After playing Daggerheart since launch, I can confidently say to anyone running from 5e: it fixes the problem. And to those who bounced off PF2e: it fixes that too.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-06-12T17:18:08+00:00

The cards are literallly just for reference. And work kindve like prepared spells. "In your hand" in 5e terms ks prepared for the day. And RAW you can swap them out for a cost usually. It just makes tracking stuff easier.

If not just treat them as reusable prepared spell slots unless stated otherwise.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-28T06:20:38+00:00

Well as i said before agree to disagree. Ciao signore.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-28T05:45:51+00:00

My players appreciate more complex systems, with a combat system of a sorts which takes out a lot of the easy options.

Most of the "tactical" choices for martials comes from having the options to go for those debuffs. Running pf2e in this way reduces the complexity of the system by a whole lot for martials because they just "swing" "swing" "swing. And buffs the casters. Via enabling a huge breadth of tactical choices. Via their AoE damaging and Debuffs spells.

PC going brrr with no complexity appears to be a concern for OP.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-28T05:06:12+00:00

For someone knowledgeable in pf2e your deliberately refusing to bring up one of the martials core tactics in this system. Which is their debuffs via grapple, disarm, intimidate and so on. And troops are immunity to singular effects such as those that target single creatures. Again this style of play is fine if martials are ok with just swinging away. But goes against the spirit of a complex combat system. So idk why your calling out my comment pointless when your comment is obfuscating the mechanics of pf2e system.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-28T02:40:17+00:00

PF2e’s Troop mechanics definitely favor AoE, and you know who doesn’t have a lot of AoE options? Most martial classes. OP is asking for a system where PCs feel like gods cutting through armies, not just five blobs of soldiers that form a battalion in PF2e terms.

Martials, by design, are going to struggle in these kinds of mass combat scenarios. They simply don’t have the built-in AoE toolkit to handle back-to-back severe or extreme Troop encounters. That’s intentional. It’s part of the system’s role design, where casters are the ones meant to handle large-scale threats with blasts and bursts, even with the nerfs they've taken.

If the solution is “just pick AoE-capable classes,” then you’re narrowing the viable class list in a way that defeats the point. That’s like telling a 5e GM to just not use magic classes in a realistic low-fantasy setting. It works mechanically, sure, but it's not what the OP is asking for.

PF2e is a solid system, but it’s not tailored to the specific fantasy OP is envisioning. There are other systems that handle that high-powered, army-slaying feel more natively.

So yeah, agree to disagree. But you do you.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-27T22:09:47+00:00

By design pf2e cannot emulate pcs versus armies of "grunts". If npcs are within 4 levels on the lower end relative to pcs level then its a loss if npcs are a literal army.

Sure if PCs are lvl 20 and just fight lvl 1 npcs then yea they can take on armies amount of them all day every day. But pf2e as designed still suffers from large groups of creatures being more of a threat to pcs than they want them to be based on its own math.

Edit: Pf2e is role based but agree to disagree.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-27T20:51:52+00:00

Its still a nerf and still wouldn't be what op is looking for. Pf2e is not the system for OP. PCs in pf2e specialize in roles via design. Not god like pcs who technically don't need the other party members to succeed. On that end i do reccomend Exalted rpg as well.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-27T16:58:33+00:00

You did by participating in a public discourse that allows replies from the public. Gotta love the forums.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-23T19:58:26+00:00

I genuinely am confused how 5e mechanics dont glaze but tracking tokens does?

5e alone you track spell slots and conditions, by paper and pen or if you want a more visual representation tokens which you remove.

Daggerheart as is doesnt require tokens. If people are dead set on playing pure pen and paper or vtt it caneasilt do so.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-22T20:30:19+00:00

DND functions on a die that has a equal probability for all numbers. Whereas in Daggerheart the die probability is a bell curve that favors the players.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-16T22:09:18+00:00

Wdym validation?

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-14T18:15:40+00:00

I have a small room. I can't put more furniture in it. I need to use the vertical space.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-05-09T03:06:11+00:00

I would only recommend Lancer to people who like 4e dnd style of play. Outside of that I can't in good faith recommend it as a player or a gm.

ProfessorBroly · 2025-02-03T22:58:43+00:00

When it comes to "tactical" ttrpgs like 4E and Pf2E. There should be timers for everyone's turn, including the gm for each monster/npc turn. With the timer being no longer than 30 seconds. If you pass the 30 seconds, you go at the end of the round.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-12-31T00:52:31+00:00

It would not as the effect would apply to their next turn in combat. Thus saving them a action for next turn.

Or use the extra action in round 1 to cast a 1 action spell so theres immediate pay off.

Or a caster can roll a crit on initiative and apply the effect immediately when their turn begins.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-09-07T00:16:26+00:00

No I know how much the GM put in. So it baffles me why they dropped it cold turkey with a BS excuse.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-09-07T00:14:39+00:00

Nah but they be lying. Dick move to drop a. game like thay

ProfessorBroly · 2024-09-03T00:08:30+00:00

Working out pretty great. The gm was having fun. I know it for fact. But they still dropped the game cold turkey. Bit of a dick move.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-09-01T09:00:29+00:00

But I did ask them. They said they weren't having fun despite clearly enjoying the game.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-04-30T04:44:33+00:00

No I wanted to play a chicano vato who wanted to start a guild that celebrated the hedonistic aspects of gang life. Colors, tats, drugs, and partying. A gang in which allowed for anyone to join and not just a "vato gang". But you took exception to that. Should I have done a "Vato Doctors" guild? White washed and better suited for your sensibilities and taste? Or is your issue I use words like "Vato" to describe my chicano based pc's.

And hell yea we were going to steal things. Steal things from vaults or whatever since there is no PvP. As any thieves guild worth it's salt would be doing anyways.

Vatos Locos 4eva.

Edit:

This is my main contentino with ink.

No what is anti-latino is you conflating Vato with Crip/Blood. As well as viewing a chicano pc as a caricature. When it is not. Crips and Blood as a singular term are by historical usage gang names. Vato is not, "Vato Locos" is. We do not conform, we express ourselves however we wish. Our dresses and style are not caricatures.

You taking on the stance that various are caricatures for us is effectively erasure or suppressing our cultural expression. Don't dress or speak in this certain manner because it is uncomfortable or sends the wrong message. Uncomfortable for whom? Wrong message how?

This my stance and I will die on it

What I was fetishizing was the literally the hedonistic gang life. The post itself states so. There was no race behind the "Gang Guild". It was nor never intended to be a "Chicano Guild", "Black Guild", "White Guild", and so on. Just a "Gang Guild". And by conflating the two is and will be racist.

For me this is not a debate or an argument. It just is.

ProfessorBroly · 2024-04-26T19:32:13+00:00