• BellyPurpledGerbil@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Calling 5e and pf2e bloated with unnecessary rules, meanwhile Pathfinder and 3.5e are quite literally full of a couple decade’s worth of volumes and modules, in comparison to OSR?

    I don’t know if you’re a boomer, a troll, or both

    • Gutless2615@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      PF2S is bloated with unnecessary rules. If that’s your thing, and I totally get the appeal of having a “wait let’s just see what nethys says abou — Oh apparently there are mechanics for this drug” moment; personally I find it really gets in the way of the session. Rule and move on with the story. Keep the mechanics to what they need. We’re ultimately dealing with a pretty simple underlying system: d20 roll high. All the subterfuge and wordy mechanics don’t really change that at the end of the day you need to roll a d20 and generally do better than a 12 or so to do what you want.

      • -☆-@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel like pf2e has just enough rules to empower the players to the level I like

        The more DM fiat a game has, the more trust I need from my players for things to go smoothly.

        That’s not a bad thing, necessarily, but for me structure is usually good as long as it doesn’t raise the skill floor too high.

        Once I’ve got trust built and feel a bit more experimental, I like Dungeon World or even Universalis

        • elementalguy2@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Same I find it easy to gm and the players have enough of a grip of the system to be able to do something out of left field and I can find a way to make it work with the system so that play is smooth but consistent.

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We’re ultimately dealing with a pretty simple underlying system: d20 roll high

        I highly disagree with this sentiment. You do you, but this is not the general feeling of TTRPG players.

      • BellyPurpledGerbil@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re not just calling it big, they’re calling an elephant big in comparison to a crude 8 year old’s drawing of said elephant (and of course the colouring is not inside the lines because it doesn’t have to conform to the consistent rules of an elephant). What purpose does that serve unless you’re the 8 year old trying to make your drawing sound impressive? See how small and unique my elephant is?

        Meanwhile the whale sitting right next to the elephant is like wow that was a very specific callout on their size when I’m sitting right here. That kid must really hate that elephant.

        It’s quite ridiculous. Wrong or right don’t factor into it.

    • Dice@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      PF2e is a joke. It requires reading the whole rules and planning out a character for multiple levels before making your first character. It gatekeeps the hobby worse than FATAL.

      Yeah, PF1 and 3.5e are bloated as hell. But you didn’t need to read all the feats for all the races before picking human fighter. Plus the people still playing those never used everything that was published.

      • Nerorero@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lmao, I think you confused pf1 and pf2. In pf1 you can build yourself into a corner and create useless characters with ease. In 2e the worst characters are still decent

        • Dice@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nope, I know both. They both suck because of the required over optimization. But pf1 at least didn’t have characters constantly at full hp, which is one of the biggest balance issues.

          • Nerorero@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            ??? Have you ever played 2e? That shit is perfectly balanced. Just because fights are designed around having full hp doesn’t mean the players always are.

            In pf1 you can ruin a character with an uninformed choice, in pf2 you can’t. The gap between minmaxxed or not has become reasonable in my opinion.

            • Dice@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, I’ve played it. And a lot of other games. PF2 balance is only okay and they had to do several annoying things to do it. Like how do you balance a mixed level party in pf2? The system really doesn’t like that, because of it’s number inflation.

            • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              in pf2 you can’t.

              I run pf2e and love it, but I really gotta call this out as bullshit. It’s actually one of the worst things new people can read about the game, imho. I read this a lot as I was learning the system and parroted it to my players. We’re all experienced with TTRPGs, for the record. Despite all the chat from pf2e players that you supposedly cannot ruin a character with bad choices, I assure you it is possible.