[PF] Is it time to get into Pathfinder?

First Age

D&D h@ck3r and Hopepunk
Staff member
#1
Is it time for me to jump into Pathfinder? The playtest for 2e is well underway, with many refinements and streamlining of the current edition.

Players need only the single 576-page Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook to play, while the Game Master who controls the action will also want the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary, a massive tome containing more than 350 fantastic foes for your adventurers to face.
That's good to know. So, is 2e now light enough for one such as I to give it a go? I'd heard that 1e was a bit of a clunker? Great for character builds and optiontastic, but you need to be a bit of a crunchmeister to play the game.

The answer is probably to go to the PF con at the garrison and play some. Anyone else tempted to jump in by the current playtest? If you've got DnD 5e or 13th Age, then why go for Pathfinder? What does it bring? Will my head explode?
 
#2
Andrew (our 5* Pathfinder expert) ran PF2 for us at the end of last year. We played out the first three adventures of the playtest campaign.

I think the thing that makes my opinion last helpful is that we had Andrew, who knows PF inside out. He guided us through the nuances of the rules and was able to highlight where we were making errors, or had calculated things incorrectly.

The game itself was ... fine. I like a bit of crunch as a player (putting some game in my game, as Gaz would say) but I would say that some of PF2's rather granular feat choices etc. took it a little into the 'dull' side of crunch. That said, it was no different really to some of the 3e D&D I ran, so its no big shakes. There's some good stuff in the classes and spells and it does have a degree of in-built flavour.

I'm not sure what it brings that D&D5e doesn't but I am sure there are people who will love every little piece of it. Its very different from 13th Age though. Good grief, its so different!!!
 
#3
For me, it will soon be time to leave Pathfinder. I only play it for Pathfinder Society at conventions as it was the closest I could get to a 3.5 game back in the day. With the move to PF 2e the need to learn a changed ruleset which is apparently still quite crunchy is offsetting my desire to play a living campaign at conventions. D&D 5e is the neater ruleset and I may look into Adventurers League again for con play.

I have to say, I much prefer Paizo's approach to organised play than WotC's (though at least the latter now allow AL home play, though too late IMHO), and also digital releases (I still can't believe WotC haven't released PDFs of the 5e core books!). However, with my tastes turning to lighter systems D&D 5e has just the right amount of crunch whilst still being easier to play and level up characters.
 
#8
I feel the need to quote a tale from the Tao of Gaming here...

As a wise man once said to me while I was lovingly eyeing up Starfinder* "No, just no" and when I pleadingly asked why the Great Sage Of First Age just answered "its just not you" :)
*from all reports Starfinder is the approach they've taken with PF2ed.
 
Last edited:
#9
Players need only the single 576-page Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook to play, while the Game Master who controls the action will also want the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary, a massive tome containing more than 350 fantastic foes for your adventurers to face.
576 pages!!! Is it appropriate to test if the Tavern has a swearing filter :D
 
#11
I've played Pathfinder 1e a couple of times. One time we went from level 1 as far as level 7.

Two thoughts: It's very fine grained. I got a bit peeved coming across a feat that had some interesting looking flavour that in the end had little mechanical effect, giving +1 bonus to hit or AC or something similarly weak. The trick was to optimise a bit by stacking such feats.

Character generation took me a few hours manually, or about 30 minutes with an online generator.

On a positive note, my wizard character managed a moment of awesome. A random encounter well out of the party's depth let him do the "Fly you fools! This foe is beyond any of you." after the high level fighter was KOed with one hit. It wasn't a sacrifice; he triumphed thanks to the fly spell and aerial bombardment.

The fun thing there was I'd been making lots of minor magical items, most of which got used up. It was good to pull that trick, but not a sign he was overpowered as I wouldn't have been able to do it again for a very long time (certainly not during that adventure).

That last bit gives me warm feelings. But 1e Pathfinder was comfortably the crunchiest D&D variant out there. As well as continuing 3e when 4e came out, that was its niche.

If you're in the mood for that type of crunch, it's got strengths. But it is one of the crunchiest games I know, especially when it comes to character creation and such things as monsters and NPCs. I would play if other elements appealed, but as GM I'd run screaming.
 

Guvnor

Administrator
Staff member
#14
Just read the GeekDad blog on PF2e.

I can feel the sheer enthusiasm.

But, like FantasyCraft in it's day, just too crunchy for me to buy.

Love to play it though, see how I feel as a player, I suspect the same
 
#15
*from all reports Starfinder is the approach they've taken with PF2ed.
I am not sure which reports you are referencing but the two systems have very little in common. 2E Pathfinder makes some fairly significant changes compared to 1E. Starfinder did likewise but in very different directions.
 
#16
I am not sure which reports you are referencing but the two systems have very little in common. 2E Pathfinder makes some fairly significant changes compared to 1E. Starfinder did likewise but in very different directions.
Starfinder is closer to Pathfinder 1st Edition than Pathfinder 2nd Edition is to Pathfinder 1st Edition.

This has basically got me upset enough with Paizo for not building Starfinder on 2nd Edition Pathfinder rules that I may not invest in Pathfinder 2nd Edition though I am tempted terribly (and, yes, every little excuse helps avoid temptation).
 
#17
By the way the collector's edition looks epic and you can justify ending your 2nd Edition Pathfinder investment with just the Core Rules and Bestiary bundle. That is1000 pages total across just two books. Very tempting, hence, I seek excuses to avoid this. Ha ha ha!
 
#18
Starfinder is closer to Pathfinder 1st Edition than Pathfinder 2nd Edition is to Pathfinder 1st Edition.

This has basically got me upset enough with Paizo for not building Starfinder on 2nd Edition Pathfinder rules that I may not invest in Pathfinder 2nd Edition though I am tempted terribly (and, yes, every little excuse helps avoid temptation).
To clarify, you're upset that they didn't base a game on something that didn't exist at the time?
 
#19
To clarify, you're upset that they didn't base a game on something that didn't exist at the time?
The 2nd Edition Pathfinder draft surely existed before final publication of Starfinder. And Starfinder was rushed out before it was fully baked so much so that Starfinder core books kept collapsing with broken spines on their GenCon premiere. Basically, Starfinder design failure is obvious now that Pathfinder 2nd Edition is published just 2 years after Starfinder so my investment into a rushed product means Paizo cheated the fans so I am reluctant to throw money at Paizo's new product lines again. .
 
#20
The 2nd Edition Pathfinder draft surely existed before final publication of Starfinder. And Starfinder was rushed out before it was fully baked so much so that Starfinder core books kept collapsing with broken spines on their GenCon premiere. Basically, Starfinder design failure is obvious now that Pathfinder 2nd Edition is published just 2 years after Starfinder so my investment into a rushed product means Paizo cheated the fans so I am reluctant to throw money at Paizo's new product lines again. .
Starfinder was released August 2017, so must've been finalised several months before then to have it printed and shipped. The playtest for Pathfinder arrived a year later. They probably had some ideas knocking around or some early drafts but getting upset that a game released 2 years ago is not based on one that hasn't been released yet seems a bit bizarre and unreasonable.
 
Top