Tony Vargas
Legend
Well, at least one of them isn't.
...I've never actually seen PF2, nor met anyone in person who has...
For all I know, could be an internet hoax.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 2E Which is the better fantasy rpg and why: D&D 5e or Pathfinder 2e?
- Thread starter Rafael Martin
- Start date
For all I know, could be an internet hoax.
Giltonio_Santos
Hero
Yeah... I wouldn’t use lazy here. I prefer to say that they’re lacking in ambition when it comes to further developing their ruleset. Or, as others have said around here, too conservative for my own taste.
Storylines have not been lazy at all, in my opinion. Even when they present a new take on an old module, I see a lot of effort from the designers to make them worth of playing/running. And it appears that some great research goes into each of them as well. Definitely not lazy.
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
To me, better is in the eye of the beholder - a matter of taste and preference.
PF2e in its first x.0 iteration has good and bad and a bit if cross-reference issues to work out but for those who want the crunchier build more akin to point buy than classed design its fine.
For me, my games always include a mix of old school long term games and newer players without so much focus by the majority on mechanics builds etc - 5e seems more suited to our tastes.
My group tends to more readily embrace the rulings not rules flexibility of 5e thsn the more codified limits of PF2.
But, certainly with different players we might be running PF2.
PF2e in its first x.0 iteration has good and bad and a bit if cross-reference issues to work out but for those who want the crunchier build more akin to point buy than classed design its fine.
For me, my games always include a mix of old school long term games and newer players without so much focus by the majority on mechanics builds etc - 5e seems more suited to our tastes.
My group tends to more readily embrace the rulings not rules flexibility of 5e thsn the more codified limits of PF2.
But, certainly with different players we might be running PF2.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Depends what you want out of the game. 5e is far easier to learn and to run. PF2 has a more complex, but also deeper, mechanical underpinning. Honestly both games are “so close, but yet so far” from what I want, but I stick with 5e for the bigger player base, and because if I have to settle, I’d rather settle for the easier to use system.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
As has been said, it depends on what you want.
Pathfinder fills a hole left by 5e. They don't directly compete with each other. 5e left behind some players and Pathfinder is there to provide a game for them.
They both have a place.
If by 'better' we're talking about what is more popular, well, that's a silly question.
Pathfinder fills a hole left by 5e. They don't directly compete with each other. 5e left behind some players and Pathfinder is there to provide a game for them.
They both have a place.
If by 'better' we're talking about what is more popular, well, that's a silly question.
Waterbizkit
Explorer
5e for me, no contest. Easier to pick up and run, easier to convert older material, etc. I've been able to improv entire sessions in the 5e system, that's an ease of use that I can't say I find many other places.
I liked PF1 and appreciate PF2 for what it is, neither were/are bad games. I just don't get that same "pick up and go" feel from them. My personal experience running games has been such that the less I have to think about the system, the more I can focus on the actual playing of the game.
And when it comes to frequency and quality of new material in 5e I'm of two minds. Part of me is always eager to see more, almost like a holdover from older editions where you could literally bury yourself in books. I think, however, that when I take a step back and really look at it... I realize as a player or a DM that the core three for 5e will allow me to create characters and stories for decades. So new stuff is nice and exciting, but it's just gravy to me at this point.
Anyway, they both have their place, but I'm a 5e person.
I liked PF1 and appreciate PF2 for what it is, neither were/are bad games. I just don't get that same "pick up and go" feel from them. My personal experience running games has been such that the less I have to think about the system, the more I can focus on the actual playing of the game.
And when it comes to frequency and quality of new material in 5e I'm of two minds. Part of me is always eager to see more, almost like a holdover from older editions where you could literally bury yourself in books. I think, however, that when I take a step back and really look at it... I realize as a player or a DM that the core three for 5e will allow me to create characters and stories for decades. So new stuff is nice and exciting, but it's just gravy to me at this point.
Anyway, they both have their place, but I'm a 5e person.
Neither have I. Weird... PF2 could actually be a hoax, and I would have no way of knowing otherwise.
A disturbing thought.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Also, I think the whole comparison of simplicity is off, as they're just very different sorts of presentations.
It's like, you can think of them as messages to be decoded.
PF2 is like a document protected by 64 bit public-key encryption.
While D&D is more like the Voynich Manuscript.
It's like, you can think of them as messages to be decoded.
PF2 is like a document protected by 64 bit public-key encryption.
While D&D is more like the Voynich Manuscript.
Fanaelialae
Legend
They're both good games that cater to different player bases. Which is best? Whichever one your group enjoys more at this moment in time.
Right now my groups all play 5e. But go back 15 to 20 years and our preferences would have almost certainly leaned towards PF2 (if it had existed then). And I've heard of groups who went the other way; they were playing 5e and switched to 5e because they preferred it.
Right now my groups all play 5e. But go back 15 to 20 years and our preferences would have almost certainly leaned towards PF2 (if it had existed then). And I've heard of groups who went the other way; they were playing 5e and switched to 5e because they preferred it.
Similar Threads
