Love how prominent character level is in the entire system; proficiencies, encounter building, etc... It's why everything is so balanced and why munkining isn't so easy.
Having level tied into all the important stats and rolls really helps balance and makes progression feel nice! You're always getting a little better at all the things you're good at.
In regards to the prepared casters being more restrictive, I would also point out that you're meant to supplement your spells slots with a lot more consumable or once-a-day items than you might be used to. Wizards should have wands, scrolls, and a magic staff or two; either their consumables are used for the spells they know they'll want so that they can use their spell slots for more situational options, or the consumables are the situational one-offs so that they can have their standard daily setup in their own spell slots. Casters don't need as many expensive armour and weapon runes as martials do, so the treasure that a martial would be investing into upgrading their gear, a caster should invest into gear that expands the number and types of spells they can cast per day.
Exactly. This is a big part of why so many items can be Invested (whereas in 5e you can have only 3!) - in PF2e iirc it is 7! You are MEANT TO have a bunch of staves, wands, scrolls, necklaces and rings and etc. These can be used to give yourself more flexibility. And you can craft your own items too! So if a wizard wants to make sure they have access to some infrequently used utility spells they could make wands of it, or even put a big list of them into a staff, freeing up their prepared spells :)
Excellent point. PF2 is built with the assumption of a lot of magic items, and if you're not playing to that, you really should be using the Automatic Bonus Progression rules to account for the power difference.
I am not sure you make it any better telling the only classes (spellcasters) that already are the only classes to depend on a true daily resource in the game, that they must also rely upon consumable resources to make it through the day, is any improvement. None of the martials have to stop to rest until exhaustion/starvation would be an issue.
I can attest that high level play just works well in PF2e. Have run games up to 17th level and the biggest issue is the difficulty of choosing what your characters want to do. Plus the high level creatures are really fun to run.
Dual-classing, not just picking feats from different paths, is noted on pp192-193 of the Gamemastery Guide. It's not in the Core rules, but it is there with some suggestions for how to handle it as an optional rule.
Great video learned alot. Question: for the exp points to create an encounter. What dose it say anything on how to plan the difficulty if your party is of different amounts of people. Say a party of 2, 4 or say 6 players? which is what I usually have playing in my group.
I highly recommend it. It’s got so much! You can always use Archive of Nethys as an online resource. I do wish the Advanced Player Guide was part of the bundle, but the bundle is a wonderful entry point.
0:45 Secret Checks! As a GM I say to heck with these. Players NEED to understand that what THEY may or may not know is different from what their character will know! I was thinking this before Icarus gave his answer, it is one of the few things that I just flat out don't like, in fact from a mechanics point of view I think it's the ONLY thing I don't like! 7:58 I want to point out one thing that was missed about the Multiclass/Archetype system(NO it's not Free Archetype, though that is awesome, play the "normal" game first before to through other crap into it)! Unlike in 5E you can't really do a "one level dip" unless you never plan to take another Archetype Dedication! Each Dedication has a "Special" that say you must take two OTHER feats from an Archetype before you can take another Dedication feat! 9:23 Medicine in PF2 is AMAZING!!! Don't sleep on it and don't ignore it, if you do you will NOT have a good time! 15:04 If I remember correctly the secondary caster doesn't even need to know how to cast spells! I could be wrong though, so take this with a grain, or a TRUCK, of salt!
Secret Checks are a contentious one. I do think there are some instances where it's better for the drama if no one knows the result but the GM, but I understand why folk wouldn't like it! For archetypes, that is correct, you need to take a certain number of archetype feats before choosing another archetype, because they are usually fairly frontloaded mechanically. Secondary casters don't need to be able to cast spells. You don't actually need to be a spellcaster to be the primary caster of a ritual spell, which makes it much easier to have your baddies cast rituals!
@@IcarusGames Secret checks are definitely going to depend on the table/players. If your players are good with avoiding metagaming and playing into something even if its potentially at the character's detriment, then there's no need to make checks secret and just let them roll it (I believe they even touch on this in the CRB or GMG). But I've certainly played with players that will adjust their actions once they see that they rolled low on the die and thus figure they've failed the check Having an official trait for those types of actions is another way of helping beginning GMs and players until they have enough experience with the game and each other to decide if they want to alter it.
Since pf2e uses xp system, how does the system cater to different level party? Say in a party you have one level 3, two level 5s and one level 6. Somehow I can see the monster would be very very hard to hit for the level 3 while they can easily crit back, yet it would be very easy combat for the level 6.
There shouldn't be any situation where there's more than 1 level gap between PCs, and that gap should be pretty small anyway. But page 508 of the CRB does give some advice on handling different levelled parties, which varies from taking the average level to adding more monsters depending on the specific comp of the party. Generally, you make an encounter that's balanced for the lower level PCs, then add more monsters to account for the higher level PC.
Thanks to the surge of interest lately, a lot of places are sold out. Amazon in the UK still has most of them at a decent price. The pocket editions are usually easy to get hold of too.
That assumption is the real worst part IMO. If you don't like games with a lot of rules the system isn't for you, but that's a personal preference thing. But the assumption that the system is this super complex mechanical beast is a big downside for trying to onboard new folks.
@@IcarusGames No, that’s just a really disingenuous answer to the question. He didn’t ask what is the worst part about trying to get people to play the system. I get that you’re trying to sell the system, but this is like at a job interview when someone asks you what your greatest weakness is and you say, “I work too hard,” while winking at them.
I'm not trying to sell anything, Paizo aren't paying me for these videos (they actually have a policy NOT to monetarily sponsor content, but that's beside the point) If my actual answer isn't satisfying to you, that's on you. I would say the worst part of the system would be vancian casting, but there are several published ways to change it to the 5e style. When the playtest for PF2 was happening I really didn't like the changes to shields, but in the final context of the rules, under the three action economy, I quite like them now. Tags can be a lot to take in when you first start the system, but they add so much depth to the mechanics and can speed things up once you learn them. So yeah, right now the worst part of the system, in my opinion, is the perception of impenetrable density. I think the Paizo could have split some of the info out of the core book to make it smaller and more approachable.
I have, and I heavily disagree with it, as do a lot of folks in the PF2 space. I don't agree with the idea that there's only an illusion of choice in PF2, and much of Cody's argument in that particular video I consider to be specific to him and his table, rather than the system itself. The argument of "my players keep doing the same, most optimal thing, in every combat" will apply to any system if that's how your players are inclined. I think all the complaints he mentioned in the video could be levelled against 5e just as much, if not more so IMO thanks to how subclasses work.
I was curious about his points, but after playing the game, it really sounds like it was a table not clicking with the system rather than an issue with the system itself.
IMO as someone learning pathfinder 2e and a veteran player of 5e... pf2e is way more math heavy and there are too many options at most levels, this isn't exactly "perceived" difficulty, it's straight up "gotta learn about a bunch more"... and that's before even considering making a build and using free archetype to crank it up to make it better. I'd say reading and learning d&d 5e is about 40% of the effort of doing the same with pf2e. While I believe pf2e is a better system than 5e, it's a worse game because it has so much, it's like comparing dwarf fortress with candy crush - sure dwarf fortress is an amazing game, but most people will just play candy crush and dwarf fortress becomes a niche game... just like pf2e feels niche.
Starting out with free archetype when you have no experience with the system is just adding needless complexity. There are a lot more choices in character creation and advancement, but once you're playing it doesn't feel too much more mathy than 5e. There are modifiers, but they all come from a circumstance or spell etc so you know when they are there or not. I disagree with PF2 being niche though. It still allows you to play a broad variety of heroic fantasy stories. Something like Call of Cthulhu is what I would consider to be niche; a system built to play one type of game very well, with little flexibility for other genres or tones.
I've gotta disagree with you on the perceived difficulty point. I have GM'd for both 5e and pf2e and I felt like teaching players 2e is actually easier once you get them through the initial huge amount of feats. Because Pathfinder sets internal patterns and tends not to break them so when you learn how one mechanic works you can figure out another pretty easily. For example the 4 degrees of success are pretty universal and once you figure those out they apply to do many things. Also on the GM side having a lot of rules is great because I don't need to know all the rules off the top of my head but I can look something up quickly without needing to homebrew anything
5e players be like "help, I need to make one or two decisions about my character every single level!" Like, damn, I know it's probably a culture shock coming from a game system that lets only gives you a handful of character decisions across the entire 20 levels, but I was able to help a brand new player make his character in... less than an hour. Characterizing having a dozen feats to choose from as "too many options" seems...disingenuous. Saying pathfinder is more "math heavy" is a weird saying also... the only thing I can think of that would apply here is that you need to keep track of 3 types of bonuses in Pf2e instead of just advantage/disadvantage. Is that the extra math you're talking about?
Love how prominent character level is in the entire system; proficiencies, encounter building, etc... It's why everything is so balanced and why munkining isn't so easy.
Having level tied into all the important stats and rolls really helps balance and makes progression feel nice! You're always getting a little better at all the things you're good at.
In regards to the prepared casters being more restrictive, I would also point out that you're meant to supplement your spells slots with a lot more consumable or once-a-day items than you might be used to. Wizards should have wands, scrolls, and a magic staff or two; either their consumables are used for the spells they know they'll want so that they can use their spell slots for more situational options, or the consumables are the situational one-offs so that they can have their standard daily setup in their own spell slots.
Casters don't need as many expensive armour and weapon runes as martials do, so the treasure that a martial would be investing into upgrading their gear, a caster should invest into gear that expands the number and types of spells they can cast per day.
Exactly. This is a big part of why so many items can be Invested (whereas in 5e you can have only 3!) - in PF2e iirc it is 7!
You are MEANT TO have a bunch of staves, wands, scrolls, necklaces and rings and etc. These can be used to give yourself more flexibility.
And you can craft your own items too! So if a wizard wants to make sure they have access to some infrequently used utility spells they could make wands of it, or even put a big list of them into a staff, freeing up their prepared spells :)
@@mduckernz it's 10 in pf2e, and there's a feat to give access to more, but 10 is likely more than enough
Excellent point. PF2 is built with the assumption of a lot of magic items, and if you're not playing to that, you really should be using the Automatic Bonus Progression rules to account for the power difference.
I am not sure you make it any better telling the only classes (spellcasters) that already are the only classes to depend on a true daily resource in the game, that they must also rely upon consumable resources to make it through the day, is any improvement. None of the martials have to stop to rest until exhaustion/starvation would be an issue.
@@IcarusGamesAPB is great, but it doesn't give free spells.
I can attest that high level play just works well in PF2e. Have run games up to 17th level and the biggest issue is the difficulty of choosing what your characters want to do. Plus the high level creatures are really fun to run.
Dual-classing, not just picking feats from different paths, is noted on pp192-193 of the Gamemastery Guide. It's not in the Core rules, but it is there with some suggestions for how to handle it as an optional rule.
Great video learned alot.
Question: for the exp points to create an encounter. What dose it say anything on how to plan the difficulty if your party is of different amounts of people. Say a party of 2, 4 or say 6 players? which is what I usually have playing in my group.
It does! You adjust up or down a certain amount per player, which is all laid out in the tables provided in the rules 🙂
@@IcarusGames awesome thanks :).
So much to learn with this system. It's exciting! Thanks for answering these questions :D
Thank you for another video! I may buy the Humble Bundle package for Pathfinder 2e.
I highly recommend it. It’s got so much! You can always use Archive of Nethys as an online resource. I do wish the Advanced Player Guide was part of the bundle, but the bundle is a wonderful entry point.
@@johnathanrhoades7751 I bought it, It was so worth it!
@@fernandozavaletabustos205 hope you enjoy it! My group is into our second session using the system and really finding it to our taste.
Thanks for answering my question! That really helped 🙂
mandatory like for anyone trying to help people get into the system I love! great video
Great guide, thanks!
Super useful video! Thank you. :)
0:45 Secret Checks! As a GM I say to heck with these. Players NEED to understand that what THEY may or may not know is different from what their character will know! I was thinking this before Icarus gave his answer, it is one of the few things that I just flat out don't like, in fact from a mechanics point of view I think it's the ONLY thing I don't like!
7:58 I want to point out one thing that was missed about the Multiclass/Archetype system(NO it's not Free Archetype, though that is awesome, play the "normal" game first before to through other crap into it)! Unlike in 5E you can't really do a "one level dip" unless you never plan to take another Archetype Dedication! Each Dedication has a "Special" that say you must take two OTHER feats from an Archetype before you can take another Dedication feat!
9:23 Medicine in PF2 is AMAZING!!! Don't sleep on it and don't ignore it, if you do you will NOT have a good time!
15:04 If I remember correctly the secondary caster doesn't even need to know how to cast spells! I could be wrong though, so take this with a grain, or a TRUCK, of salt!
Secret Checks are a contentious one. I do think there are some instances where it's better for the drama if no one knows the result but the GM, but I understand why folk wouldn't like it!
For archetypes, that is correct, you need to take a certain number of archetype feats before choosing another archetype, because they are usually fairly frontloaded mechanically.
Secondary casters don't need to be able to cast spells. You don't actually need to be a spellcaster to be the primary caster of a ritual spell, which makes it much easier to have your baddies cast rituals!
@@IcarusGames Secret checks are definitely going to depend on the table/players. If your players are good with avoiding metagaming and playing into something even if its potentially at the character's detriment, then there's no need to make checks secret and just let them roll it (I believe they even touch on this in the CRB or GMG). But I've certainly played with players that will adjust their actions once they see that they rolled low on the die and thus figure they've failed the check Having an official trait for those types of actions is another way of helping beginning GMs and players until they have enough experience with the game and each other to decide if they want to alter it.
Thanks Anto!
Great video!
question, can one use Pathfinder 1ed spells in Pathfinder2e 2 of the spells i was wondering about are abbundant ammo and reloading hands?
Nice video
Since pf2e uses xp system, how does the system cater to different level party? Say in a party you have one level 3, two level 5s and one level 6.
Somehow I can see the monster would be very very hard to hit for the level 3 while they can easily crit back, yet it would be very easy combat for the level 6.
There shouldn't be any situation where there's more than 1 level gap between PCs, and that gap should be pretty small anyway. But page 508 of the CRB does give some advice on handling different levelled parties, which varies from taking the average level to adding more monsters depending on the specific comp of the party.
Generally, you make an encounter that's balanced for the lower level PCs, then add more monsters to account for the higher level PC.
The lower levels will also level up slightly faster to catch up because of that disparity.
Thanks! I usually host a west-marches style games, so level gap is expected.
👏👏👏
Thanks for answering our questions?
Where can I find the best deals on hardcover books? :)
Thanks to the surge of interest lately, a lot of places are sold out. Amazon in the UK still has most of them at a decent price. The pocket editions are usually easy to get hold of too.
I tried the humble bundle. I could not make it download. I'm kinda dumb with tech
There are download instructions included with the codes. You redeem the codes on the Paizo site.
First!
On to watching the video =P
Okay but what's the REAL worst thing about it, not just a thing that people assume about it.
3 action system.
3-action economy is easily one of my favourite parts of the system!
That assumption is the real worst part IMO. If you don't like games with a lot of rules the system isn't for you, but that's a personal preference thing. But the assumption that the system is this super complex mechanical beast is a big downside for trying to onboard new folks.
@@IcarusGames No, that’s just a really disingenuous answer to the question. He didn’t ask what is the worst part about trying to get people to play the system. I get that you’re trying to sell the system, but this is like at a job interview when someone asks you what your greatest weakness is and you say, “I work too hard,” while winking at them.
I'm not trying to sell anything, Paizo aren't paying me for these videos (they actually have a policy NOT to monetarily sponsor content, but that's beside the point) If my actual answer isn't satisfying to you, that's on you.
I would say the worst part of the system would be vancian casting, but there are several published ways to change it to the 5e style.
When the playtest for PF2 was happening I really didn't like the changes to shields, but in the final context of the rules, under the three action economy, I quite like them now.
Tags can be a lot to take in when you first start the system, but they add so much depth to the mechanics and can speed things up once you learn them.
So yeah, right now the worst part of the system, in my opinion, is the perception of impenetrable density. I think the Paizo could have split some of the info out of the core book to make it smaller and more approachable.
Have you seen Cody from Taking20's two videos on why he's not so keen on Pathfinder 2e now?
I have, and I heavily disagree with it, as do a lot of folks in the PF2 space.
I don't agree with the idea that there's only an illusion of choice in PF2, and much of Cody's argument in that particular video I consider to be specific to him and his table, rather than the system itself.
The argument of "my players keep doing the same, most optimal thing, in every combat" will apply to any system if that's how your players are inclined.
I think all the complaints he mentioned in the video could be levelled against 5e just as much, if not more so IMO thanks to how subclasses work.
I was curious about his points, but after playing the game, it really sounds like it was a table not clicking with the system rather than an issue with the system itself.
IMO as someone learning pathfinder 2e and a veteran player of 5e... pf2e is way more math heavy and there are too many options at most levels, this isn't exactly "perceived" difficulty, it's straight up "gotta learn about a bunch more"... and that's before even considering making a build and using free archetype to crank it up to make it better.
I'd say reading and learning d&d 5e is about 40% of the effort of doing the same with pf2e.
While I believe pf2e is a better system than 5e, it's a worse game because it has so much, it's like comparing dwarf fortress with candy crush - sure dwarf fortress is an amazing game, but most people will just play candy crush and dwarf fortress becomes a niche game... just like pf2e feels niche.
Starting out with free archetype when you have no experience with the system is just adding needless complexity.
There are a lot more choices in character creation and advancement, but once you're playing it doesn't feel too much more mathy than 5e. There are modifiers, but they all come from a circumstance or spell etc so you know when they are there or not.
I disagree with PF2 being niche though. It still allows you to play a broad variety of heroic fantasy stories. Something like Call of Cthulhu is what I would consider to be niche; a system built to play one type of game very well, with little flexibility for other genres or tones.
I've gotta disagree with you on the perceived difficulty point. I have GM'd for both 5e and pf2e and I felt like teaching players 2e is actually easier once you get them through the initial huge amount of feats. Because Pathfinder sets internal patterns and tends not to break them so when you learn how one mechanic works you can figure out another pretty easily. For example the 4 degrees of success are pretty universal and once you figure those out they apply to do many things. Also on the GM side having a lot of rules is great because I don't need to know all the rules off the top of my head but I can look something up quickly without needing to homebrew anything
5e players be like "help, I need to make one or two decisions about my character every single level!"
Like, damn, I know it's probably a culture shock coming from a game system that lets only gives you a handful of character decisions across the entire 20 levels, but I was able to help a brand new player make his character in... less than an hour. Characterizing having a dozen feats to choose from as "too many options" seems...disingenuous.
Saying pathfinder is more "math heavy" is a weird saying also... the only thing I can think of that would apply here is that you need to keep track of 3 types of bonuses in Pf2e instead of just advantage/disadvantage. Is that the extra math you're talking about?