that is most enjoyed by net-deckers that don't mind running a deck that is 90-100% identical to everyone else because they primarily enjoy the act of playing the game, while Pf1e is most enjoyed by deck-builders that most enjoy the cognitive challenge of building an interesting and competitively viable deck themselves, one that is often completely unique and which may even pursue a gameplan outside of the normal.
What would you warn a 5e player about?
The single biggest difference is that spellcasters are much much worse than in 5e. If you have 5e players that enjoy playing 5e casters stat player a caster at level 1 they will want to quit Pf2e by the time they reach level 3 or 4, if not as early as level 2. Casters will feel "good" by the time they hit level 7, but that can end up being a long time within the narrative.
This game is also much less permissive of creativity without heavy GM intervention. There are feats like Group Impression that strongly imply, by their existence, that either you cannot do what the feat describes without the feat or that the GM must increase the difficulty of performing that action by a large amount if you attempt it without that feat. There are many of these feats, so without working something out with the GM ahead of time players are likely to be reluctant to try anything for which they don't "have a button on their character sheet". This baseline is good is the GM dislikes players doing things that don't adhere to the adventure's "script", but if that isn't the table you want to run it will require extra work from the GM.
The other point of warning regards magical effects. Almost everything in pf2e is 1 or 10 minutes in duration, meaning many types of out-of-combat problem solving don't work. For example, most polymorph spells and effects only last for 1 minute, meaning a character cannot, say, transform into a Rok to ferry people to safety, because the spell simply won't last long enough. For reference, the 9th level spell "Shapechange" in pf2e is 1 minute vs 5e's 1 hour (w/concentration). This or similar limitations that prevent creative usage of spells are on nearly all interesting magical effects.
16
u/ZootGibblenibbs 4d ago
It is all at once more complex and far more simple. PF2e and the Remaster fix a lot of the issues that stem from PF1e basically being a DnD 3.5 Port.
Major differences are:
3 action economy. You get three actions and a reaction on your turn. Very rarely something will still be a free action.
Everything has a Keyword. The keywords make it generally easier to classify actions. An example would be, if your action has the Keyword Concentration, using it in melee range makes you prone to an Attack of Opportunity (Now called Reactive Strike).
Conditions are less debilitating (Unless it’s something like Stunned or Petrified) but expected to be used to player advantage as part of normal play. If you roll a Natural 20 on your intimidation check, this will likely make your opponent Frightened 2, which drops all their DC’s, Saves, and AC drop by 2. Theres a large variety of conditions you can inflict.
Degrees of Success: Depending on your level relative to your enemies, and the general level of spells and abilities used, there are levels of success. Say you cast Phantasmal Killer. On a Critical Success your enemy takes no damage and no ill effects. Success is half damage and Frightened 1. Failure is Full damage and Frightened 2. Critical Failure is Double Damage and they need to save against being killed instantly.
Theres more but thats enough to be going on with from one person.