On my last session of d&d combat took too long and I had to apologize for it to my players. One player, who is a Pathfinder 2e player, said it’s nothing compared to long fights he had in that system, where between party of high level casters, boss, minions and enemy spellcasters, he would be waiting a whole hour for his next turn. I certainly want to at least have one Pathfinder 2e campaign among options to present to this group after we finish current one, so how much is this a general problem and not his group’s problem and are there some ways to avoid this long combat?

  • pixeltree
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    The worst system I’ve ever played was dnd 4e. It was the first one I played so I thought it was great at the time but fuck, it was only built for combat and it sucked at combat. You would take forever doing pointless attacks for the other minor bonuses they would give. 0/10 would never play again

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’ve been trying it out because I kind of skipped that edition, and tbh combat has been pretty amazing. Every battle is fun and tactically interesting. It’s really been scratching that itch I had for dynamic, teamwork set piece combat that I was afraid I was going to lose when some people wanted to play “DnD” and I really didn’t want to play 5e lol. It can take awhile because health is too big but once we instituted a common house rule and reduced enemy HP by 25-30%, it’s been perfect. We’ve just been doing a one-shots and tiny modules while the players humor me trying out this edition, though, so no idea how it will scale.

      But now I do wish I had given it more of a chance before. Admittedly, now we have the benefit of hindsight, and some 10 years of common house rules recommended by the internet that didn’t exist when it first came out. I might even switch between it and PF2E from now on depending on how much I miss the cool critical rules and 3 action economy of PF2E vs dynamic forced movement rules and simple but abstract AEDU actions of D&D 4e. Although we’ll see if the sheen of newness fades at some point.

    • Kichae@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve never played 4e, but this is a wholly new take from what I’ve heard.

      • pixeltree
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s only 4 classes, reskinned as a lot more. The power system means there’s very little you can do magic wise out of combat, and with how the powers were daily/encounter/at will, if you didn’t resolve combat by dumping your big powers you were in for a slog of “I use this at will attack again”, every round, at every level. All the powers gave a ton of tiny random bonuses that were such a pain to keep track of it led to the creation of advantage and disadvantage. All the at will powers are “I attack and another small bonus thing happens”, so if you want the bonus thing but no enemies are in range, guess what, you’re attacking the wall/the ground/whatever. Honestly just a miserable time for the most part. What it had going for it was that it was incredibly simple to pick up, because all the classes worked exactly the same. It also simplified 3.5e’s cool but overly complicated skills

    • dumples@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve heard very little good things about it. It did give us short rests in 5e which I love.

      • pixeltree
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Advantage and disadvantage also came out of it! As a way to simplify buffs and nerfs, because 4e had way too much small stuff to keep track of.