Only I din't liked PF2E? And don't wish a move to 2e?

I just don’t get. Paizo got a massive success when WoTC decided to push they generic wow clone : tabletop edition AKA D&D 4E. Even outsold D&D, a thing which never happened on the history of TTRPG. A decade later, they decided to … Mix 4E and 5E.

IMO they should made PF2E more akin to D&D 2E. Picking the good aspects from 2E(more immersion, higher lethality) and good aspects from 3E(player customization, simpler math), not taking a lot of stuff from 4e and 5e.

So far, what I disliked most about Pf2e is the low lethality. n PF2e, everything deals less damage while enemies and players has way more hp. Finger of death only deals 70 damage. CR 10 creatures like a Giant flytrap can soak 3 finger of death spell, failing the save 3 times. While in 1E, Finger of Death casted at lv 15 can OHK a Giant flytrap. Why not rename it to finger of minor annoyance?

I really miss the 2E times, where Vecna, a demigod lich had 150 hp but even dealing 1 pt of damage to him was hard. Past level 9, you get almost no hit points. Having 3 digit hp was rare even for dragons. And in Dark Sun? Certain kits like Shadow Wizards could die while preparing spells at low levels since they had too little hp and contacting the other dimension was too risky.

Pf2e also ruined most of my favorite spells. And lacks a lot of interesting spells from PF1e. Examples :

  • Boneshake
  • Boneshatter
  • Ice prison
  • Ice prison ,mass
  • sirocco
  • Tsunami
  • Acid fog
  • Death Clutch
  • Animate dead / Create undead / Create greater undead
  • (…)

Pf2e also fells too “gamey” and too little concerned with making game mechanics and lore in line. The few “summon” spells are final fantasy style “”"“summons”""". They aren’t summons, are just attacks. You can summon a draconic legion but it lasts only one round. That is so awful. I would rather a “Wyvern Call” from Baldur’s Gate 2 spell which actually summons a wryven creature instead of just a “summon as a attack”.

All action economy of Pf2e is just awful IMO. To get the bonus of having a shield, you need to “raise shield”, which is nonsensical.

If the next OwlCat game becomes Pathfinder 2e, I will buy it and play it? Yes. But I will not love like I love the 1e games. I have over 850 hours on kingmaker. Already finished PF:WoTR and will wait for the DLCs to re play.

At moment, I’m in chapter 5 of my unfair Thassilonian necromancer run. If kingmaker was 2e, I would probably like it way less. I know that is just my opinion, if Paizo and OwlCat decides 2e, there is nothing to do about it.

And before anything, yes, I love necromancy. My avatar and nick is a tribute to a dark lord of Ravenloft. The lich mythic path is one of the most popular in WoTR and IMO OwlCat should use a ruleset which allows PCs to play as a necromancer effectivelly.

Your entire post is literally “WAHHH 2E ISN’T 3.5 WITH DIFFERENT PAINT.”

You’ve clearly got no understanding of game design. Grognard up in here wanking because 2E is it’s own game with numerous, intentional changes to create a different play experience.

I’ll give you the tldr of what 2E avoids:

The Harsk Vs Adowyn power chasm ((Harsk and Adowyn are the iconic ranger and iconic hunter, and both fulfill the same party role. Adowyn is head and shoulders above Harsk in combat efficacy. They are a prime, apples to apples example of potential power difference in pf1e PCs))

Player Builds that out-of-the-bestiary monsters only hit on 20a, and only fail saves on a 1.

Player builds that only miss out-of-the-bestiary monsters on a 1, or that bestiary monsters only save vs on a 20. ((Both of the above are easily possible even in the most reasonable groups)).

Mechanics that remove a combatant from the table with one dice roll. ((These effects are fundamentally unhealthy, regardless of which side of the gm screen they are being deployed against.))

Backpack wars ((Most dangerous effects in 1e / 3.5 have a counter consumable. This creates a binary of: if you have X item you ignore Y effect, if not you just lose)).

The ten minute adventuring day

Endgame spellcasters being reality altering gods who run the table.

The fact that you are completely unable to realize any of this in your wall of text crying because you can’t rehash your past ttrpg exploits means that all of 2E’s “problems” you’re complaining about is actually just you being too narrowminded to experience something other than the dynamics and mechanics you’re accustomed to.


It’s not a matter of roleplay immersion that other editions did better. It’s a matter of you being butthurt because you can’t mix, dip and feat-chain a godmode character that oneshots things. The spells you mentioned either cause massive destruction to the environment ((tsunami)), completely cripple a large area of combatants ((sirocco)), or removes one or more combatants with a single failed save ((icy prison / mass, deathclutch.))

Your critique of 2E as a system seriously boils down to “my wizard isn’t a god anymore”, and you fluffed it up with a generic mention of action economy and RP immersion to make it seem like you might actually be putting thought into your post.

Strawman. My critique is that PF2e is too similar to D&D 5E and D&D 4E which are the weakest editions IMO.

So, not liking a edition which lacks lethality and cool things to do is not understanding game design?

What is the problem? this mechanics exists not only in D&D/Pathfinder but also in Vampire : The Masquarede, Vampire : The Requiem, GURPS, Mage : The ascension a lot of games has save or else mechanics. And obviously, the tons of retroclones too.

If the players are creating pun pun builds, is not reason to destroy the game.

I personally only allow multiclass when it makes sense. For example, in 3.5E, getting a level as a Red Wizard of Thay should require going into thay, doing the exams and paying the tuitation fees, doing the exams and so on. Should’t be something which your mage in waterdeep who never even has been into thay could multiclass into.

Same for any class/multiclass combo.

OVer 99% of campaigns don’t reach close to “end game”. Most adventure paths are lv 1~15. And everything that a PC can cast, a NPC can cast.

There are no rule saying “stop time, wish and similar spells can only be cast by the player”.

1 - Wizards was never even close to “Gods”.
2 - I treasure immersion a lot in RPG’s.

Can you imagine if in a SCI FI movie they introduce a disintegration weapon which everyone says that it can reduce stuff into dust but when it is used vs the bad guy, the bad guy by no reason soaks multiple disintegrate beams?

Responding on phone. Enjoy brevity:

Save or lose is toxic. Very few people enjoy such mechanics. Citing their prevalence doesn’t make them healthy. There’s absolutely nothing fun about losing a pc with a long running, complex story to a single low dice roll. Just like it’s equally antifun for the climactic end fight of a story arc to end round 1 action 1 because the party’s spellcaster won initiative. Rocket Tag is bad mmmkay.

You don’t have to punpun to trivialize the bestiary. You just have to spend a small amount of gold on things like lesser extend rods and pearls of power for low level high potency buffs. The fact that you think punpunnery or hyperregional archetypes is needed to trivialize the 1e bestiaries is laughable.

God-tier spellcasting starts at 6th lvl spells, which are available as early as level 11. When I say “late game”, I mean levels 11-15. The spot where most long running campaigns fall apart. You don’t need time stop delayed fireball onions and other chicanery for casters to take over the table.

Your scifi example is garbage. Obviously the disintegration beam wasn’t powerful enough. Much like your finger of death can erase a lvl 1 peasant, but only wilts an on-level threat. Hell, you aren’t even appreciating the true power of 2e finger of death: It’s an execute. If FoD reduces a pc to 0 hp, they’re instantly dead. No dying value, nothing. It’s also a basic fort save, so a crit fail = double damage A crit fail is a fail by 10 or more. This means that, potentially, finger of death can instantly kill a pc with 140-180 hp depending on heightening

Before you further misinterpret:

I play both 1E and 2E very frequently. 1E is actually my preferred system. 2E is it’s own completely different beast with it’s own merits and faults. I’m shooting your points down because all you’re doing is grognarding and complaining about 2E as if 1E is some perfect system where everything is incredible.

There are ways to bring him back to life. Also, if you are going into a dragon hunting, it should be dangerous with death coming at any moment.

Dark Sun for 2E recommended creating multiple characters. And start at lv 3. Because you will gonna lose multiple characters.

In 3.5E, deathward, a tier 4 spell can make you immune to wail of the banshee, a tier 9 spell. Have the boss play smart. Also, even if the din’t play smart, the caster would have to win the initiative, use a spell which he is not prepared against, win vs his spell resistance, win vs his save and no one else would be able to dispel this effect on him.

This things should’t be available everywhere. Problem solved.

Then why everyone who is soloing Pathfinder Kingmaker, the CRPG adaptation, not the AP in the unfair difficulty are playing as Vivisectionist and similar classes?

That is not my point. My point is that if something does X in lore, it should does X in game mechanics.

It is certainly better than 2E. I never said that 1E is perfect. I would prefer if casters had d4 hit points like AD&D, stop gaining a lot of hp past lv 9 like AD&D, if plate armor had increased AC vs slashing damage and reduced AC vs blunt weapons such as a mace, if casters was more specialized and was more drawbacks for certain caster options.

For eg, a sorcerer of white/silver draconic bloodline can cast fire snake and sirroco spells despite it making no sense for someone who draws his power from his white/silver dragon blood. He also gets a lot of amazing buffs which his ancestors get but none of the drawbacks like weakness vs fire. Same with undead bloodline sorcerers. A lot of undead resistances and benefits, no drawbacks. Wizards, IMO they should focus in a school of magic or a theme of research, so we would get Cryomancers, Pyromancers, Illusionists, Necromancers, Conjurers, Transmuters, Abjurers and so on. Each specialization should come with drawback.

Eg - Pyromancers can’t learn spells with cold or water descriptor and must chose 3 prohibited schools. Necromancers must chose 3 prohibited schools and can’t learn evocation spells except those with cold descriptor and have a penalty in social checks = to half of the necromancer level.


Anyway, OwlCat target audience is people who like relative old school RPG’s. I really wish that OwlCat will maintain 1E or adapt any retroclone over going 2E in the next game. Obviously, is just my wish, I have no say in the matter. I loved both owlcat games so much.Just wish that the enemy had a better AI.

The Pathfinder system only exists to scoop up DnD players who wanted more 3.5 after 4e came out, so…

Exactly. Paizo target audience is old school RPG fans. This alterations in Pathfinder would’t appeal to that target audience. Simple as that. Any retroclone > PF2e