I’ve seen a bit of complaints about the action cost of monks entering a stance at the start of combat. I assume it’s mostly with players whose GMs allow the free drawing of weapons prior to combat, but am interested to know if there’s more to it.

RAW Weapon wielding martials would need to use an interact to draw their weapon at the start of combat (unless GM is generous and allows this to be free, which puts monks at a disadvantage, or they are walking around with weapons in their hands, which isn’t always appropriate to setting).

To make this absolutely sure: This is a humorous post, the title is not meant to be taken seriously, I just want to jokingly rant about my experience(s) with Paizo APs that seemingly love to have PCs murder each other.

A week ago, our group had a climatic boss battle against a powerful foe. It was part of an AP >!(Strength of a thousand)!<(Spoiler because I will rant about a mechanic), and part of the boss fight was a mirror that had shadows grasping for the PCs. If you fail a saving throw, these shadows would have grasped you, pulled you into the mirror and... released an evil shadow duplicate of yourself. The way we played it, our GM straight up told a player about to get pulled in "well, you have your character sheet, now use it to obliterate the party".

This is not the first, but the SECOND time this happened, and BOTH TIMES it was a GODDAMNED MIRROR. Back in first edition, there was an AP >!(Rise of the Runelords)!< that had you navigating a tremendously big dungeon searching for items that you needed for plot reasons. One of the passages (which, of course, you HAD to pass) included a mirror that created an aggressive copy of every PC that looked into it, ready to roll initiative. It was the first and only time our group almost TPKed, because our tanky oracle went first, the mirror copy rolled high initiative and blasted all of us to hell with a prismatic spray (and some poor saves on our side). Our GM had a literal deus ex machina intervene after my character (who was late because I was late to the session) came into the passage, found the massacre and offered literally everything he had to whoever would listen in order to save his friends (because as a barbarian that I was, I couldn't really cast resurrection spells or carry them all back to civilization and have them revived).

So when we entered that powerful foe's chamber and our GM described the mirror just standing there menacingly, cold sweat broke out. I literally flew into a panic when they took the player into another room to "just talk to them". I was sure that NO ONE of us would get out alive.

So, what's the takeaway from my story? Clearly, Paizo loves enabling PvP and does so by including cursed mirrors in their APs that make PCs (or their copies) murder the party. It can't be a coincidence that this has already happened twice in the four or five APs I've played!

On a more serious note, the "fight against oneself" is a classic concept for narration, but one I've never found to be working in TTRPGs. I don't know why some authors are seemingly hellbent on including it, one way or another. Anyway, despite two near TPKs, we lived to see the end of the APs, so perhaps the true friends were the mirrors we smashed along the way. I hope you guys had fun, and love to all the Paizo people actually reading this! You're doing a great job and I wish you only the best!

Hey y'all!

I've told my players they can ignore the rule around archetype feats and dedications. For example, my cleric player picked up the Medic Dedication at L2 in their Free Archetype slot, then Doctor's Visitation at L4 in their Class Feat slot and Bastion Dedication in their FA slot.

To me, (1) if it fits their character, why not? At the same time, if they try to gimmick the system and push their character development in a way that enables munchkinism, (2) the action economy and hand economy naturally limits things. And (3) if they play the number-go-up game, it's kinda cool. As the GM, seeing someone's specific combo of nonsense pay off in a way that every so often breaks my encounter isn't the end of the world.

That said, am I downplaying the negatives? Have you done this and regretted it?

Good afternoon, fellow players!

I'm here because I have a question about the Barbarian. I've been doing quite a bit of research on the class, and I've come across several different builds: two-handed weapons for high damage, sword and shield, unarmed (specifically Animal Instinct), and dual-wielding. However, I haven't really found much about a build that uses one weapon in one hand and keeps the other hand free.

I'm planning to play in a game with some friends, and I picked Barbarian to help round out the party with a Strength-based character. I really like the idea of keeping one hand free so I can use consumables or perform actions such as Shove, Disarm, Trip, and Grapple. Since I don't really see much discussion about this kind of build, I decided to ask people who know the system better.

My character and what I've picked

The campaign starts at level 2.(we have the gradual Ability Boost Variant Rules).

Ability Scores:

• Strength: +4
• Dexterity: +1
• Constitution: +4
• Intelligence: +0
• Wisdom: +1
• Charisma: +0

I'm playing an Anadi (Spindly Anadi) with the Energy-Scarred (Fire) background.

For my Barbarian instinct, I'm going with Ligneous Instinct. I think it's probably the Barbarian instinct that fits the Anadi vibe the best, especially since my character is going to be very connected to nature in general.

Another thing I like about it is that its damage output is basically comparable to Giant Instinct, but without the Clumsy drawback. Yes, it does reduce your Speed, but I think that's much easier to deal with than Giant Instinct's drawback, and there are ways to increase your Speed anyway, so I don't think it will be a huge problem.

At level 9, the resistances also look pretty good. The main drawback is having a fire weakness of 3 + Constitution modifier, but since I have fire resistance from my background, I should only end up taking around 1–2 points of fire damage at levels 9–10 in most cases. So, in my opinion, that's something I can deal with.

Also, since the instinct doesn't have any unique feats, it makes it easier to pick up some of the really good Barbarian feats as I level up, such as Reactive Strike.

But here's where I got stuck.

At level 2, we're using the Free Archetype rule, and I was thinking about taking either the Duelist Dedication or the Wrestler Dedication, but I don't really know how to properly build for the late game.

So I came here to ask for your opinions and advice on what direction I should take with this character.

(Also, Ligneous Instinct should be discussed more. It actually seems to be really good!).

Saving Throws are a BIT of a controversial topic in the Pathfinder community! How much investment do you REALLY need? Is it as bad as some optimizers say? Is it as easy as some other folks say? Let's find out!

If you are short on time, watching from 31:26 onwards is where I present about 15 minutes of actual advice on how to assign various Saves, how to build characters to have diversity without sacrificing your Saves too hard, etc.

Timestamps

• 0:00 Intro
• 1:09 Saving Throw Optimization
• 6:00 Math Setup
• 11:44 Zero Attribute Charts
• 15:51 Analyzing the Data
• 22:21 Mathing a “Recipe”
• 26:47 Recipe Charts
• 31:26 My Recipe
• 37:44 Ref vs Fort vs Will
• 43:15 Saves and Freedom
• 48:54 Are Saves poorly designed?
• 51:09 Outro

Hello r/Pathfinder2e!

Now, first and foremost: I am mainly a D&D 5e player, but I am open to any new system if I like it. Also, excuse my English, I'm not a native speaker.

So there has been the big discussion about D&D 5.5, which I didn't buy for a multitude of reasons.

And recently, WotC announced all the new stuff - most importantly for me they are going to bring back Dark Sun and have crossovers with Star Wars and World of Warcraft.

While I am really sceptical after the last manuals they made, if this is done right, I may seriously consider switching. But I have serious doubts.

But of course, like everyone else, I have issues with 5e which 5.5 doesn't fix. Then Pathfinder came to my mind as an option.

I have a bit of experience with PF 1e - played a couple of sessions at a game store and Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - and it was an absolute mess. But I liked it, it was better in many ways, even though way too complicated. Plus I like Paizo better than WotC

So naturally I thought about switching to PF 2e, or its remastered. Which is why I'm posting here.

I'm asking for things like:

• What are the main differences between the two editions and the remastered?
• How played are these systems really?
• Is 2e a less complex version, a rebalanced one or something else?
• What would you warn a 5e player about?

Thanks in advance!

Cruonign, Rune of Leeching reads " Strikes with the rune-bearing weapon deal an additional 3 void damage. Whenever a living creature is damaged by one of these Strikes, the rune-bearer gains temporary Hit Points equal to the void damage the target took". Temp HP based on total void damage taken from the strike, not void damage done by this rune. So I started to wonder how much void damage I could stack on a strike, to get as much temp HP as possible.

Assume we're level 9, we just got the rune of leeching.

Rune of leeching: 3

Decaying weapon rune: 1d4

Greater Grim Sandglass (only after casting a spell): 1d6

Quietus Strikes (Duskwalker heritage): 1

Harmful Malice (Soulforger Archetype): 1d4

Deathdrinking weapon rune (crit only): 1d6

That's 3 + 1 + 1d6 + 2d4 = 12.5 damage on average, 28.5 on a crit. Or at the low end, 9 damage if you don't proc the sandglass. 9 temp hp every turn is not bad at all. Almost like casting false vitality on yourself every turn. Am I forgetting any good sources of void damage?

I am looking to get some DM input. We are starting a new campaign (Season of Ghosts) and I have a player who wants to change out traits for a katana, namely to change two-handed d10 to Finesse. Everything else would remain the same. Personally, I prefer rules-as-written but allow homebrew when it is to add flavor. Here I am very much on the fence. What would you do as a GM, would you allow this or not? What are the pro's and con's for allowing this? No other of my players have requested such changes and I do not expect them to.

I got my copy of Pathfinder Quest 2 weeks ago and I really, really like it. It's the perfect tool to introduce someone who has never played a TTRPG to the core mechanics of PF2e. It features many of the same concepts: skills, a noticeable level progression, customization options at every level, and most importantly, the 3-action economy.

While it stays true to the spirit of PF2e, Pathfinder Quest differs in a few key ways:

• Uses a dice pool instead of a d20.
• Uses flat values instead of rolling for damage and healing.
• Keeps numbers small and easy to manage.
• Ties skills directly to your class.
• Replaces grid movement (squares/hexes) with zones (similar to Fate or Mothership).

Why It Works as a Rules-Light PF2e

During my first game, I immediately realized this is an almost perfect rules-light alternative to PF2e. You keep the main selling points of the system: deep character customization, tactical gameplay, the 3-action economy, and a solid structure for GMs. At the same time, it strips away the crunch that usually scares off new players.

It doesn't feel "empty" like other rules-light games where a whole class fits on half a page; not that's a bad thing for those systems, but not something you want for your Pf2e public. Because everything is presented on cards, it feels visually clean and far less overbearing than a page full of dense text. It also takes a page out of the D&D 4e playbook by measuring ability uses in purely mechanical terms (unlimited, 1/round, 1/encounter, 1/adventure), making resource tracking trivial.

Pathfinder Quest Mechanics That Make Great TTRPG Tools

Since it's fundamentally a board game, it includes a few mechanics that teach prospective GMs great encounter design and would work wonderfully in a zone-based TTRPG:

1. Adventure Clock: Each adventure features a clock. Entering a combat encounter advances it, and during exploration, players can voluntarily advance the clock to gain "exploration actions" (marked with a clock symbol on cards and in the adventure book). You can advance it as much as needed to take more actions. Why it matters: The adventure ending changes depending on how fast or slow you were. As a GM, you can use it to trigger special events or set a countdown. It’s a built-in urgency tool. Since the actual time unit isn't strictly defined, 1 tick could mean 10 minutes in a city or 2 hours in the wilderness.
2. Challenge Coins: The game uses challenge coins (labeled A through H) with Combat Challenge on one side and Exploration Challenge on the other. Placed directly on the map, these are the designated spots where players use their skills. Why it matters: Since there are no traditional skill actions in Pathfinder Quest, this replaces them cleanly. It teaches GMs not to run "white room" encounters and forces players to interact with the environment, keeping gameplay tactical and engaging. It’s not a brand-new concept in the TTRPG space, but having it built into the base game is fantastic.

Final Thoughts

My point at the end is that with just a few missing tools, you could easily play Pathfinder Quest as its own standalone TTRPG system. All it really needs is:

• A basic table for DCs.
• An encounter builder.
• A quick guide to create monsters or convert existing PF2e statblocks into Pathfinder Quest enemy cards.
• And maybe an "advanced" character creator where you could select your skills and separate ancestries from backgrounds.

Besides that, everything else is already in the box, and after a bit of experience, you could probably eyeball the numbers and make things work on the fly. Paizo has an incredible product on their hands, and I really hope they take full advantage of it.

If you're thinking about picking up a copy, I personally recommend buying it at a LGS or waiting for it to hit Amazon, the shipping cost directly from their store was brutal!

TL;DR: Pathfinder Quest is essentially a fantastic rules-light version of PF2e. It keeps core mechanics like the 3-action economy, level progression, and tactical depth, while ditching heavy crunch in favor of dice pools, flat damage, zone movement, and clean card-based UI. With just a simple DC table and a monster conversion guide, it could easily run as its own standalone TTRPG. Excellent gateway game!

I mean stuff like flexible spellcasting or even the undead archetypes. The different kind of archetypes that you can take at level 1 that force you into taking the level 2 feat and typically alter some fundamental aspect of your class.

I've been trying and failing to find some place where they're listed separate from other archetypes (mainly on AON, but googling and reddit threads haven't been any help either).

So, I kind of like the idea of dragoons from ff, but is not as easy to make in pf2e as it is in 5e, so I’m looking for some advice in how to achieve this, I believe the main feature should be taking advantage of fall damage and sharing the pain with an enemy with stuff like jump for example, but since movement is weird in pf2e some of my ideas just don’t work, anyhow, does anyone have ideas on how to achieve building a dragoon/meteor knight?

My friends and I are gonna start playing a campaign soon in 2e. I've played a fair bit of D and D but never Pathfinder.

We're gonna be level 3 and I was just wondering if people had suggestions for the most fun class to be? As a player, I need to have magic so any purely or mostly martial classes aren't my thing (although I could be tempted by something like an artificer.)

I've been looking at Kineticist and Oracle currently, but I'd love to hear from more experienced players.

My GM says it's canon to Pathfinder that if you cast Speak with Animals, every animal is just going to spend their time complaining and demanding rights, effectively cutting off all possibility of communication, diplomacy, or having them do anything. Is this a legit thing?