I should've listened to you guys
Wizard is fucking terrible in PF2e
I thought it was going to be so much better but after an entire campaign of lackluster impact I've finally fucking had enough

Why aren't Wizards allowed to have strong spells? Why is our only strength peppering a group of enemies for 10-20% of their HP? Why are all of our single-target save-based spells so bad?

My fighter will hit 3 times in a turn at level 10 and regularly deals triple my damage output, and they don't even use resources.
Weren't Wizards supposed to get fucking better with Rival Academies?
PF2e looked like so much fun on paper but why bother when my favorite class is flat out terrible

>>95903147 (OP)
>why bother when my favorite class is flat out terrible
Because there's twenty more.

>>95903147 (OP)
>Pathfinder 2e is fucking terrible.

Fixed that for you. I honestly don't know how it's possible to make a game more mediocre than D&D 5e, but hot damn did Paizo succeed somehow.

>>95904546
Is it terrible or mediocre? It can't be both.

>>95903147 (OP)
Paizo nerfed casters into the ground in PF2e because the NUMBER ONE complaint in PF1e was that casters were overpowered and there was no reason to play anything else.

Also, using magic for damage has always been shit. You want to focus on save-oe-suck control spells that leave your enemies unable to actually play the game. Unfortunately there are better options for this style of play than Wizard, like the Witch, Bard, Oracle, or basically any other caster except maybe Sorcerer. Sorcerer sucks even more horse cock than Wizard, no matter how you build them.

Also, have you tried playing D&D? Wizards are still OP as fuck in D&D 5e.

>>95904556
D&D 5e is mediocre.
Pathfinder 2e is terrible.

>>95904576
I guess Ill just go back to fuckin' 5th edition then
How boring

>>95904576
>casters were overpowered and there was no reason to play anything else.
This is what happens when a system requires you to min/max in order to complete their adventure modules. In any homebrewed campaign this is a non-issue.

>>95907327
>In any homebrewed campaign this is a non-issue.
The levels of cope here are off the charts.

Whats wrong with PF 2e? Maybe im too casual and dont give a shit to notice it, but i want to know.
The only thing i know is they nerfed range attacks

>>95907906
>Whats wrong with PF 2e?
Casters can't shut down encounters with one push of a button.

>>95907906
I wouldn't say there's that much "wrong" with it, it's a fairly tightly designed game, but it's not for everyone. Personally, I'm not a fan of these rigid class-based systems. And they seemed to focus a lot on making everyone roughly as strong as everyone else. Whether or not they succeeded is not for me to say, I'm not a game designer, but it means that a lot of your options as a player are kind of unexciting. The people who get the most out of the game will be the ones who get off on carefully planning every +1 in a build dozens of sessions in advance.

>>95907327
>This is what happens when a system requires you to min/max in order to complete their adventure modules.
>while the topic is fucking pathfinder
ell emm ayy oh, outside of a few gimmick fights where you just lose if you don't have a countermeasure (ie stuff like cloudkill where you just get fucked even if your saves are good), basic bitch power attack fighter tier builds clear the pf1e adventure paths

>>95907976
>The people who get the most out of the game will be the ones who get off on carefully planning every +1 in a build dozens of sessions in advance.
Hey, can you point me toward the many +1s I'm supposed to be carefully planning? Because apparently I'm doing something wrong, Im reading all these feats I want to take and none of them contain +1s.

Did you forget youre talking about PF2e and not the bullshit that is 1e where you have to plan your +1s in advance so you can actually handle higher level enemies. Did you get confused by the phrase, "every +1 matters" which is about combat buffs and debuffs around criticals, and think the game revolved around planning out your +1 feats like 1e?

>making everyone roughly as strong as everyone else
>a lot of your options as a player are kind of unexciting
Theres that "being overpowered compared to another class is the only way to be exciting" shitass bias that regularly shows up in these discussions. Its possible to make classes roughly equal and still have exciting powers within the class.

>>95908164
>>95907952
>Immediate defensive squawking as soon as 2e is criticized in any way

The biggest problem with 2e is that the fanbase are genuine cultists who made a product their identity in a way surpassing even DnDtards. As you can see here.

The discussion was quite polite until these guys unironically got mad that PRODUCT was criticized and started flinging out the passive aggressive bitchfit.

>>95908164
NTA, but there are skill feats that require a specific tier of proficiency, and skill proficiency increases are regimented. So you have to plan for it from the start in order to make First Aid checks every 10min instead of every hour with Continuous Recovery, for example.

In my experience, PF2 (like 4e) is OK on its own, but sucks in comparison. It makes you pick every option, which in theory gives you lots of freedom but in practice requires a lot of up front investment from the player. There are no more "braindead" classes, you have to pre-plan fighters too, so you don't miss something essential at a lower level before more options open up. PF1 by comparison just gives you everything up front, and then asks you what you want to trade away. D&D5e is better for new players because it has specific ways to build your class right in the PHB. Consider that everyone online plays PF2 with Free Archetype, and you may understand how PF2 nickel-and-dimes you for every option. You're not picking which +1s to grab where, you're scrounging for +1s trying to feel like your choices matter.

>>95907906
Everything Pathfinder 2e does, D&D 5e does better and with less math involved, and D&D plays faster. Which is saying something when combat is still a fucking slog in 5e. Still, combat in Pathfinder 2e is like "might as well start watching Lord of the Rings now, because I've got time to finish the whole trilogy now before it's my turn again".

>>95908248
Say something stupid, Im going to call you out. Youre just upset people couldn't get away with bullshiting about PF2e.

>>95908255
>you're scrounging for +1s
Every feat you pick enhances your abilities or gives you new ones. There are no +1s and the idea you are scrounging for them is absolutely retarded. This isn't PF1e where you literally need to take feats whose whole purpose is to literally give you +1 to some stat.

And planning for skill proficiency increases is absolutely not the same thing as planning which +1s you need to take to stay relevant in the game. Its the same thing as 5es (or older editions) level granted class features. Its a built-in thing every fucking class-based system has, and to conflate it with 3.pf's +1 planning is utterly asinine and a desperate attempt at saving face.

People play with Free Archetype because it allows you to multiclass, thus getting more abilities, while not having to sacrifice your class abilities. Nothing more.

Also, there should absolutely never be a brain-dead class in a ttrpg. That way lies laziness and bad habits for certain types of players.

>D&D5e is better for new players because it has specific ways to build your class right in the PHB
There are no ways, there is only the single specific way as presented in the PHB and the single way your subclass will modify it. You dont get options in 5e beyond a few feats not tied to your class.

>>95908933
You didn't really call anything out. You kind of just missed the point and cried that people were insulting the brand that you for some reason made your identity. That's why you're projecting that everyone else is upset when you're the only one who is.

For any neutral anons reading this thread, do not do not DO NOT play 2e. If you have a fried or GM interested in checking it out, steer them away from it whatever it takes. Otherwise you'll turn into a braindead brand warrior drone like this anon right here.

Play anything else. Even DnD 5e. The issues with 2e may not be as immediately obvious but when they hit, they hit hard and you either realize you've wasted months of your life on complete crap or you turn into this anon, massively Stockholm Syndromed and desperately shilling for Nu-Paizo for free to feel like all the time they wasted on a terrible system wasn't a complete sink.

>>95903147 (OP)
Maybe play ACTUAL D&D, not neutered, raped, and ruined wannabe variants?

>>95911872
Pathfinder has always attracted fanboyism. Take off the tin foil hat.
It's a fine game. Not my first choice but I'll play it before 5e any day of the week.

>>95912020
>It's a fine game
Absolutely not.

And not only do you use the term tinfoil hat incorrectly you missed the point. I'm not saying play 5e specifically. I'm saying play ANYTHING else other than 2e. I don't really care what it is. I only want to warn anons not to play 2e.

Play fucking hopscotch with your friend group if you must. Just not Pathfinder 2nd Edition.

>>95908248
I criticise PF2e plenty (staggering amounts of bloat f.e.), but I'm also going to mock people whining that Wizard can't solo combat encounters.

>>95912224
>people whining that Wizard can't solo combat encounters.
This really seems like the end all complaint about the game.
Casters can not replace classes that excel at something mundane with spells, so you need to stay in your lane.
That said, you should expect this from a place that still dickrides 3.5 D&D and compares everything else to that wacky aberration of a game.

>>95908248
No that’s 3.PF tards
t.never played PF2e

>>95908255
>braindead classes
This keeps coming up and I genuine do not believe people that want a braindead classes exist
They’re a strawman invented by casterfags to justify their faggotry

>>95912315
>This really seems like the end all complaint about the game
Oh no, no, no.
I have plenty of complaints, and I never even touched the Wizard class.
But that particular complaint is simply very mockable.

>>95912315
This.
It’s that simple

>>95911996
So 1st edition D&D? Yeah, it's pretty based. Fuck 5e or any WotC edition though.

>>95912315
>This really seems like the end all complaint about the game.
Even within this thread I see several other complaints

>>95907906
The 3 action economy sucks ass. Spellcasting sucks. Fighter is just better than everyone else.

>>95903147 (OP)
Wizards aren't a damage dealer caster, they're the utility belt caster who always has the right spell. But they do have good class archetype if you want to dump utility for damage such as the Rune wizard

Fighters can have bad days where nothing even hits or gets lucky where a MAP -10 crits. Spell casters thanks to degrees of success can still get past defenses reliably, something happens even when the monster passed a save

Would you trade your ability to by-pass defenses nearly always for bonus to hit? Probably not, because that's what the Magus does and everyone makes fun of the gambling addict

>>95908651
PF2E is faster generally because of fewer rounds, 3-5 rounds typically

5E, doesn't matter how smart your party is it's still going to take ten rounds to kill high level monsters spamming cantrips if you don't grant advantage 24/7 or you're playing rocket tag with surprise rounds-- which 5.5e removed

>>95907906
Mostly skill issues, the game is harder than your average modern TTRPG.

The kind of player that never reads will be subpar at the game. They can't handle having to actually analyze items and spells, then gets confused why their character is mid

>>95908164
Pf2efags are so funny. They always think some hairsplitting gotcha over single words in rulings somehow magically saves their game from overall being a piece of shit. That damage control mexican twink on youtube has built an entire career around doing this. As if some “well awkshually” about a single sentence in a rulebook changes their game into actually being enjoyable to play.

>>95912143
>I used tinfoil hat wrong
You're painting PF2E players like a cabal of cultists. Seems pretty conspiratorial to me.

>>95913134
>he doesnt know
Forget a tinfoil hat, you need a new pair of eyes and ears.

>>95912700
Combat in 5e is also 3-5 combat rounds. Stop playing with dogshit dms who artificially boost monster HP to make sure the combat is dramatic.

Having played both games, they have combat roughly the same length but pf2e is a little more rules heavy which makes the game take longer

>>95903147 (OP)
You have to stack dc and be a control wizard everything else sucks ass. Other then some buffs I guess. If your dm doesn't give you dc gear then you ain't doing shit.

>>95912700
>"I have never played DnD 5e, and it's blatantly obvious, but I'm going to make up bullshit about it to defend Shitfinder!"

Just say this next time.

>>95913484
It's like clockwork.

>>95912460
I'd like to turn off my brain and swing a big weapon in melee. "Two handed power attack" was pretty much that in D&D3e. I don't get to do that because real people gravitate towards different things they want their characters to do, and expect me to cover utility/RP. I just want to be a brick =(

>>95908933
You're focusing on the details rather than the overall picture. PF2e is fine on its own, but when compared against other systems - even PF1 - it feels both guideless and restricting. Free Archetype gives you more stuff, yes, but everyone effectively making it a mandatory rule means the base game is barren. And proficiency growing for everyone at the same time means you're always scrambling to maintain parity.

Again, if you are not comparing PF2 to anything and examine it only on its own merits, it is a fairly well-curated ecosystem. Its main downside is the same as in most Dungeons & Derivatives games - the time between picking a character option and finding out you made the wrong choice is too long, and the opportunity to alter your choices too sparse. Early D&D solved this via character death, but with every new iteration "permanent" characters became more and more of a fixture. Trap options aren't necessarily 3e's fault, but they became more obvious then. 4e tried fixing that by balancing everything, which left players complaining all options were the same. 5e tried fixing that by reducing choices, removing "bad" ones to the point you don't even need dedicated healers, which resulted in a more curated but also more restrictive experience. PF2e doesn't seem to care that you build "mistakes" but also expects you to be competent, which is frustrating. It's like the designers assume everyone will scour the net for best builds anyway, so the game just needs to punch you for your bad choices and you'll figure out why they were bad on your own.

>>95913484
Hasbro defense force, please

I DM'd adventure league and ran a 1-20 campaign. The higher level you get, the slower and slower combat gets-- not just in terms of resoling turns but the number of rounds

High level 5E is nearly unplayable RAW and the combat in 5E is slow because of HP bloat, Legendary Resistance, turn loss and horrible encounter balancing guidelines

>>95913641
I find the opposite happens. If your players are trying, you'll find that monsters have no HP, encounters fall apart from crowd control spells that don't involve direct saves, and generally if you don't homebrew you can't challenge a high level party.

>>95912635
What you talking about? 3 action economy is great, you can do whatever you want. Do you preffer the "i attack, i miss, oh well thats all my turn" or "i have to spend 2 rounds to cross this room cause i cant move more than 1 time because..." ??

>>95913871
I concur, the 3 action economy was one of the most praised things by my group when it comes to PF.
Maybe anon means it in the context of spellcasting, lion's share of spells always take 2 actions and that is limiting and takes away the system's advantage of flexibility.

>>95913871
Spellcasting blows chunks in this system and you don’t get to experience any benefits of the 3action system and only experience the issues with everything being an action.

Also, attack then miss is then your turn ends is ultra common in pf2e as each extra attack means you miss much more frequently while in 5e you get extra attack and dont get penalized on your second attack. Also pf2e you have reduced move speeds based on armor worn, so you need to use 2 actions just to get into position

>>95913595
>5e
>Most classes in the meta are relegated to dips where you take a couple levels
>half the levels are nearly unplayable with a level 3-7 goldilocks zone
>damage is the only utility

>4e
>all the classes feel the same since they use the same resources based around le Adventuring Day tm
>hardcoded roles

>3.5e/pf1
>90% of feats/spells are traps or taxes
>need a spreadsheet for calculating epic autochess
>Everyone just runs it RAR

I think pf2e has the healthier metas where all classic roles exist also allowing classes to feel different with unique resources, even if it's not the perfect game it's the best in the market atm when it comes to software and support. It's fucking free.

> finding out you made the wrong choice is too long, and the opportunity to alter your choices too sparse.

You can retain feat/skill in a week, class features in a month; a lot faster with spells like Dreaming Potential or Trainers used to unlock rare/uncommon feats/archetypes. It's advised in the GM Core between adventures loads of downtime. The default rules are very forgiving

I like the freedom to fail over rails, if you don't read you deserve to be subpar and to get gud. I lost many rogues in my days of 3.5 to traps because I didn't read how skills worked, invested in the right saves or picked up the right items. I hate that modern TTRPG'ers feel entitled to just win without even trying why they might suck

>>95914062
>modern TTRPG'ers feel entitled to just win
It’s not a question of wanting to win, it’s one of wanting to be able to play in the first place.

>>95914074
What do you mean?

>>95914053
Sounds like a serious case of get gud, works at my table

>>95914140
You’re describing losing multiple characters to system complexity, then bemoaning that people don’t try to figure out why they suck. But people prefer to learn that they suck through actually playing—interacting with the game—rather than being ejected from it due to character death. If you can’t interact with the system at all because of character-generation choices, you don’t get real feedback on what about your skill set needs to be worked on.

>>95914062
>5e
>Most classes in the meta are relegated to dips where you take a couple levels
This is misleading, and only really applies to Barbarian, which has little incentive to go beyond level 5. They're bottom tier along with Monk and Rogue, but they're fine at lower levels anyway. Warlock, Fighter, and Cleric are far more common dips. They're not really relegated to that, though. There is a rung of Barbarian, Rogue, and Ranger multiclass builds, but those go mix a lot of levels together. Fullcasters either stay single class, or may dip 1-3 levels. Charisma classes usually jump at a chance to dip amongst eachother, but it's not a requirement. The meta heavily favors fullcasters, and multiclassing out of higher level spells and caster level progression is detrimental. I would tell you to single class 9 times out of 10. On the flipside, they typically don't deal stupid amounts of damage like the multiclass builds. Some builds enjoy both the utility of casters, which go far beyond damage, and are able to push single and aoe damage. There's also a discussion on saving throws, but it's more a tier 3 and 4 issue.

>>95914445
If you know what level the campaign is going to end is when you know when to multiclass. But if you choose the wrong dip at the wrong level, or god forbid, choose the wrong starting class

Want to play wizard in 5E optimally? Start as a fighter! Or else you will fail most of your Concentration saving throws and get one-shot by a goblin a level 1

I don't understand how this jank is defended

>>95914579
>Want to play wizard in 5E optimally? Start as a fighter!
You don't actually believe that, right? You could take Resilient or Warcaster, or at least not gimp your spell slot progression by going Artificer.
>I don't understand how this jank is defended
You have the freedom to make whatever dumb choices you want.

>>95914614
2 Fighter dip meta was so bad for full casters they had to errata that you can only use one leveled spell per turn because double fireball was getting to be too much

>>95914682
I'm genuinely not impressed. That's also not an errata, that's 5.5.

>>95914682
>>95914682
Let's say you take 2 levels of Fighter, and 5 levels of Wizard. You gain two 3rd level slots, which you cast with action surge. That's easily 50 damage in a wide area. Now what? You're spent for your 3rd level slots. All you have to fall back on are 2nd level slots and cantrips. A couple of Shatters, maybe. Your adventuring day is killing a group of kobolds, who died in one fireball. Now what do you get from action surge? If you face bosses, then Fireball isn't the answer. If you don't fight enemies that don't bunch up more than 2 or 3, the enemies get jumbled up with your party, or things never appear to line up, you don't have much recourse.
>Meanwhile
Any other dumb idiot wizard got to cast fireball at a way more relevant level, and at level 7 can throw double the amount of fireball. Better yet, they can cast 4th level spells for Polymorph, and this trend of accessing better spells keeps going until level 17.

>>95914864
Legendary Resistance makes control spells shitty for casters to use on bosses and spell scrolls are cheap

>>95914906
NTA Incapacitation tag making your highest level spells do nothing 50% time and literally nothing 45% of the time feels worse than ticking off legendary resistances.

>>95914906
That's a different conversation, but ok.
>Legendary Resistance makes
At face value, I agree it's shit. Some call it a necessary evil, I just think it's bad design. The wizard is better of doing nothing than trying to burn legendary saves, because at least he'll have his spell slots by the time the fighter kills it.
>Control spells are shitty because of this
Not directly. It's not as widespread in the MM as people believe, but it's always - always homebrewed into each boss. I think single target spells aren't really worth it in general, unless they target a weak save. It's better to go for multi-target crowd control for stuff that isn't a boss, or spells don't rely fully on a save to function. There's also a caveat of charm & fear immunity and truesight at higher levels. Still, you have evergreen options like Command, Web, Binding Ice, Mind Whip, Ray of Enfeeblment, Slow, Banishment, Psychic Lance, Telekinesis, Wall of Force, Mass Suggestion, Reverse Gravity, Forcecage, Maze, Prismatic Wall, etc. that shine in different ways. The question is when to use them. In a sense, bosses balance casters out a bit, as damage is the only shit that works. Spells generally don't do great single target damage, shy of eldritch blast or scorching ray + ramp.
>Scrolls are cheap
Not really, and it'll depends on your DM. 5e is notoriously shit at pricing anything. I don't see people making them in 2014. It'll take a week and 500gp for a 3rd level scroll under those rules. That's not happening. Other listed prices have 3rd level spells cost 300gp. Availability can also quickly become a problem. Speaking from experience, you're not throwing more than three scrolls.
It's a different story with a monty hall DM, or 2024 version, but then the gold meta just shifted dramatically in general.

>>95914906
That's a different conversation, but ok.
>Legendary Resistance
At face value, I agree it's shit. Some call it a necessary evil, I just think it's bad design. The wizard is better of doing nothing than trying to burn legendary saves, because at least he'll have his spell slots by the time the fighter kills it.
>Control spells are shitty because of this
Not directly. It's not as widespread in the MM as people believe, but it's always - always homebrewed into each boss. I think single target spells aren't really worth it in general, unless they target a weak save. It's better to go for multi-target crowd control for stuff that isn't a boss, or spells don't rely fully on a save to function. There's also a caveat of charm & fear immunity and truesight at higher levels. Still, you have evergreen options like Command, Web, Binding Ice, Mind Whip, Ray of Enfeeblment, Slow, Banishment, Psychic Lance, Telekinesis, Wall of Force, Mass Suggestion, Reverse Gravity, Forcecage, Maze, Prismatic Wall, etc. that shine in different ways. The question is when to use them. In a sense, bosses balance casters out a bit, as damage is the only shit that works. Spells generally don't do great single target damage, shy of eldritch blast or scorching ray + ramp.
>Scrolls are cheap
Not really, and it'll depends on your DM. 5e is notoriously shit at pricing anything. I don't see people making them in 2014. It'll take a week and 500gp for a 3rd level scroll under those rules. That's not happening. Other listed prices have 3rd level spells cost 300gp. Availability can also quickly become a problem. Speaking from experience, you're not throwing more than three scrolls. It's a different story with a monty hall DM, or 2024 version, so it's a moot point.

>>95915070
That's the default chance for 5E though, regardless of the monster level, since most spells do nothing if they save. A boss level creature with Magic Resistance in 5E likely has 70%+ chance of passing a save, that's not including legendary resistances to fudge any that make it through

Plenty of control spells that don't have incapacitation though in PF2E, you just can't make the BBEG's eyes explode...Unless you have a heightened scroll that is, which is something you ought to do as a caster when shopping for control spells

I think degree of success is much more interesting than hail Mary goofy control spells to overload a bosses' defenses

>>95915152
Control spells suck in 5E because they compete with way better spells that have zero chance of whiffing more often than not. You're limited by one or two concentration spells where haste is competing with a cool spells

>Not really, and it'll depends on your DM. 5e is notoriously shit at pricing anything. I don't see people making them in 2014. It'll take a week and 500gp for a 3rd level scroll under those rules

Consumables are half the price, free if you craft it yourself; if you're a wizard you can make level 1 scroll a day roughly. A party of four casters can make a shitton of scrolls over time

>>95915268
I can tell you don't play 5e.

>>95915158
>I think degree of success is much more interesting than hail Mary goofy control spells to overload a bosses' defenses
It is, but Incapacitation tag takes a shit on it and on the player "foolish" enough to prepare spells that look cool instead of those without the tag.
It's one of the worst mechanics in the game, absolutely miserable.
I know what it's supposed to "fix" but the cure is worse than the disease.

>>95915287
I actually ran Adventure League and also did a sandbox 1-20 Thule as the DM. Also played a hobgoblin wizard as a player, loved crafting scrolls

I will pull out charts and rule citations but I don't think that would change your mind

Control spells are good if you DM doesn't use legendary res or magic resistance, which many jank DMs don't actually read the DMG

>>95915338
Just spend the gold you broke ass wizard

>>95915355
Then you're bad at probabilities, or risk evaluation. I advocated for target weak saves, or multi-targeting, or control spells that just work. I listed numerous examples of spells you should know about, and still you think they're bad because they might not work. It's D&D. You might roll a 1, why attack?

>>95915355
also
>AL
Explains a lot.

>>95915378
You have limited actions, concentrations and spells, if you know a boss has legendary res you'd be dumb to cast any control spells until you counted the charges spent. Basically off the table until the encounter is half way over

Spells that have no save, such as buffs, are way better because of the certainty
This is why wizards are always bullied to cast haste and not cool spells

>>95915394
Yes, the official version of 5e is hot garbage and I did it for the money

Most people should be kissing their DMs ass if they make it work, most 5e players don't realize they're playing an extremely modded version of the game

>>95915408
>Legendary resistance
Yes, we went over this. I'm more concerned about what you think encounters are now. Crowd control spells are meant to split encounters in half. If you don't include minions, or tougher mobs, then yeah - it's kinda worthless against bosses who just say no. But there's something that annoys me more here.
>Boss encounter.
We fight the boss, until I cast Wall of Force or Maze. I tell the cleric to cast Aura of Vitality to heal us up. Others get to pre-buff, drink potions, and ready actions. We then continue to hit the boss till it dies. That was crowd control.

>>95915437
> most 5e players don't realize
They do though. People homebrew the shit out of this game. Meanwhile, the notion that you have forever to print scrolls for free is completely alien to 99% of tables.

>>95915508
Just put the boss in the Wall of Force if they fit and yes Wall Force is good because there is no save but it's one of those spells that makes the DM go 'this is why we never play high level'

>>95915560
Crafting, there are in fact rules on it shockingly

>>95915721
No shit there is rules for making scrolls, but most people aren’t playing AL games with dedicated down time days granted to them for each session they’ve played. Many people aren’t playing games where they have 10 down time days between each session

>>95915766
>downtime doesn't real reeee

Are your games just one be national lampoon movie lol?

>>95915721
>Crafting rules
Yeah, I listed them. They don't fucking work, because no DM is going to let you sit for a week to craft one 3rd level scroll for 500gp. You decided to ignore it in favor of whatever lunacy you had going on in AL.
>This is why we never play high level
Now we're back on schedule, acknowledging that casters are broken because of these crowd control spells that answer anything short of extreme DM fiat. I'll shake hands on damage being the only reliable metric to deal with bosses in the end, letting those multiclass builds shine.

>>95915811
Nobody crafts in 5e prior to 2024, anon.

>>95915823
Consumables are half the price, so it would be 250g for the buying price. 2014 DMG Downtime Activities rules at least, I know there been three different versions since then

This is why I hate 5e

> I'll shake hands on damage

Indeed

>>95915880
>This is why I hate 5e
As long as you hate it for accurate reasons, I don't mind. I'm looking for other systems. My group is going to be stuck on it anyway though.

>>95912315
Right. Because you're in a cult and "anyone who disagrees with us is just <strawman>" repeated over and over and over again is cult like behavior. It's what you do. You can't help yourself.

And it's why I mock 2e fags because you made a genuine cult out of a shitty tabletop system that's somehow even worse than DnD 5e.

>>95912812
> the game is harder than your average modern TTRPG.
Pfffft

This is the lie 2ebabs have to tell themselves every night.

Pathfinder 2e is braindead easy. A dipping bird could play most of the classes after character creation. You do the same actions over and over and over again and you just win if your team has any kind of synergy at all.

2efags genuinely thinking stacking a status malus, a circumstance malus, a circumstance bonus and a status bonus is some high level forbidden tech that no one else understands. Extreme level encounters can be cleared trivially easily with even a modicum of brainpower but go to any 2e community and you'll have players struggling with basic rules interactions and complaining that they can't deal with even the slightest pushback. It's clear who the dullards actually are and why they gravitate to Pathfinder 2e.

It's not that you're smart. You're just the only ones dumb enough to still be playing 2e and I think deep down you know that.

>Just wait till Level 15 play bro. The game gets really complex then bro. Enemies get like super cracked reactions bro!
>Nooo the game is actually super duper complex! Your GM was just taking it easy on you!

Just to say it again, DO NOT play 2e. It turns you into a /v/tard who unironically uses terms like "skill issue" like this anon. To the actual fa/tg/uys here, do you really want to play a game that /v/tard praises as "tactically deep" and gets a superiority complex over?

I played PF2e and had fun.
GM said he also had fun with boss monsters like a wyvern, a giant bat, a hydra, and a dragon.

Do you really want to play a system where the players who enjoy it will post a smug anime girl without a hint of irony?

>>95919290
>'skill issues are a big concern with PF2E'
>Pfffft PF2E players have skill issues

You're so schizo I love it, sounds like you got filtered hard though, like you never got past the beginner's box lol

What anon was implying is that PF2E is easier than what other makes it out to be and players who struggle with say with spell casters have skill issues, because of not reading
For example: You can get past incapacitate by simply using a higher rank of the spell, if you want to be real cheeky with some high level cities around; you could obtain a higher rank scroll than you can normally cast with a Retrieval Prism talisman attuned or on Inscribed robes but you wouldn't know that unless you read

>>95919458
Bosses are fun in PF2E, it's nice being able to make any creature into a boss type by simply changing the math a little bit. I really enjoy making monster in PF2E, a lot of support for customizing and making monsters from scratch

I do recommend PL+2 with a hazard/mooks over a solo PL+4 at lower levels though

>>95919769
Yes

>>95913437
>If your dm doesn't give you dc gear then you ain't doing shit.
Aren't you meant to be able to buy your own preferred magic gear in pf2e?

>>95903147 (OP)
Biggest difference that wizards have to suffer is that now they're the class that has to know how to build their character to be effective. In 5e you just take Fireball. Didn't matter what else you chose.

>>95921331
you mean using spells that arent complete traps and avoiding anything with the incapacitate trait on it?

>>95921331
5E wizards are S-tier for the simple fact they have the best list. The meta of 5E is all prep casters are top with charisma characters following second then everyone else being dip tier. Even after turning all casters into prep in 5.5e, the originals are still the best. The same stinky meta for over a decade

PF2E Wizards are the toolbox control casters, they're extremely good during downtime and exploring. Some schools and archetypes can make wizards more into blasters but that's not their strong suit
Prep casters in general are the best choice for games that are going between different subsystems and modes of play; you can have load outs for all your needs

>>95921287
Yes, if an item is common you should have access to buy from cities of that level and to craft. Uncommon and rare items need special vendors or crafting schematics

>>95921398
>avoiding anything with the incapacitate trait on it?

Heighten your spells noob

>>95925333
>they're extremely good during downtime and exploring
aka the point of the game where it doesnt matter how good anyone is at all

>>95925470
Exploring and Downtime are major parts of PF2E, there are exploring and crafting classes for a good reason

You could in fact run a kingdom building, stealth or even cooking campaign

>>95925566
pf2e is best played as a kingdom management sim?

>>95925618
Kingmaker is very popular if not the most popular published campaign. Groups use their leadership and influence rules fairly often

A lot of the 'useless spells' are for other modes of play other than pure combat

>>95903147 (OP)
Yeah, Paizo overdid it with caster nerfing and restricting in 2e. It went from "press X button to win without any drawback" to spells being like wet farts and casters getting relegated to mostly support. I generally don't like the system, though I recognise that they introduced some good things as well (like the action system or flexible ancestry).
People still seem to not be able to find a way to somewhat balance casters without taking the fun out of them.

For a hobby supposedly thriving on imagination and creativity, it's surprising how little input creators can provide about it.

>>95927898
Just coming off from a 1-20 campaign where we had a psychic chef as one of the oldest and original characters from the start. She didn't give a crap about giving heroism and haste, just liked making Udon noodles and using occult magic to mindfuck people with and summoning spirits; ignoring many of the most meta spells for themed ones but still carried as a controller and blaster with very creative uses of spells through counteracting

Casters are not weak and are highly valued in the meta, but they're harder to play.
That's the price to pay if you want spells to also be balanced verses players, having tanks being more valuable than summons and playable at mid & high level outside of going full 4E

To be a good caster you have to know itemization, counteracting, focus spell selection, knowledge statistics, minion rules, trait interactions and generally more advanced combat tactics. It's a steep learning curve-- if you're good at it you can be a big brained superstar of the group and you deserve it

the fact that magic weapon is the only spell worth casting at lv 1-2 as a wizard in 2e is honestly the biggest indicator of how terrible the system is for casters: It's the most boring thing imaginable

>>95928697
>Casters are not weak and are highly valued in the meta, but they're harder to play.
lol, its literally just paying attention to monsters and targeting the weak save / buffing allies

>>95929108
true

>>95929108
>Magic Weapon
You got bullied by newbies or the ranger for you using a quad tradition spell lol

Conductive Weapon is way better for Arcane and Primal, gives you +1 weapon and a shocking rune along with bonus 1d12 damage to metal armor; absolutely bonkers if you give it to an agile weapon user that will zap up to two other creatures on a crit

If you need good focus spells or rank 1-2 I could list a few dozen for Arcane

>>95929419
See above as an example why players struggle with magic, if you didn't understand what a Shock rune was you'd think Runic Weapon/Magic Weapon is better

the thing that turned me off of PF2e is that it feels like no class has anything special to it, like removing Paladin disease immunity
like Skyrim, everything is balanced against each other, you aren't allowed to be special

>>95930169
No you dip, the fact that the only good thing you can do as a spell caster is cast shock/runic weapon at early lv until your allies start getting their own magic is the issue. The fact that there might be a situational difference from runic v shock matters not for the play style of the wizard

>>95935873
Sounds like you got bullied because the party thought you were too dumb to understand how to analyze spells, so they asked for buffs for themselves instead wanting to spend money on potency crystals and runes

lol

>>95935676
>Skyrim
>Paladin

Paladin doesn't exist in PF2E? You can play as an Exemplar or Champion in PF2E if you want to be the extra special divine fighter though

Mike Mearls said 5E was modeled after Skyrim like how 4E was modeled after warcarft

Never ran anything published except the beginner box here and had a very easy time constructing my own adventures. Most discussion online seems to be informed by player experiences in adventure paths that I don't relate to as either GM or Player.

Like most games you will get out what they put in.

>>95936948
Esl?

Comparing casters verse bosses

>3.5e/pf1
>Spell Resistance on all spells, even mooks with templates can have it
>Entire mid and high level spell meta is around by-passing SR
>20% (SR + save); ~40% after taxes
>Surprise rocket-tag meta; Pre-combat summons, buffstacking, no-save spells

>4e
>Adventuring Day tm
>No Vancian magic, everyone has not-magic
>Solos have universal bonus to saves +5/+2, abilities to remove debuffs/gain actions
>Many dailies you have to hit AC and get past a save
>16% 45% partial, RIP if not a Controller
>Daily-Dumpy attrition nova meta

>5e
>Adventuring Day tm
>Legendary Resistance on bosses, DM just fudges 3 rolls lulz
>Magic Resistance also exists oh god
>just use spells that don't have saves, duh
>spam the same three S-tier spells
>Success: 30%; 5-15% if they have magic res. 0% for 3 saves
>DPR attrition meta

>PF2E
>bosses are just higher level monsters that can crit the shit out of you
>spells do something even on a successful saves
>naughty action denial spells are labeled with the Incapacitate trait, up degree of success
>5% crit, 20% full effect; partial effect: ~50%
>Peal and crit meta

I only dislike casters at low level. My experiences have been pretty positive once there's more spell slots to play with. Wrath runelord has been very fun even after john paizo nuked double staff charges.

The other magic traditions and classes (other than psychic) have been powercrept pretty hard though in comparison to wizard.

>>95942006
It's not bad at all in PF2E compared to other systems, mostly thanks to summons/companions, degrees of success, unlimited cantrips and focus spells.
I grew up playing casters that died to rats and had to use crossbows for the first few levels because level-0 spells had limited use

1-2 Low-level casters in PF2E want a good focus spell or use a summon to carry for those first couple levels. You have to be a bit creative with the mundane actions, items and raw ability scores like all classes though

3-4 your damage cantrips dice are ahead of damage striking runes, you get rank 2 spells and you get another feat which is often a focus spell. Life is pretty good as everything starts coming online

5-6 is hard for casters if you're fighting higher level enemies, because their DCs get bumped +2 after level 7 which happens to be when you get your prof bump. Life is real good for fighting mooks and mids now with some serious AoE

Once you hit level 7 you get level 4 spells and a casting prof +2 bump, you survived low level caster gratz

>>95904576
>Sorcerer sucks even more horse cock than Wizard, no matter how you build them.
Sorcerer is better than wizard in almost every single way and if you can't make a powerful character out of the class it just means you suck at the game and your opinion on casters isn't worth hearing

>>95943406
>if you can't make a powerful character out of the class it just means you suck at the game

Many such cases

>>95907871
It's true though, any decent GM will know how to supplement a mechanically underperforming player with greater returns on his progression. Adhering to a prebaked module removes that level of agency.

>>95920234
>You're so schizo I love it, sounds like you got filtered hard though.
Reminder that 2e players will post things like this completely without any kind of irony. They're basically indistinguishable from /v/ermin. How can you say I'm a schizo when your only counterargument is to literally start shrieking in /v/tard terms? "S-Schizo! S-Skill Issue!" It's fucking pathetic and shows how underdeveloped your brain needs to be to unironically enjoy 2e.

No trog, your game isn't hard or complex in the slightest. It's a beer and pretzels game made for pseudointellectuals like yourself who think you're somehow above normal DnD.

Also I totally called your Beginner's Box cope in advance lol and you still barreled right into it.

Guess that shows the staggering brainpower 2e fags work with.

>You could obtain a higher rank scroll than you can normally cast with a Retrieval Prism talisman attuned or on Inscribed robes
Crawling through the magic item lists isn't intelligence btw. You seem to have the mistaken belief that it is.

>>95938437
>Paladin doesn't exist in PF2E?
2e fags really are subhuman autists.

>>95938437
>Mike Mearls said 5E was modeled after Skyrim like how 4E was modeled after warcarft
>3.5 was actively called Diablo Edition by players
>never heard this said by the players about 4e, only by it's detractors and this apocryphal account by a sidelined dev
If you have an interview with Mearls, the guy who ruined 4e, where he said this, I will accept this, to the point of transcripting the link.

>>95920234
>Bosses are fun in PF2E, it's nice being able to make any creature into a boss type by simply changing the math a little bit.
Templating has existed for decades. It is not novel or unique to pf2.

>>95950109
Using the word paladin is newfag alert and describing PF2E as skyrim is lmao

Obvious no-game

>>95950759
He did like a dozen interviews, you can find the full interview in the description
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGFHTAe-wnc

But why is it shocking that they copy trends in RPG games? I'm more surprised 5.5e wasn't just BG3 copy & paste

is Magus any good in 2e?

>>95952969
>>95920234

2e is Skyrim though

>I made a product my whole identity and get unironically upset when people criticize it

lol

>>95904576
>You want to focus on save-oe-suck control spells
did you read that line in the index about incapacitation effects?

>>95953750
The modern Paizo balance team are monkeys so there are still really powerful Save or Suck control effects that just have no incap for whatever reason. Like Slow.

So you just pick the bread and butter control spells that everyone else does and pretend you're having fun.

And then get hyperdefensive in threads like these when 2e gets criticized because of Sunk Cost and Stockholm Syndrome.

I'm playing an intimidation fighter, any advice?

>>95953485
>>95954013
>Any advice
Don't play 2e

>>95954013
be a catgirl and take the hissyfit feat to scare illiterate people

>>95953485
Yeah, Magus is good just kinda of a gambling character with a very tight action econ

>>95954013
If you want to play up what fighters can do better I recommend Fear Gems+Intimation Strike since Barbarians can't typically use Talismans due to rage. Crits can give frightened 3 with a fear gem, low key crazy good

>>95954831
Do you have to invest in charisma to make Intimidation Strike worthwhile?

>>95955552
Nope, it's based on your attack if it hits or crits

>>95953986
I love how different tables in PF2E have different metas but Slow is a noobtrap spell at most tables. Slow debuff is baby-tier rider effect control

It being a 30 foot range single target fort save makes it instant B tier, the save that's the hardest to debuff, degree upgrades and typically highest-- might as well be an incapacitate. Slow is good for large group of elites and bosses who have shitty fort saves, which is kinda rare at higher levels as anything with a low fort save is going to be flying or ranged

If you open even with a stun 1 or Laughing Fit on a boss your entire party can close in without fear of a reactive strike while entering reach; stun 1 on round 1 could end a fight that even denies first round triggers if you went before them

How people think wizards are bad in PF2E boggles my mind. I still am breaking games by level 12, and past that I have been banned from two tables for just one-shotting entire encounters, doing hundreds of damage per turn, or straight just deleting problematic stuff with wizards.

They aren't on the level of PF1E but damn they are still just annihilating things.

>>95903147 (OP)
The only class I thought PF2 did well was the Magus. Though, I dropped PF2 and 5e for ACKS Worlds without Number, and been loving what I been reading on DC20

>>95961835
How are you one-shotting encounters?

>>95961835
>How people think wizards are bad in PF2E boggles my mind

Mostly newbies that never make it past the first few levels and use ABP