Quote from: Rhedyn;1099445Ah but PF2e does not get to exist in a vacuum. You can argue that it is off to a better start and will grow into a more rich game, but right now it is lacking compared to it's equivalents; PF1e, D&D4e.

Honestly combat length in almost any system depends more on the GM than anything else. 4e healing surges add a lot of flexibility to encounter structure and I've been in sessions that were more "combat as war" and it works fine with minions (better than D&D 5e at least IMHO).

If you compare the Pathfinder 2e core book with the current 5e offerings then the options look pretty comparable swapping the Warlock for the Alchemist and the Dragonborn for the Goblin.  And if you believe the scuttlebutt around the water cooler then "less is more" is the new black with the Millennials not being able to handle the old wall'o'books.

Healing Surges were a little too gamist for my tastes, no real reason why a Healing Potion would stop working just because you had run out healing surges.  In my experience it limited the game when you had to stop because your Striker had exhausted his healing while your Defender was only halfway through.

Quote from: Shasarak;1099454If you compare the Pathfinder 2e core book with the current 5e offerings then the options look pretty comparable swapping the Warlock for the Alchemist and the Dragonborn for the Goblin.  And if you believe the scuttlebutt around the water cooler then "less is more" is the new black with the Millennials not being able to handle the old wall'o'books.

Healing Surges were a little too gamist for my tastes, no real reason why a Healing Potion would stop working just because you had run out healing surges.  In my experience it limited the game when you had to stop because your Striker had exhausted his healing while your Defender was only halfway through.

Not really because my friends who actually like D&D 5e play with tons of unearthed arcana and online homebrew. 5e already isn't balanced at all so at worse the homebrew balances their games. In my opinion this is the way 3.5 Players play D&D 5e (because the whole edition is meant to be ran however the DM thinks D&D should be ran). That young ultra progressive group I know about is PF2e's target audience and they are actively repulsed by PF2e.

Healing potions in D&D 4e are not like healing potions in other editions. They help you dip into your shonen anime protagonist reserves of strength that you could have easily done without the potion.
As someone who plays a defender, I like having extra healing surges left over. It allows me to play a lot more recklessly. Which is like half the fun of playing a Human Fighter.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1099384I would also note that with minion rules, combat as war playstyles are fairly easy to pull off. You can even run megadungeons in the system if most foes are minions.

I argue that 4e D&D could easily play like high level OSR characters still going on adventures. (from level 1 with healing surges, your 4e HP is about as high as a level 10 OSR character).

I think that the main things that make 4ed a not so good fit for "Combat as War"* playstyle would be:
-Combat takes a long time.
-Harder to attrition down PCs.
-More abstract skill system.
-More tightly defined spells etc. They're defined in terms of specific mechanic effects not in fiction terms of what they actually DO so it's harder to use them in off-label ways which a Combat as War playstyle really thrives on. In 4ed it's sometimes unclear what exactly is happening in fiction terms when you use an ability. As a general rule of thumb the easier a game is to reskin to worse it is at Combat as War since the things that make it hard to reskin stuff (being tied very tightly to specific fiction) is the sort of thing Combat as War thrives on.

Of course you can speed up combat and make the PCs more attrition-prone (the best way to do this in 4&5ed is make a short rest a night's sleep and a long rest extended bed rest) but it's still less than ideal. Some of this applies to high level OSR as well which is why stereotypical Combat as War play is usually associated with the low levels.

The other problems with 4ed were that the execution was a botched in places. Due to problems with the dev cycle (murder/suicide will do that) the different bits of the system, especially PCs and monsters didn't fit together so well which lead to problems with sloggy combat etc. The game really needed some more time for balance, speed, etc. It also would've helped a lot if some things were put in to make it less than idea for people to nova with their best powers right off the bat. Stuff like Daily powers working better when bloodied or when out of healing surges or somesuch.

Would really like a game that plays like a cleaned up version of 4ed (kind of like in actual play 5ed plays like a cleaned up version of 3.5ed, at least for me) for when I want big smashy high fantasy fights, it's just not a good fit for rat bastards surviving by their wits in Fantasy Fucking Vietnam. Doesn't mean that it's a bad or unfun way to play though. I've played a lot of different styles of RPGs and the only thing that I really can't stand is "frustrated novelist" railroading bullshit. As long as what's happening is determined by the choices I made I'm usually pretty happy.

*So weird to still see that term pop up after so many years. I've written so many random long-winded forum screeds and none of them made the slightest impact on anyone except that one.

Quote from: Daztur;1099491I think that the main things that make 4ed a not so good fit for "Combat as War"* playstyle would be:
-Combat takes a long time.
-Harder to attrition down PCs.
-More abstract skill system.
-More tightly defined spells etc. They're defined in terms of specific mechanic effects not in fiction terms of what they actually DO so it's harder to use them in off-label ways which a Combat as War playstyle really thrives on. In 4ed it's sometimes unclear what exactly is happening in fiction terms when you use an ability. As a general rule of thumb the easier a game is to reskin to worse it is at Combat as War since the things that make it hard to reskin stuff (being tied very tightly to specific fiction) is the sort of thing Combat as War thrives on.

Of course you can speed up combat and make the PCs more attrition-prone (the best way to do this in 4&5ed is make a short rest a night's sleep and a long rest extended bed rest) but it's still less than ideal. Some of this applies to high level OSR as well which is why stereotypical Combat as War play is usually associated with the low levels.

The other problems with 4ed were that the execution was a botched in places. Due to problems with the dev cycle (murder/suicide will do that) the different bits of the system, especially PCs and monsters didn't fit together so well which lead to problems with sloggy combat etc. The game really needed some more time for balance, speed, etc. It also would've helped a lot if some things were put in to make it less than idea for people to nova with their best powers right off the bat. Stuff like Daily powers working better when bloodied or when out of healing surges or somesuch.

Would really like a game that plays like a cleaned up version of 4ed (kind of like in actual play 5ed plays like a cleaned up version of 3.5ed, at least for me) for when I want big smashy high fantasy fights, it's just not a good fit for rat bastards surviving by their wits in Fantasy Fucking Vietnam. Doesn't mean that it's a bad or unfun way to play though. I've played a lot of different styles of RPGs and the only thing that I really can't stand is "frustrated novelist" railroading bullshit. As long as what's happening is determined by the choices I made I'm usually pretty happy.

*So weird to still see that term pop up after so many years. I've written so many random long-winded forum screeds and none of them made the slightest impact on anyone except that one.

Combat is pretty quick with minions and minions/traps can widdle away PC health really fast. With healing surges you can't just have tons of Healing Potions.
I personally find the 4e skill system to be one of the most detailed in the industry. Each skill gets definition and target number examples. I think the DMG "skill challenges" tables throw people off because that is an abstract skill system.
I think most of the "combat as war" useful magic comes from rituals which cost money, another resource, and I think fit in right well. Few of the daily powers or utility powers would make a difference and I think that's fair.
We discarded "D&D 4e Essentials" aka Mike Mearls making a pre-5e, and Monster Manual 1. The late edition Monsters combined with the pre-essential classes is a good match up for us.

In my mind 4e basically starts at OSR traveling level 10 characters. If you are doing something like Combat as War it's either an epic affair or something the PCs are going to be able to handle easily. Most of the OSR games seem to end at level 10 and the mechanics tend to not extend well beyond it. And I think that is for good reason. Sure BECMI goes to level 36, but how many wizards are dungeon crawling at level 30? 4e does a lot to enable that kind of story. Most OSR enthusiasts advocate ground the scope of the campaign in high levels, but what if you didn't want to do that and instead just keep adventuring into crazier and crazier situations.

Aside: A big part of "Combat as War" to me is that the world isn't leveled with you. In 4e you can kill minions more than 3x your CR but would die to any regular monster that strong. So once you veer outside of minions you go back to more Combat as Sport, because nothing too crazy can have normal HP without wiping the party.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1099485Not really because my friends who actually like D&D 5e play with tons of unearthed arcana and online homebrew. 5e already isn't balanced at all so at worse the homebrew balances their games. In my opinion this is the way 3.5 Players play D&D 5e (because the whole edition is meant to be ran however the DM thinks D&D should be ran). That young ultra progressive group I know about is PF2e's target audience and they are actively repulsed by PF2e.

I dont think that PF 2 is targeting young ultra progressive people, I think it is more the younger smarter people that want flexibility to make a unique character with real choices that give actual benefits.

QuoteHealing potions in D&D 4e are not like healing potions in other editions. They help you dip into your shonen anime protagonist reserves of strength that you could have easily done without the potion.
As someone who plays a defender, I like having extra healing surges left over. It allows me to play a lot more recklessly. Which is like half the fun of playing a Human Fighter.

Yeah it was one of those gamist choices they made that kinda ruined the high fantasy feeling of DnD for me.

Quote from: Shasarak;1099562I dont think that PF 2 is targeting young ultra progressive people, I think it is more the younger smarter people that want flexibility to make a unique character with real choices that give actual benefits.

When last I looked at it, the choices were tons and tons of boring options that amounted to characters less interesting than in PF1 or D&D5e, let alone D&D 4e that actually succeeded in giving players real choices that give actual benefits.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1099566When last I looked at it, the choices were tons and tons of boring options that amounted to characters less interesting than in PF1 or D&D5e, let alone D&D 4e that actually succeeded in giving players real choices that give actual benefits.

Which is a fantastic observation. If you provide context. What's the difference between a boring option and "real choices that gives actual benefits"?

Quote from: trechriron;1099567Which is a fantastic observation. If you provide context. What's the difference between a boring option and "real choices that gives actual benefits"?

Let me just visualize the Fighter PF2e let's me pick between Double Slice, Exacting Strike, Point-Blank Shot, Power Attack, Reactive Shield, Snagging Strike, and Sudden Charge. I found none

In 4e, my two at-wills were the one where I always do damage even on a miss (which kills minions and saves me from nat 1s) and the other one let me cleave damage to a nearby target (which killed minions).

In 5e, I get to pick a fighting style, it's boring small numbers like PF2e, but in 5e you pick between powerful small numbers like your longsword now doing great sword damage. (I don't even like 5e)

In PF1e, my level 1 human fighter normally picked Blind-fight, Combat Reflexes, and Intimidating Presence. All cooler gems than what is being offered in PF2e. I had more viable fighter builds with different starts than PF2e even has starting options.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1099576Let me just visualize the Fighter PF2e let's me pick between Double Slice, Exacting Strike, Point-Blank Shot, Power Attack, Reactive Shield, Snagging Strike, and Sudden Charge. I found none

In 4e, my two at-wills were the one where I always do damage even on a miss (which kills minions and saves me from nat 1s) and the other one let me cleave damage to a nearby target (which killed minions).

In 5e, I get to pick a fighting style, it's boring small numbers like PF2e, but in 5e you pick between powerful small numbers like your longsword now doing great sword damage. (I don't even like 5e)

In PF1e, my level 1 human fighter normally picked Blind-fight, Combat Reflexes, and Intimidating Presence. All cooler gems than what is being offered in PF2e. I had more viable fighter builds with different starts than PF2e even has starting options.

4e at wills were particularly bad because you are basically stuck with your two at wills for your whole character level 1 to 30.  They are much better then what the choices that they offer you in 5e.  In comparison Pathfinder 2 gives you the option to train out your double slice for what ever you want to take and it also gives a better choice of cantrips that you can change up from day to day.

I see that you feel that feats like Intimidating Presence are "cool" but I dont know if adding your Str bonus to your Intimidation check is actually a real choice, its just a math feat giving an extra +4 to your Intimidation roll.  I see real choices as being able to Intimidate with a glance, or as a reaction using Intimidate when you roll initiative or being so intimidating that you can literally scare someone to death.  Now those are real choices and the best thing is that making those choices does not even affect your combat abilities.  Much better then a +4 bonus.

Quote from: Shasarak;10995874e at wills were particularly bad because you are basically stuck with your two at wills for your whole character level 1 to 30.  They are much better then what the choices that they offer you in 5e.  In comparison Pathfinder 2 gives you the option to train out your double slice for what ever you want to take and it also gives a better choice of cantrips that you can change up from day to day.

I see that you feel that feats like Intimidating Presence are "cool" but I dont know if adding your Str bonus to your Intimidation check is actually a real choice, its just a math feat giving an extra +4 to your Intimidation roll.  I see real choices as being able to Intimidate with a glance, or as a reaction using Intimidate when you roll initiative or being so intimidating that you can literally scare someone to death.  Now those are real choices and the best thing is that making those choices does not even affect your combat abilities.  Much better then a +4 bonus.

Bah at-wills are your advance melee attack and you use them when none of your other powers are applicable. I don't see how the PF2e version of "your level 1 abilities are so lame you will jump to get rid of them" is a selling point (though 4e does get guilty of this when you can start trading out powers).

Intimidating Presence ends up being a +10 bonus eventually. But it's main help is that you give your Fighter a social skill equal to any bard or sorcerer. It also combos off into intimidation builds, but I tend to just use it as it is.

Spoiler

Dwarf(Mountaineer, Sky Sentinel, Craftsman) Fighter || 16 14 16 12 10 8 || Traits: Glory of Old, Seeker|| Perception, Climb, Craft(Clothing)
1. Steel Soul, Combat Reflexes
2. Step-up
3. Master Armorer, Armor Training
4. Power Attack
5. Master Craftsman (Clothing), Weapon Training(Heavy Blades)
6. Disruptive
7. Craft Wondrous Item, Armored Juggernaut
8. Cut From the Air
9. Smash from the Air, Versatile Training(Intimidate, Ride)
10. Spellbreaker
11. Shatterspell, Armor Specialization
12. Combat Stamina
13. Pindown, Defensive Weapon Training
14. Warrior Spirit
15. Armed Bravery, Critical Deflection
16. Fighter's Reflexes
17. Sprightly Armor, Trained Initiative
18. Improved Initiative
19. Armored Sacrifice
20. Weapon Sacrifice

Now that I have some time on my hands, I can talk about my favorite Fighter Build in PF1e. I've yet to see any Fighter ability that would let me do something as cool or cooler than sunder spells or knock arrows/rays from the air. (slight goal post shift here. But main problem with PF2e choices is that they all seem kind of boring. It's not a real choice when I'm picking between crap and more crap).

I always considered situational feats like Blind-Fighting and Combat Reflexes garbage. Useful yes though I'm not a fan of "Feat ABC gives this bonus or ability if conditions XYZ". Combat Reflexes sucks even more as most gamers unless they are using a DEX build are at most are making out STR. Even then unless the enemy has low Intelligence or forced by magic to provoke an AOO the feat remains pretty much a feat tax imo.

Though I get Rhedyn point though. I found many of the feats for PF 2E at least during the read of the playtest lacking imo. Maybe that has changed yet the Paizo devs love their +1 feats.

Quote from: sureshot;1099621I always considered situational feats like Blind-Fighting and Combat Reflexes garbage. Useful yes though I'm not a fan of "Feat ABC gives this bonus or ability if conditions XYZ". Combat Reflexes sucks even more as most gamers unless they are using a DEX build are at most are making out STR. Even then unless the enemy has low Intelligence or forced by magic to provoke an AOO the feat remains pretty much a feat tax imo.

Generally I would agree with you. However level 1 human fighter gets a lot of mileage out of those feats and they continue to be useful. Standard PF1 Fighters need to pump dex to keep their armor training maximally useful, so many fighters tend to start with 14 or higher dexterity. At level 1, you are likely to fight a large group of tiny creatures (suck as rats). Creatures of that size attacking you in melee trigger an AOO, so against traditional level 1 foes you get +3 attacks. The other ribbon ability of "Can AOO when flat footed" helps at times also (no being surprised by rats). But even just having +2 AOOs is useful against smaller foes that want to rush around you to kill the squishy party members. In 3.5, I would have just rushed great cleave since "lots of attacks" > "everything else" at level 1, but PF1 level locked that to later levels.
Blindfight is great for humans in low levels where poor lighting tends to come up the most, but it comes up a lot more for high level fighters because you roll twice on concealment. Mirror Image, Displacement, etc? Just close your eyes and ignore all of that 75% of the time. Enemy blinded you? You are only missing 25% of the time.

Quote from: sureshot;1099621Though I get Rhedyn point though. I found many of the feats for PF 2E at least during the read of the playtest lacking imo. Maybe that has changed yet the Paizo devs love their +1 feats.

*Sigh
I'm more disappointed than anything else. At least Savage Worlds is scratching that character building crunch itch.

Quote from: sureshot;1099621I always considered situational feats like Blind-Fighting and Combat Reflexes garbage. Useful yes though I'm not a fan of "Feat ABC gives this bonus or ability if conditions XYZ". Combat Reflexes sucks even more as most gamers unless they are using a DEX build are at most are making out STR. Even then unless the enemy has low Intelligence or forced by magic to provoke an AOO the feat remains pretty much a feat tax imo.

Exactly, which is why I am surprised that someone is holding up these as a example of the great choices that Fighters had.

QuoteThough I get Rhedyn point though. I found many of the feats for PF 2E at least during the read of the playtest lacking imo. Maybe that has changed yet the Paizo devs love their +1 feats.

It would be helpful to look at the actual feats rather then the ones that you remember from the playtest.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1099620Bah at-wills are your advance melee attack and you use them when none of your other powers are applicable. I don't see how the PF2e version of "your level 1 abilities are so lame you will jump to get rid of them" is a selling point (though 4e does get guilty of this when you can start trading out powers).

Intimidating Presence ends up being a +10 bonus eventually. But it's main help is that you give your Fighter a social skill equal to any bard or sorcerer. It also combos off into intimidation builds, but I tend to just use it as it is.

Spoiler

Dwarf(Mountaineer, Sky Sentinel, Craftsman) Fighter || 16 14 16 12 10 8 || Traits: Glory of Old, Seeker|| Perception, Climb, Craft(Clothing)
1. Steel Soul, Combat Reflexes
2. Step-up
3. Master Armorer, Armor Training
4. Power Attack
5. Master Craftsman (Clothing), Weapon Training(Heavy Blades)
6. Disruptive
7. Craft Wondrous Item, Armored Juggernaut
8. Cut From the Air
9. Smash from the Air, Versatile Training(Intimidate, Ride)
10. Spellbreaker
11. Shatterspell, Armor Specialization
12. Combat Stamina
13. Pindown, Defensive Weapon Training
14. Warrior Spirit
15. Armed Bravery, Critical Deflection
16. Fighter's Reflexes
17. Sprightly Armor, Trained Initiative
18. Improved Initiative
19. Armored Sacrifice
20. Weapon Sacrifice

Now that I have some time on my hands, I can talk about my favorite Fighter Build in PF1e. I've yet to see any Fighter ability that would let me do something as cool or cooler than sunder spells or knock arrows/rays from the air. (slight goal post shift here. But main problem with PF2e choices is that they all seem kind of boring. It's not a real choice when I'm picking between crap and more crap).

I think this is a perfect example of the strength of character creation in Pathfinder 1e.  There is no way that you would be able to build this sort of character using 4e or 5e.

Just forget about it.

Quote from: Shasarak;1099683It would be helpful to look at the actual feats rather then the ones that you remember from the playtest.

Of course and I will keep an open mind when and if I decide to purchase PF 2E. At this time other non-gaming stuff requires my hard earned cash. Even if I could spare it seeing their new releases just feels like buying the same books again. APG, GMG Bestiary 2 I just can't justify it at least for now.

At the same time given how the Paizo devs refused to listen to player feedback unless it suited them it is upon them to prove themselves to myself at least they are willing to think outside of the bok with PF 2E. The sheer amount of +1, situational or even worse fluff style with no crunch substance feats before the release of PF 2E well I'm not going to expect too much from them.