5e and PF2 (split from the extension thread)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lou Ciphor

Just posting my humble opinion so they can read all about it...
This is just one more way WoTC is continuing to drive the enjoyment of the hoby into the dirt. Good luck with that. I hear PF2 is a better product than 5E, anyway...
/end rant

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColinBuckler

As a owner of both content - I would really entertain a discussion about the pro's and con's between both systems. I extensively run 5E but would consider looking at PF2. I like the simplicity of 5E, but love the way PF2 uses "feats" to create the characters. Unfortunately this thread is not the place for this discussion as I would not want to hijack it from the OP. If you do want to discuss the pros/cons between 5E and PF2 we could always open another thread?

---

New thread here, as I didn't see one. I don't have much to say other than I have played both and the PF2 book is horribly edited with good ideas. However, Cody from Taking20 did a great head to head with his favorite parts of the two systems:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v7iM6DOcIg

I glanced through the PF2 books awhile back and I can't remember anything I saw there...doesn't mean its bad, it just didn't stick with me and find some way to stand out that really made me want to play it.

I just ran about 8 sessions of Starfinder recently and I can tell you that I really don't care for the 3.5/PF1/Starfinder situational modifiers at all. +2 on a full moon when the wind is blowing out of the east (ok they aren't that bad but they feel that way sometimes).

Did PF2 get rid of all those situational modifiers? Because I feel like the 5e advantage/disadvantage system really streamlined the speed of games. It's far less to remember on GM and players parts.
It also seemed like we spent a lot more time doing rule look ups and rule lawyering in the 1/2/3/3.5/PF1/Starfinder games then was ever required in 5e (4e I didn't include in that list because it was fairly streamlined when played on FG). Which doesn't mean 5e is better but it feels faster.

Despite all of that I may still try PF2 someday....when it maybe gets a bit more content/little more baked.

Point 7 of that video (editing/layout)....I had this problem every game, multiple times in Starfinder. Searching around trying to find rules that were all over the place. It sucked!

The lookup part depends a lot on what you play. I played a 5E fighter with lots of combat tactics and had to look them up again every time we played (and then some). No one at the table seemed to know most of the tactics despite being far more experienced in 5E than I am. Except for the elephant in the room that is "Sentinel". And there is your problem, 5E characters do feel used after some time, the customization options are limited and there are some clear winners.

Looking up which spells are concentration and which are not also was a constant source of delays for the spellcasters.

Knowing both Pathfinder 1 and 5E I would say that a lot of things have been done right in Pathfinder 2 and you can see where they are coming from.

A direction that both systems went to is how much share the die has on the outcome. From there 5E's advantage/disadvantage rerolls differ from PF2's small modifiers that can only come from three stackable sources instead of PF1's literal dozen. What makes modifiers special in PF2 is that they can increase crit range (mostly for Fighters), but the dice are still strong in this one.