A complete breakdown and comparison of the newest versions of the biggest games in the TTRPG community, the 2024 Edition of D&D 5e, and the 2023 remaster of Pathfinder 2e
Pazio has clarified that the wounded value only adds when you 1st go unconcious, not on failed recovery rolls. (ie, back to how it was before the remaster)
that's why it's important to play the game instead of just researching it. the video is globally good, but the reasoning about pf2e is imo completely off ( and sometime straight up wrong on facts ) PF2e is as much focus on story telling than D&D5e. the difference is PF2e focus story telling on a solid mechanical framework ( which doesn't mean you can create new feat/spell and so on, just that the rule to create balanced one are clearly given, letting you create under/overpowered one on purpose) while letting you add as much flavor as any ttrpg let you, even helping some player's creativity by being restrictive ( restrictions fuel creativity ). Dnd on the other hand present itself as this : build your own thing high fantasy game... issue : the foundation are quite broken, letting the GM here to fix it, and at this point the question is : why do I buy a DnD book instead of just building on the SRD ? if I have to fix the game anyway ? ( btw quite unfair to say : hey maybe they split player core in 2 book to make money ? while the entire system ( not an srd, not a starter kit, the entire of all rules published ever ) are available for free officially on Archive of Nethys :/ )
So, on the subject of Pathfinder's prepared spellcasters, you don't forget the spell when you cast it, you use the slot it was prepared in. Think of the caster as a revolver. Each spell slot is a chamber in the cylinder and each spell is a bullet. This style of magic is known as Vancian Magic because it's how magic was presented in the novels of author Jack Vance. Basically, spells require several steps to cast. By preparing a spell, you're preforming most of the steps to cast it, but leaving out the last one. When you cast the spell in combat, you're just finishing the ritual. Spell slots represent how many unfinished spells you can hold on to in a day.
I am actually reading through the Dying Earth series now. You are partially correct in that it is saying the words, waving your hands, and burning components that is the final step, but it then sears the knowledge from the brain until you have a chance to spend the time to rememorize it again. The most amusing thing to me was that the D&D novels (well, at least the ones from the 80s and 90s) did not treat magic in anywhere near the same way. But, I guess if you want to think of them in gun terms, you could. The difference is you would forget how to make the bullet everytime. This is why the wizard must travel with his spellbook.
i fucking hate this system, like why the hell can't i hold more unfinished rituals, and why the hell are spells not a Swift/Bonus Action. there are so many things wrong with Vancien Magic but what i presented is the most immidiate
@theprinceofawesomeness I prefer a mana based system much more, myself. Just makes more sense that you are pulling from energies within you that will rejuvenate from the energies surrounding you. Definitely makes magic-users less wimpy at lower levels.
Also, I'm not buying the poster's assertion that D&D 5.5 is "better" for narrative storytelling then Pathfinder 2E Remaster. How is having large sections of "the rules" left undefined helpful for storytelling?
About the floating modifiers of Pf2e an important distinction is that they can only be a Circumstance, Status or Item bonus, meaning that they are more controlled and you can't just get a +1 from 5 different sources to get a +5 total
Before 5th, Pathfinder 1st was winning, not just challenging. The 5th edition was a result of 4th's failure. Pathfinder 2nd was a result of the age of the system, ten years, and 5th edition pulling ahead of Pathfinder 1st. Paizo felt it had to risk relatively big changes. Me? I stay with Pathfinder 1st, or 3.5 at the outside. Yes, I'm a dinosaur. Time to go eat some ferns with the other brachiosaurus'.
@@DadtheDungeonMasterI chooses Pathfinder 1st over D&D 3.5. I bought the 5th player's handbook because two separate people I knew threatened to run campaigns, but I felt feats were nearly worthless (just to start).
@@TheOtherSteel feats are not so bad, they also give +1 to a stat now. the problem with pf1 is thats its so complicated compared to new systems. i played pf1 for a long time, i really like it and im starting a gamenext friday, but this game requires so much work and its so time consuming that its not for everyone. new 5e makes everything more fluid and cinematesque instead of being all about min maxing and knowing 100+ books to play properly. one of the things i really liked in pathfinder was the additon of touch AC and flat foot AC
Is it me, or is the artwork / and general feel of PF1e vs PF2e kind of like the comparing Lord of the Rings to The Hobbit? (Like the tone of LotR is very adult and gritty, and the Hobbit was righten as a bed time story for kids). As Frodo put it, "my adventure is very different from Bilbo's" (at least I think he says that at some point).
On a side note, I think one of the main reasons to remaster is not only to differenciate from DnD but also becuase they created a whole new Open Game Licence that is not property of WotC and that is irrevocable and safer for people to publish their own work and games, so they published their new stuff under that licence instead of the other old one. Pathfinder gives you security of rules, but you are also incentivized in creating your own things, you actually have rules to create such things, like traps, monsters and new feats with a complete knowledge of how difficult the encounter is going to be. Sorry guys, I am now the Pathfinder fanboy after DnD and WotC disapointed me so much x_x
As a DM, I prefer pathfinder because of the balance! It is far more difficult in pathfinder to create game breaking overpowered characters! The encounter design also works remarkably well. It is quite easy to design encounters, even at high level. The difficulty level of the encounters are quite accurate. If I want an encounter to be easy, it is easy. If I want my players to suffer, they suffer ;-)
Fairly certain that when D&D was made, Race was based on the scientific definition and not the common language model we use today. (You have to remember at one time in the past certain groups wanted to separate the cultural differences by referring to those groups as separate races for multiple reasons. We know better today based on DNA, and cultural changes. Since we are so clingy to the common language model today there is too much baggage to keep using the scientific term.)
The word 'race' has a pretty specific definition listed, which is just a group of individuals that share some characteristics, whether cultural or ethnic. It very much can still apply. But if you think it is a touchy subject, then you can certainly use a different word. What gets more touchy is the 'half' races. Unless there is some compatibility between genetics, then these wouldn't exist. For Tolkien, elves and mankind were compatible, as Elrond was a Half-elf. A Half-orc to him would have likely been considered abhorrent, since orcs were a corruption of all that was good. Hence, why the Urukai are really the big bad nasties they were. I recently was reading the half-orc description in the 1e PHB and it pretty much snays that any PC half-orc would be of the variety that could still pass off as human. This makes a lot of sense to me, as I had said in the past to a player that while he could play a minotaur, they are known for eating people, and you wouldn't make it very far into town without a mob lynching you... But, back on point, race is not an offensive word, we are just choosing to make it so.
I play pathfinder because i didn't feel like having the pinkertons sent to harass me at my house And since wotc is going all in on ai, i wanted to leave that ticking time bomb as fast as possible. So now im here with no magic cards left to my name (sold them all) but left with 3 actions to attack the O.G.L and defend the O.R.C Also being able to play completely free with Archives of Nethys and path builder is great.
After several years of 5E and one year of PF2e as GM, I can safely say that PF2e is way better for GM - reliable math and structure really helps with preparation and I can focus more on storytelling instead of ruling random s*it. After 5E session I was exhausted and I felt like my encounters didn't work, traps were lame and NPCs couldn't provide any meaningful reward. PF2e leaves me happy and motivated for next session. For players it's more complicated - if they just want to be there for the story and are not interested in making lot of choices (which is completely valid way to play with friends), 5E is their game; for players who want more control over their character and are ready to make difficult choices (with narrative consequences) all the time - which could be exhausting for casual players - PF2e is perfect. In the end, I'm happy I left 5E behind.
There are barely any meaningful consequences of player's choices in combat in 5E. Action is just an attack. Anything else is suboptimal choice. Bonus action? Most classes have one that make sense and that's all. Movement? Combat is mostly static because everyone have AoO. There are no choices. And when they emerge, consequences are mostly non-existent (because healer can just wait until someone get's to 0 - which itself is consequences-free).
8:10 wait wait wait. You're messing up the abc's of character creation in pf2e. outside of the pathbuilder app, you start with Ancestry, then Background, then Class, and you don't forget your free attribute boosts. The spread is... not off but i feel is not right. Most of the time you won't have a negative one to any attribute. It's also fairly comming to have two attributes at +2 instead of your second highest being a +3. My point being it's a lot more customizable. About the ancestries vs species thing. I found the fact you see them as equivalent. What i heard of d&d's species, it had become mostly cosmetic. Meanwhile pf2e ancestries have mechanical significance. Think you could go more indepth why you find the two equal? 20:31 so about this. You are not wrong here... at the same time you are. Proficency bonus is indeed your proficency rank bonus + your level. But there are very few exceptions where you wouldn't add your attribute bonus. So a level 20 rogue would have a 32 in stealth not a 28. 25:39 loke you said it was a balancing between dex and str. 27:00 is there a reason you didn't mention the +10 -10 system in pf2e? It the main reason why so many people love the crit system. Feels odd to be left out. 32:26 hearing you call heal cure wounds hurts me lol. 41:27 it's an advantage. Means your teammates have longer to heal you. 43:22 that's not true. You only add your wounded score once when you go down. That was a mistake they erraterd during the remake release.
I will disagree _slightly_ on the races thing, at least in the first tier of play (level 1-4), races in dnd 5e will be far more impactful than pf2e. After that how impactful the race feels will depend on what feats you pick and how it interacts with the build Similarly, the pf versions of low-concept races like elf or dwarf might feel more impactful than their 5e counterpart, while the wackier 5e races arguably have the wackier pf2e races beat (once starfinder 2e releases and the Barthu release i'll have to walk this statement back, plus 2024 has not reprinted most of what i'd call the 'wacky' 5e races, although they have made the innate caster races more impactful by default due to bla bla)
@@defensivekobra3873 still I do want to know how are spices impactful. Serious question. I just heard they remove attributes. Do they still get unique abilities and spells?
@@flameloude race feats (you select one at 1, 5, 9, 13 and 17 level) can give bonuses, limited spells and unique action, some races have a unique feature from the start, but that features are not very powerful
@@flameloude yes they still grt unique attributes and spells. And in particular the innate spellcasting ones as per 2024 get to both choose the spellcasting stat for their innate spells (as long as it's inteligence, wisdom or charisma) and cast their innate racial spells using any spell slots they have (similar to that one feat pf2e sorcerers used to have, except available by default to every spellcaster). On top of that, the ability to cast spells without using a spell slot in 2024 is a bigger deal due to a rules change, you can now only cast a single spell *using a spell slot* (so an high elf wizard can cast both misty step and fireball in a single turn). They also technically allow you to pick bs like fairy (which grants you both a flying speed at level 1 and some innate spellcasting to boot) or githzerai (which let you cast your innate spells without components), or any of the races with magic resistance, or tortles (which is a completely free psudo-heavy armor proficiency), or maybe changeling (infinite free perfect humanoid disguises) I still think question of where racial choice is most impactful is up to debate at later levels, but at early levels dnd species have a lot more sauce at their strongest than pathfinder ancestries
@@defensivekobra3873 that's good. I was really disappointed when I heard they were removing stuff from spices and moving it to the backgrounds. If they are keeping they more notable features I can see why he said it's a wash on both ancestries and spiceas.
I just want easy to use tools to tell a story-exactly. I like 5e and learned on dnd beyond. The integration of digital tools is the next step and wizards is smart for doing it IMO. I don’t care about meticulously tracking stats or making builds. I feel like with more options and complexity we stray closer to chaotic games and it makes it harder for new DMs to step up.
I am playing a PF2 and a 5e game right now. while I do agree PF2 is more intimidating for somone new, once you understand the system all the crunch most people are afraid of becomes just as automatic and in my opinion is more logical for on the fly decisions.I'd even argue it helps with role play. Making an impassioned speach and the GM giving a +4 circumstance bonus to a diplomacy check. While in 5e, it comes down to just advantage v disadvantage in most cases. PF2 doesn't make it so you can't make stuff up, just that you usually don't have to. My biggest issue with 5e's advantage system is how it is to easy to get either. My biggest issue with 5e though, and maybe this was fixed in the 2024 books, is the abilities that are sort of just auto win. Flying was a big one in one of my past 5e games. As for why range weapons don't add dex to damage in PF2 is risk vs reward. You are safer at range and can spend actions on more things since you wont have to move as much. There are some weapons that let you add part of your str to ranged damage and thrown weapons add your full str bonus to damage but the range tends to be smaller so you are at a higher risk
0:06 Wait...seriously? "Dungeons & Dragons, and their main rival, WotC's first edition of Dungeons & Dragons" is the more appropriate way to phrase that...
So basically what you're saying is that the 2024 edition of Dungeons & Dragons is the same as first edition why not just play first edition the books are cheaper
@Thkaal You mean first edition pathfinder? Or first edition DnD? No, 2024 DnD is easy closer to 5th edition than to either one of those, but it has definitely made some changes to add a LITTLE more of that old complexity.
You lost me at your preference for rolled ability scores. I'd walk from any table that allowed that - something I did back in 1983 when I left D&D up until it had point buy in 3E in 2000. It's just the source of too many issues with group balance.
@@DadtheDungeonMaster, dc20 has some interesting ideas, but the foundation is flawed in my opinion. So, more like the opposite of dc20. Still piecing it together.
Definitely let me know as soon as you have something. Or hit me up if you need someone to bounce ideas off of. I've been thinking about working on a game myself. It's nothing like dnd, more like an Apocalypse survival ttrpg, but I love talking about rules and game mechanics
