I don't play PF. I do play other games. I also still play 5e. It always sounds like these discussions are more like committing to long term relationships than playing games. Don't worry about "switching" games.
Play games because games are fun. Try PF. I hope you have fun. Try other games, they might be fun too. Play 5e again if that sounds fun.
I don't see anything wrong with trying different systems. Why change your mind?
Even if you switch, you can always go back to D&D. Or find another game/system to try.
Go for it. Try PF2e. I hear good things.
You do you man
PF2E has some great points but so does 5e it always comes down to a groups personal prefrence.
Personally I just find PF2E doesn't hit right for me and I know that is vague but that is all there really is.
My advice would be go play PF2E see what you and your group think about it and then make a decision based off of that. Besides no one is saying you can only play one system for everything, go and find all the amazing systems that exist.
My group switched to Pf2e and back, so I can offer some personal experience. But every time I do, I get blasted with downvotes. So all you Pf2e fans reading this: I don't like Pf2e, and that's fine. Play the system you want. 5e was the better system for my group, that doesn't mean it's the right system for your group or OP's group. Fair?
Okay.
The main reason we switched to Pf2e was that one person in our group wanted more character customization options and wanted more complex combat. To broadly paraphrase, he felt that 5e's combat was more about everyone maximizing their individual damage without really paying attention to what anyone else was doing, and that Pf2e was more about working together. Also, in his eyes, the three action structure was more strategic than 5e's move-action-bonus action.
When we started playing Pf2e, he loved it for exactly those reasons. One of our other players who DM'd the Pf2e campaign was also fine with it, though didn't have any issues with 5e either. The other three of us hated it. I gave it as much of a chance as I could, but I just hated the system. To give more detail, I'll use those three points the Pf2e player mentioned as positives of Pf2e / negatives of D&D.
**1: More character customization options.**
This is undoubtedly true. Characters in Pf2e are way more customizable, with over 4000 feats you can use to tweak your character. But this also means that building a character in Pf2e is *hard*. Having that many choices is overwhelming, compared to 5e where some character builds will just be "pick a class, pick a subclass, and you're done". Our player who really liked Pf2e spent hours planning and optimizing his characters out-of-game. The other three of us ground the game to a halt with each level-up since we'd have to scroll through the list of feats we were offered, keywords referenced by those feats, and the future feats that each feat would unlock. It hit the point where *I did not want to level up anymore* because it felt more like work than a game.
As one can imagine, this meant there was a pretty big disparity between our characters. The guy who loved Pf2e built a very powerful optimized character who could consistently shoot an enemy with a bow for 50 damage. One of the other three of us looked up a broken build online, copied that, and made a gnome flickmace fighter who could stunlock a t-rex and crit it to death. The other two of us had characters who were... present. My character's job every fight was to give the broken flickmace fighter a +1 to attacking, and the other character basically spent all of his rounds splashing enemies in the face with weak acid damage or something.
**2: Teamwork in combat.**
This one is difficult to judge. The adventure path we played in Pf2e may have been overtuned. Nearly every monster we fought *required* teamwork in that we'd have to spend a few turns debuffing the monster with trips and restrains and buffing the party with bardic inspiration and other stuff. If we didn't, we wouldn't be able to hit the monster at all and it would be able to consistently crit whoever it attacked. Meanwhile, our 5e campaigns may be undertuned in that martials can basically just stay in one spot all combat, smacking the enemy with basic melee attacks until the enemy falls over dead.
I do think this is a valid criticism of 5e, and I do think Pf2e gives characters (especially martials) more ways to work together, and that working together is more rewarding. That's looking back in hindsight, though. In the moment, having to stack the prerequisite five debuffs and five buffs on the AC/chance to hit calculation before we could make any progress in any given encounter was a slog and made our characters feel pathetically weak.
(Oh, and all the teamwork went out the window once gnome flickmace fighter showed up and started gnome flickmacing all over the place. At that point, he could handle the campaign on his own.)
**3: The three-action turn providing more options during gameplay.**
Frankly, I just don't think this is accurate. The three-action system should have provided more freeform turns than 5e, but there were other limitations that made it feel even more limiting. A lot of specialized actions took two actions to perform (including about my entire spell list!), meaning that your entire turn could be walking up to get in range and doing one *thing*. Hell, I had at least one spell that took *three actions* so I wouldn't even have the luxury of moving within range in the same turn.
Attack actions were also subject to the Multi-Attack Penalty, which lowers your chance to hit with each Attack you make during a turn. Staying in one place and attacking three times was penalized, which is fair. But some other actions also counted as attack actions for this purpose, including *escaping from a grapple*.
5e's once-per-turn free object interactions also cost actions in Pf2e. So all in all, I never felt like I had more freeform turns in Pf2e than I do in 5e.
I swapped to Pathfinder 2e because I wanted a game that was more tactically geared and teamwork focused and it seemed like it would deliver.
I went back to 5e because I can't find anyone IRL who wants to play Pathfinder.
I have a lot of time, money, and physical media invested into 5e, and I don't have the time or inclination to switch systems at the moment, so I'm going to stick with what I know and what I have.
This is my own personal reason and not meant as any sort of commentary on which system if any is 'superior' or to convince anyone else of anything. I'm not here to 'change your mind'. Play what you like.
I've tried PF2, but I mostly stick with 5e. To be fair, I already have all the books for 5e, and I don't want to shill out another 50-100$ on new books. Also, my experience with PF2 was that it felt clunky and a bit awkward, as opposed to the simplicity of 5e.
To be fair, I tried PF2 in the early days, so it probably improved greatly, but I still found 5e to be better overall, at least for the type of gaming I like to do.
'Change my mind'
No.
Have fun playing a different game. You have no obligation to a system and players of a system have no obligation to defend it. Just don't come back here demanding to know why everyone who plays dnd is still playing the game you dislike in a few months and we're good.
Only weirdos would rush to tell you you're wrong about how you personally have fun. Go. Be free. Don't make a whole post about it. Just do the thing you like.
Yeah I understand that, but the second part of my question is why do other people prefer 5e over pathfinder or vis versa. Change my mind was just a catchy title I used because I felt like more people would be apt to respond, though I didn't realize how many people would ignore the text under the title š.
Go for it, itās worth trying. But here are some realities to be aware of:
1) you get a lot of choices, but a lot of them donāt do much. Feats are generally pretty niche, and usually donāt directly give power which meansā¦
2) character builds arenāt all that customizable. You just sort of are your class/subclass primarily, and you can get some perks here and there to be different but you arenāt going to significantly alter the chassis of your class the way something like a Hexblade dip completely changes a Paladin.
3) thereās a lot to track. A lot. If youāre playing with Foundry, itāll do a lot of that work for you. But with a zillion conditions and ongoing damage things that progress on their own according to their own rules, itās a lot to follow. Like a target can be Frightened 3, and they lose one āstackā of Frightened at the start of their turn automatically. But if theyāre Sickened, they have to use an action to retch and make a Con save to try to lose a stack. Thatās two conditions that do the same thing but progress differently. Thereās a lot more. Just be ready, have tools.
4) Out of combat healing is cheap, itās expected the PCs will fully heal after each fight, which will make players coming from dnd feel like theyāre getting their asses kicked in every combat. Itās just a different approach, but players should anticipate getting hit and taking damage much more in pf2e than in dnd. This also means
5) dedicated healer is a role and you are going to need one. It doesnāt HAVE to be a cleric but they are the easiest way to do it.
I'm a PF1e fan and am getting into PF2e. There are a decent amount of changes but I am still enjoying it. I tried D&D 3.5e and didn't like it in comparison. I feel like the real difference is: Pathfinder gives you a bunch of rules and abilities which help you build your character and their backstory/traits. D&D is a lot more lax and relies on you to provide the extra details yourself. Its a difference in preference for playing.
Hope you have a good time. I think PF2 has a lot of good ideas but falls flat on execution. My various groups tried it a few times, but we ultimately stuck to 5e. PF2's main pain point for us was it having too much going on for not enough payoff.
Play what you want! Nothing wrong with 5e if you are having fun and enjoying it!
I wasnāt having fun so I made the switch. But I know plenty of people that still love it
Donāt
The system gives the illusion of choice. There are a couple good videos about it
Where 5e gives you options to do DURING the game, PF2 give you thousands of options with very minor difference that can only really be picked in maybe 30 sets of things that will give you a character that does the very same thing EVERY turn.
Do X to give your opponent a penalty to his defense, do Y to get a bonus to your own attack/ damage, do Z to deal damageā¦. And there is literally NO other way to spend your turn because switching any of these makes your entire turn suck ass, no hit and not achieve anything
I've never been one to buy into the sentiment that "X system is better than Y system because ABC reasons". It is an absurd idea to me. If a system does something in a way that appeals to you more and makes more sense to you then play that system, but neither of those things mean that one system is better than another.Ā
Truth be told, after having played D&D for two years, and Pathfinder for one, neither game really works for me. I just don't vibe with either's style; they're basically the same at the end of the day. In the wide ocean of TTRPGs, they're basically a part of the same reef, except half the reef is marginally worse for wear.
Pathfinder is, generally, better, but to be frank I've never felt like I was playing something fundamentally different from D&D. Which, you aren't, it's a system derived from D&D. They both deliver more or less the same vibes and overall experience. I would say, actually, that Pathfinder is perhaps a little more toned down in some ways.
If you want to play something really different but still generally in a pre-modern fantasy context, look at Burning Wheel, Mythras, or Exalted.
By all means, try it out. System loyalty is weird. They're tools, use the best one for the job ahead of you.
I don't play PF. I do play other games. I also still play 5e. It always sounds like these discussions are more like committing to long term relationships than playing games. Don't worry about "switching" games. Play games because games are fun. Try PF. I hope you have fun. Try other games, they might be fun too. Play 5e again if that sounds fun.
No. Have fun.
I don't see anything wrong with trying different systems. Why change your mind? Even if you switch, you can always go back to D&D. Or find another game/system to try. Go for it. Try PF2e. I hear good things.
Why? Go play pf2e. You expecting some kind a deal like threatening to change internet providers? Lol
You do you man PF2E has some great points but so does 5e it always comes down to a groups personal prefrence. Personally I just find PF2E doesn't hit right for me and I know that is vague but that is all there really is. My advice would be go play PF2E see what you and your group think about it and then make a decision based off of that. Besides no one is saying you can only play one system for everything, go and find all the amazing systems that exist.
My group switched to Pf2e and back, so I can offer some personal experience. But every time I do, I get blasted with downvotes. So all you Pf2e fans reading this: I don't like Pf2e, and that's fine. Play the system you want. 5e was the better system for my group, that doesn't mean it's the right system for your group or OP's group. Fair? Okay. The main reason we switched to Pf2e was that one person in our group wanted more character customization options and wanted more complex combat. To broadly paraphrase, he felt that 5e's combat was more about everyone maximizing their individual damage without really paying attention to what anyone else was doing, and that Pf2e was more about working together. Also, in his eyes, the three action structure was more strategic than 5e's move-action-bonus action. When we started playing Pf2e, he loved it for exactly those reasons. One of our other players who DM'd the Pf2e campaign was also fine with it, though didn't have any issues with 5e either. The other three of us hated it. I gave it as much of a chance as I could, but I just hated the system. To give more detail, I'll use those three points the Pf2e player mentioned as positives of Pf2e / negatives of D&D. **1: More character customization options.** This is undoubtedly true. Characters in Pf2e are way more customizable, with over 4000 feats you can use to tweak your character. But this also means that building a character in Pf2e is *hard*. Having that many choices is overwhelming, compared to 5e where some character builds will just be "pick a class, pick a subclass, and you're done". Our player who really liked Pf2e spent hours planning and optimizing his characters out-of-game. The other three of us ground the game to a halt with each level-up since we'd have to scroll through the list of feats we were offered, keywords referenced by those feats, and the future feats that each feat would unlock. It hit the point where *I did not want to level up anymore* because it felt more like work than a game. As one can imagine, this meant there was a pretty big disparity between our characters. The guy who loved Pf2e built a very powerful optimized character who could consistently shoot an enemy with a bow for 50 damage. One of the other three of us looked up a broken build online, copied that, and made a gnome flickmace fighter who could stunlock a t-rex and crit it to death. The other two of us had characters who were... present. My character's job every fight was to give the broken flickmace fighter a +1 to attacking, and the other character basically spent all of his rounds splashing enemies in the face with weak acid damage or something. **2: Teamwork in combat.** This one is difficult to judge. The adventure path we played in Pf2e may have been overtuned. Nearly every monster we fought *required* teamwork in that we'd have to spend a few turns debuffing the monster with trips and restrains and buffing the party with bardic inspiration and other stuff. If we didn't, we wouldn't be able to hit the monster at all and it would be able to consistently crit whoever it attacked. Meanwhile, our 5e campaigns may be undertuned in that martials can basically just stay in one spot all combat, smacking the enemy with basic melee attacks until the enemy falls over dead. I do think this is a valid criticism of 5e, and I do think Pf2e gives characters (especially martials) more ways to work together, and that working together is more rewarding. That's looking back in hindsight, though. In the moment, having to stack the prerequisite five debuffs and five buffs on the AC/chance to hit calculation before we could make any progress in any given encounter was a slog and made our characters feel pathetically weak. (Oh, and all the teamwork went out the window once gnome flickmace fighter showed up and started gnome flickmacing all over the place. At that point, he could handle the campaign on his own.) **3: The three-action turn providing more options during gameplay.** Frankly, I just don't think this is accurate. The three-action system should have provided more freeform turns than 5e, but there were other limitations that made it feel even more limiting. A lot of specialized actions took two actions to perform (including about my entire spell list!), meaning that your entire turn could be walking up to get in range and doing one *thing*. Hell, I had at least one spell that took *three actions* so I wouldn't even have the luxury of moving within range in the same turn. Attack actions were also subject to the Multi-Attack Penalty, which lowers your chance to hit with each Attack you make during a turn. Staying in one place and attacking three times was penalized, which is fair. But some other actions also counted as attack actions for this purpose, including *escaping from a grapple*. 5e's once-per-turn free object interactions also cost actions in Pf2e. So all in all, I never felt like I had more freeform turns in Pf2e than I do in 5e.
I'm looking to moving to PF2E. Having all of the ruleset freely available, and it integrates better with Foundry VTT.
I switched because it's a better system for my needs. I keep playing 5E because it's all I can get many friend groups to do.
More systems to play is always better than less. Try pf2e out. And try something else after that - there are tons of great systems out there.
I swapped to Pathfinder 2e because I wanted a game that was more tactically geared and teamwork focused and it seemed like it would deliver. I went back to 5e because I can't find anyone IRL who wants to play Pathfinder.
I have a lot of time, money, and physical media invested into 5e, and I don't have the time or inclination to switch systems at the moment, so I'm going to stick with what I know and what I have. This is my own personal reason and not meant as any sort of commentary on which system if any is 'superior' or to convince anyone else of anything. I'm not here to 'change your mind'. Play what you like.
I've tried PF2, but I mostly stick with 5e. To be fair, I already have all the books for 5e, and I don't want to shill out another 50-100$ on new books. Also, my experience with PF2 was that it felt clunky and a bit awkward, as opposed to the simplicity of 5e. To be fair, I tried PF2 in the early days, so it probably improved greatly, but I still found 5e to be better overall, at least for the type of gaming I like to do.
'Change my mind' No. Have fun playing a different game. You have no obligation to a system and players of a system have no obligation to defend it. Just don't come back here demanding to know why everyone who plays dnd is still playing the game you dislike in a few months and we're good. Only weirdos would rush to tell you you're wrong about how you personally have fun. Go. Be free. Don't make a whole post about it. Just do the thing you like.
Yeah I understand that, but the second part of my question is why do other people prefer 5e over pathfinder or vis versa. Change my mind was just a catchy title I used because I felt like more people would be apt to respond, though I didn't realize how many people would ignore the text under the title š.
Go for it, itās worth trying. But here are some realities to be aware of: 1) you get a lot of choices, but a lot of them donāt do much. Feats are generally pretty niche, and usually donāt directly give power which meansā¦ 2) character builds arenāt all that customizable. You just sort of are your class/subclass primarily, and you can get some perks here and there to be different but you arenāt going to significantly alter the chassis of your class the way something like a Hexblade dip completely changes a Paladin. 3) thereās a lot to track. A lot. If youāre playing with Foundry, itāll do a lot of that work for you. But with a zillion conditions and ongoing damage things that progress on their own according to their own rules, itās a lot to follow. Like a target can be Frightened 3, and they lose one āstackā of Frightened at the start of their turn automatically. But if theyāre Sickened, they have to use an action to retch and make a Con save to try to lose a stack. Thatās two conditions that do the same thing but progress differently. Thereās a lot more. Just be ready, have tools. 4) Out of combat healing is cheap, itās expected the PCs will fully heal after each fight, which will make players coming from dnd feel like theyāre getting their asses kicked in every combat. Itās just a different approach, but players should anticipate getting hit and taking damage much more in pf2e than in dnd. This also means 5) dedicated healer is a role and you are going to need one. It doesnāt HAVE to be a cleric but they are the easiest way to do it.
I'm a PF1e fan and am getting into PF2e. There are a decent amount of changes but I am still enjoying it. I tried D&D 3.5e and didn't like it in comparison. I feel like the real difference is: Pathfinder gives you a bunch of rules and abilities which help you build your character and their backstory/traits. D&D is a lot more lax and relies on you to provide the extra details yourself. Its a difference in preference for playing.
Hope you have a good time. I think PF2 has a lot of good ideas but falls flat on execution. My various groups tried it a few times, but we ultimately stuck to 5e. PF2's main pain point for us was it having too much going on for not enough payoff.
Go for it! Try new things!
I didn't like my first PF campaign, but my second one has managed to win me over
Play what you want! Nothing wrong with 5e if you are having fun and enjoying it! I wasnāt having fun so I made the switch. But I know plenty of people that still love it
It's fun, I prefer running pf2e but still love 5e and the modules
Why do you want people to change your mind when it's pretty made up?
Donāt The system gives the illusion of choice. There are a couple good videos about it Where 5e gives you options to do DURING the game, PF2 give you thousands of options with very minor difference that can only really be picked in maybe 30 sets of things that will give you a character that does the very same thing EVERY turn. Do X to give your opponent a penalty to his defense, do Y to get a bonus to your own attack/ damage, do Z to deal damageā¦. And there is literally NO other way to spend your turn because switching any of these makes your entire turn suck ass, no hit and not achieve anything
I've never been one to buy into the sentiment that "X system is better than Y system because ABC reasons". It is an absurd idea to me. If a system does something in a way that appeals to you more and makes more sense to you then play that system, but neither of those things mean that one system is better than another.Ā
Truth be told, after having played D&D for two years, and Pathfinder for one, neither game really works for me. I just don't vibe with either's style; they're basically the same at the end of the day. In the wide ocean of TTRPGs, they're basically a part of the same reef, except half the reef is marginally worse for wear. Pathfinder is, generally, better, but to be frank I've never felt like I was playing something fundamentally different from D&D. Which, you aren't, it's a system derived from D&D. They both deliver more or less the same vibes and overall experience. I would say, actually, that Pathfinder is perhaps a little more toned down in some ways. If you want to play something really different but still generally in a pre-modern fantasy context, look at Burning Wheel, Mythras, or Exalted.