PF2e - rules set quality?

[Morfedel]

So, after the OGL fiasco, been considering switching to PF 2nd ed, but wanted to ask, how good is the rules set?

[MaxAstro]

Do you mean "how good is PF2e as a system?" or "how good is Fantasy Grounds support for PF2e?"

In either case the answer is really, really good. Trenloe, ShadeRaven, and everyone else working on PF2e for Fantasy Grounds care a lot about adding as much convenience and automation to the ruleset as humanly possible. There's so much that it does for you that I just can't imagine running game without it.

As far as the system itself - it's definitely very different from 5e. It's crunchier (not as crunchy as 3.5, though) and definitely more challenging. A party with bad teamwork can find themselves getting beat up pretty badly by on-level encounters. The math is very tight, though, and the system doesn't "break" at any point - you can run 20th level games as cleanly as 1st level games. It's also the easiest system to run as a GM out of any system I've ever run. Plus, the character creation options are surprisingly deep, and actually make a big difference in how characters feel in play. You could easily have a party of four monks and have them all play completely differently (in fact I basically do in the Fist of the Ruby Phoenix campaign I'm running; with one exception every character is either a monk or multiclassed into monk, but they all have very distinctive styles).

[Morfedel]

I was talking about how Fantasy Grounds handles it. I was debating between FGU or Foundry. I am already sold on PF2e, though I am new at it.

I own both VTTs, though I have a LOT of time and money invested in FGU already, vs almost nothing in Foundry, so I am leaning towards FG. But foundry DOES do a few things that FG doesnt, and it seems the PF2e community really pushes Foundry over FGU, and I got the PF2e stuff super cheap due to a humble bundle, so, well, I'm debating on the pros and cons here of which vtt to use.

I also like using Talespire, and Foundry does kind of cause me a little more disjointed interactions betweem them vs FGU, so thats another consideration.

[Trenloe]

Fantasy Grounds has the largest amount of official Paizo PF2 material available on any VTT platform - over 130 products with new releases being made on, or close to, the Paizo release date of the product (with the odd exception due to ruleset code complexity or converters playing catchup). So there's plenty of official PF2 content available for Fantasy Grounds.

See the product conversion status thread here for details of what's been converted and what is close to release: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?61483-Pathfinder-Second-Edition-Official-Paizo-Product-Conversion-Status

There's a lot of automation coded into the ruleset and converted products, with more being added all the time. The upcoming Release 19 (heading to test soon) has a massive update in terms of expanded player side automation of actions/activities.

Check out some of the videos here: https://www.youtube.com/@martinblake4215/videos

There's been a few GMs who've moved from running D&D 5E on Fantasy Grounds to running PF2 who have praised the amount of automation/functionality in the PF2 ruleset. The main difference is that PF2 doesn't have the 5E Character Wizard, but it does have a chargen tracker that facilitates and provides guidance in the character creation and maintenance process. The Eldritch Trickster video shows the most recent chargen tracker functionality and runs through how to create an Eldritch Trickster Rogue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi030mCKyEk

As you're already invested in Fantasy Grounds then I think you'd should give PF2 a go. Either with the Beginner Box or the Core Rules (plus an adventure if you're the GM) and give it a go - if you're not satisfied (and you buy the products from the FG store) there's a no questions asked 30 refund policy.

If you decide to take the plunge, please come back to the forums with any questions you may have.

[Morfedel]

Good to know, thanks for the info!

[MaxAstro]

I will say that Foundry is definitely cheaper than Fantasy Grounds, no question there. Significantly cheaper, even.

However, you get what you pay for, in my opinion. The Fantasy Grounds crew here is extremely patient and responsive, and typically very quick to fix any issues that are reported. On top of that there is just - like I said above - so much automation that Fantasy Grounds does for you. There is some things Foundry does that FG doesn't, but there is a lot that FG does that Foundry leaves you to do yourself.

At least that was true the last time I looked at Foundry, which was a year or two ago. It's possible that Foundry's automation has progressed since then - but it's also definitely true that FG's automation is constantly improving.

[Gwaihir Scout]

I also did not think much of Foundry's automation compared to FG a year ago. It's certainly prettier, though.

[dsaraujo]

Personally, I moved all my PF2 campaigns to Foundry this year as they now have pretty much all the capabilities of automation of FG, with one big exception (Players cannot directly effect NPCs, so more work on the GM to add effects and damage). I still love FG, but I think it is getting behind in features and capabilities. Pricing was never an issue for me, and with newer support for modules available as paid content there, I just moved. I'll be happy to switch back if FG goes back to be ahead of the curve. A big factor for me to switch was also Syrinscape support (now fully integrated with Foundry if you have a SuperSyrin sub via extension), and performance issues (some of my players PCs had issues to run FG satisfactory).

[Atreides Ghola]

So, after the OGL fiasco, been considering switching to PF 2nd ed, but wanted to ask, how good is the rules set?

Just the opposite here - I used Foundry VTT for PF2e for about a year, and switched back to FGU.

As stated, Foundry has done a lot of catching up to FGU, and for the most part works very well. But, it doesn't have an Combat Tracker or centralized way to view all of the information on statuses that you can interact with - so while Foundry has an Initiative Tracker, it's not as comprehensive as FGUs, and you cannot directly add, edit, or change effects in any way. The CT alone was reason enough for me to return to FGU. Also, as stated in an above post, players can only change things on their own actors, and cannot apply to anything else. This means that automation in Foundry always has a point of interruption that the GM has to attend to.

So that leaves the GM responsible for taking care of all damage, all spell effects, calculating resistances, adding status conditions, and more. It's a huge PITA, and since there's no good central CT, it adds plenty of time to each combat turn.

A major feature that Foundry has implemented that FGU has not (though it is the focus of v19 and is coming sometime in the future) is the presence of a tab that has all actions that a PC can use and which will roll against the appropriate DC if an actor is targeted. So, it's super easy for players to do things like RK checks against a target; the GM doesn't have to interrupt the flow of the game.

So, if the CT is of major importance to you - you won't find anything like it in Foundry, or any other VTT that I am aware of.

Keep in mind also that FGU's Paizo products are more varied and useful. While you can get the APs for Foundry starting back with Outlaws of Alkenstar, there's no access to the content of the other books, like the Lost Omens campaign books. The OGL material is added to the Foundry Compendiums, but that's it. They don't offer books like these for sale - they just enter any new spell, class, archetype, etc. data. The useful exception here is the Gamemastery Guide. You can use all of the alternate rules in Foundry already.

Also, if you're interested in running Kingmaker - there's no telling when it will be available in Foundry, and they get pissy when you ask. I find this to be a problem with the Foundry PF2e community. They're pretty full of themselves.

[dsaraujo]

Atreides has all good points, and I agree with them. I prefer the model of Combat Tracker versus the old Roll20 model of tokens as entities that can be linked to actors as well. Old material is also a great point: one of the reasons I kept playing with FG was the fact that my current campaign, a Rise of the Runelords conversion to 2E, was available on FG marketplace in its original form (1E). Having all text and maps was very convenient, it wasn't until I found a 2E conversion readily available for Foundry that I fully moved.

Only one nitpick though: you can do any all skill actions versus targeted opponents DCs already on Foundry. By default the actions are not pre-populated on the character sheets, but there is a default macro available to populate and for each individual action. Makes things like Demoralize and Bon Mot a breeze.

I also recommend anyone that wants to have the amazing Lost Omens content available in their VTTs to go with Fantasy Grounds, as you only have rules/mechanics on the Foundry side. If you want to use the amazing Absalom, city of Lost Omens, for example, for a campaign based on that city, FG is by far your best choice. If you just want to play APs, starting with Outlaws of Alkenstar, I think Foundry is (currently as in April 2023) a better choice.

[Trenloe]

Player activity records and the associated automation (including a lot of new effect functionality) is coming really soon in Release 19. See the "Fantasy Grounds Pathfinder 2 Release 19 - Update 1 - Activities Part 1" video here: https://www.youtube.com/@martinblake4215/videos

I've just completed today one of the last major coding pieces for Release 19 - combing damage entries for class feats/fearures like fighter double slice, monk flurry of blows and ranger hunted shot and twin takedown. Here's an example (and it also eludes to auto calculation of range and volley penalties) - in this example the target has RESIST: 5 precision. All of the damage from the two attacks is combined - total of 5 piercing and 7 precision (piercing). The first damage stored and then combined with the second damage, and the piercing resistance is applied to the total of the two damage rolls:

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=57177

[Morfedel]

Interesting discussion!

I have to admit, a part of me REALLY wants to use Talespire. The 3D aspect is just so lovely, and you can import Heroforge minis, which makes it even lovelier. The problem is that Talespire has crappy LOS and FOW, so when you log into a map the players can see the entire map if they want, and hide volumes is a rather poor substitute.

So using a 2D map which has all that is more practical... using the 3D map is prettier. Kinda wish I had something that combined both.

Question: Foundry's maps had some really cool things such as Sound nodes that can play sounds as you get closer, and can play a playlist in Foundry too. I think it even can add in Syrinscape?

I believe FGU doesnt have that? If not, are there any plans to add that anytime soon?

[Moon Wizard]

We're working on Syrinscape integration; but it will be closer to the community options available in the Forge. (i.e. based on content areas and chat triggers)

Regards,
JPG

[Milke]

I like Foundry. A lot, actually. But... a lot of it is bells & whistles to me. Most the stuff I actually need I have to get from a mod. And then I have to hope that mod creator keeps the mod updated with the latest version of Foundry.
FGU is stable. It's intuitive. And when I have a question about something I just can't figure out on my own, one of the developers or a friendly community member is usually Johnny on the spot with a reply.
I use it every week, and my players really like it too.

[Atreides Ghola]

Interesting discussion!

I have to admit, a part of me REALLY wants to use Talespire. The 3D aspect is just so lovely, and you can import Heroforge minis, which makes it even lovelier. The problem is that Talespire has crappy LOS and FOW, so when you log into a map the players can see the entire map if they want, and hide volumes is a rather poor substitute.

So using a 2D map which has all that is more practical... using the 3D map is prettier. Kinda wish I had something that combined both.

Question: Foundry's maps had some really cool things such as Sound nodes that can play sounds as you get closer, and can play a playlist in Foundry too. I think it even can add in Syrinscape?

I believe FGU doesnt have that? If not, are there any plans to add that anytime soon?

There's extensions that allow you to do some of that, though the localized sound nodes are not something FGU can do. You can easily drag sound triggers to the map, or you can use something like Syrinscape Sounds extension and triggers for FGU.

I use Kenku FM and a bot to pipe pretty good stereo sound into a Discord Channel, and the chat triggers play sword swooshes, damage sounds, crossbow bolts, etc. for sound, and everyone likes it fine.

You can set up the Syrinscape integration for Foundry, but I have found it kind of clunky, and it doesn't do chat triggers - you still have to manually play specific sound effects you like, so yet another open Foundry window while you're playing, unless you go in and assign sounds to each spell and weapon you want to have a sound effect. If you're looking for just ambiance/music, it works fine, I suppose. I've never been really impressed by Foundry's audio component, and if you have too many local sounds on a map, it can bring Foundry to a crawl.

[Macgreine]

I currently GM a game on both and I really enjoy both. The automation on Foundry is very good and slightly ahead of FGU on most things but still doesn't function completely on its own when it comes to applying and removing conditions. It does have pop out windows which I find is really helpful for keeping the main screen clear and the ability to "ping" maps which I find is very useful. The really big thing for me is that Foundry has "active" area of effect templates that are actually shaped like the PF2e area of effects https://2e.aonprd.com/Images/Rules/Rules354.png instead of just circles, cones, squares ect. and by "active" I mean they already have everything in the area targeted and rolling saves when the spell is cast. Once the saving throws are made damage is rolled and applied automatically based on the saves. Pretty sweet. I am hoping that FGU catches up on some of this stuff and I am excited about release 19.

[Ludd_G]

The really big thing for me is that Foundry has "active" area of effect templates that are actually shaped like the PF2e area of effects https://2e.aonprd.com/Images/Rules/Rules354.png instead of just circles, cones, squares ect. and by "active" I mean they already have everything in the area targeted and rolling saves when the spell is cast. Once the saving throws are made damage is rolled and applied automatically based on the saves. Pretty sweet. I am hoping that FGU catches up on some of this stuff and I am excited about release 19.

Does this perhaps address some of the spells token functionality?

https://forge.fantasygrounds.com/shop/items/149/view

Hope this is some help.

Cheers,

Simon

[Trenloe]

...and rolling saves when the spell is cast. Once the saving throws are made damage is rolled and applied automatically based on the saves. Pretty sweet. I am hoping that FGU catches up on some of this stuff and I am excited about release 19.
FGU does this now, and has done for a while. The only thing in what you mention (before this quote) is the auto targeting of "active" areas of effects - you just need to quickly target the relevant creatures (you can drag a box to select) and then trigger the roll - with the option to auto roll the saves or allow the PCs themselves to make the save roll. FG takes into account traits related to the save and applies any relevant effects to the save. FG also has the ability to not just apply damage based off the success level of the save, but also apply a wide range of effects based off the success level of the save.

[Macgreine]

Thanks for sharing this but these are not something I would use. They are not the right shapes and they look like they would add more clutter to the encounter maps. Not only that but you have to pay extra for them.

[Macgreine]

Nice! Now we just need some semi transparent area of effect templates that are actually the shapes of the area of effect and FGU will be up to date. Thanks Trenloe!

If I knew anything about how to make stuff like this I would gladly put in the work and offer the templates for free. I have a coding modifier of -4 and fail all my checks

[Trenloe]

Nice! Now we just need some semi transparent area of effect templates that are actually the shapes of the area of effect and FGU will be up to date. Thanks Trenloe!

If I knew anything about how to make stuff like this I would gladly put in the work and offer the templates for free. I have a coding modifier of -4 and fail all my checks
Thanks for the feedback. I'll look at providing templates that can be placed on an image to show the various area of effects after Release 19 goes into test (soon!).

[Macgreine]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll look at providing templates that can be placed on an image to show the various area of effects after Release 19 goes into test (soon!).

Thank you for doing this and having an understanding of what I'm talking about. I'm excited for the new changes coming.

[MaxAstro]

Nice! Now we just need some semi transparent area of effect templates that are actually the shapes of the area of effect and FGU will be up to date. Thanks Trenloe!

If I knew anything about how to make stuff like this I would gladly put in the work and offer the templates for free. I have a coding modifier of -4 and fail all my checks

Honestly I think the cost/benefit equation here is fairly narrow.

The number of situations in which you want to select a group of creatures that can't be quickly selected with either a) a click and drag or b) "target all enemies" and then deselect a couple is fairly small, in my experience.

The only implementation I can think of that would be meaningfully more convenient would also, I imagine, be very complicated to code: You would need to be able to add "target" actions to spells, define the shape of the target action (at least whether it is a circle, cone, line, etc) and then click the action -> drag it on the map -> targets are set.

That would be very convenient, but like I said - frighteningly complicated to code, I suspect.

[RavenSaint]

I used Foundry recently. Ended up spending like $500 in just getting it set up for my players who are in different time zones and countries. If I hadn't came back to FG, I would be paying out like $150 per month for subscriptions to VPNs, modules, quality of life support as I am not savy on XML and several other necessary coding languages for running games and being able to add homebrew things, utilities for running the game across time zones, and building a server storage for everything to run from since my computer is not set up to be a central memory hub for Foundry running online. This included using a website service to handle the Foundry link.

I tried my hand at PF2e. Liked a lot of the automation. I had trouble getting changes for NPCs to stick for encounters. Killed a new player group because the changes on the backside of the NPCs didn't match the changes I made to the parsing. Now, I switched to PF1e, I ran that and 3.5 for years, but crunchy doesn't begin to describe what I have been looking at for 1e over 2e. PF2e did at least have everything that was in the books, as far as what I could see from what I and the players used. PF1e though, looks good on the front end until you get into the details of character creation. Then you find that things are missing and other things aren't working at all, then parsing pretty much doesn't work at all. Between the two PF systems, each has its upsides, but both also have downsides. I'm afraid to even spend any money to try seeing if 3.5 (without PF1e in the mix) would be feasible. It is hard to find anything that isn't all about D&D5e. I miss the sandbox systems, like Rifts and a lot of 3.5/PF1e. I also miss table top where everyone is sitting around a table ITR, instead of virtually.

[Macgreine]

Wow. That's quite a story. I paid $50 for the Foundry tabletop and $4.95:a month to have it hosted (optional) on a dedicated server and I play with people all over the world. Sounds like you had some troubles there. Glad you got it all sorted out for yourself.

[Morfedel]

I used Foundry recently. Ended up spending like $500 in just getting it set up for my players who are in different time zones and countries. If I hadn't came back to FG, I would be paying out like $150 per month for subscriptions to VPNs, modules, quality of life support as I am not savy on XML and several other necessary coding languages for running games and being able to add homebrew things, utilities for running the game across time zones, and building a server storage for everything to run from since my computer is not set up to be a central memory hub for Foundry running online. This included using a website service to handle the Foundry link.

I tried my hand at PF2e. Liked a lot of the automation. I had trouble getting changes for NPCs to stick for encounters. Killed a new player group because the changes on the backside of the NPCs didn't match the changes I made to the parsing. Now, I switched to PF1e, I ran that and 3.5 for years, but crunchy doesn't begin to describe what I have been looking at for 1e over 2e. PF2e did at least have everything that was in the books, as far as what I could see from what I and the players used. PF1e though, looks good on the front end until you get into the details of character creation. Then you find that things are missing and other things aren't working at all, then parsing pretty much doesn't work at all. Between the two PF systems, each has its upsides, but both also have downsides. I'm afraid to even spend any money to try seeing if 3.5 (without PF1e in the mix) would be feasible. It is hard to find anything that isn't all about D&D5e. I miss the sandbox systems, like Rifts and a lot of 3.5/PF1e. I also miss table top where everyone is sitting around a table ITR, instead of virtually.

I have to say, I don't understand why you had to pay so much. I havent even paid $100; I just bought the basic foundry account with no subscription, a $25 humble bundle that included some PF2e stuff for foundry, and thats it. No problems.

Not saying yours isnt legit, just not understanding why Macgreine and I had such a cheap investment and yet you had to spend so much more....