How often do pathfinder games do the thing like “The soldiers in the first area attack at +4, but these basically identical soldiers two plot beats later attack at +12, because you’re higher level and I want the math to be challenging”? Because I’ve always disliked that in games. That’s more of a video game trope, but I’ve seen it leak into tabletop games before. I liked the idea of bounded accuracy, and how a goblin is always a goblin. You don’t need to make mega-goblins to fight the higher level party, because even the little ones can still hit and wear you down.

Yeah. I don’t think 1e is underrated, but I do think it’s over-hated. It’s the system I largely got started with for TTRPGs. It’s really not that difficult, but it does let you make things very complex.

I know why people went for D&D 5e over Pathfinder, but I think it should have been seen as an entry point, not the place you stay forever like it’s become for most people. It’s dumbed down, but also with you having to remember a lot of exceptions and things because they dumbed it down too much and tried adding things that didn’t fit exactly into the rules.

What Nintendo was worried about is almost inconsequential compared to what American parents were worried about. And parents were very worried about the investment they’d made into games that still worked.

You’re probably right for D&D 5e 2024 (or whatever it’s being called). The main focus was the virtual table top subscription service. As the other commenter says though, this isn’t true for most other systems.

Also, I don’t even think it’s necessarily a bad thing. Table top inspired video games. It’s not bad for the influence to flow the other way too. It just needs to be considerate of the format.

That’s down to the GM in any system.

Either you send mega-goblins, or you send MORE goblins.

A lower level party might fight 3 goblins fair and square, so 4 levels later they confront 6 goblins and 2 lieutenants.

The idea that the same enemy stays a challenge despite the level increase is actually what I despise in D&D. My character has grown in power, why is the rat from the beginning still able to down me?

Ehh, not really. In D&D 3e-like games, a low level goblin that attacks at +4 can barely hit a mid level character with AC 30. You could have a thousand goblins, and they’d only hit on natural 20 (and for regular, non-crit damage).

I’m doing my part

There’s literally a book called How to be a GURPS GM that’s a pretty good blend of system agnostic and GURPS specific advice. Additionally, Chris Normand has a pretty good Intro to GURPS video series on YouTube

My character has grown in power, why is the rat from the beginning still able to down me?

I read an article online somewhere about bounded accuracy, and it brought a question like that as a litmus test for if you like the idea. Should a novice archer, no matter how lucky they are, be able to shoot the ominous black knight? For a scratch? Or a lucky hit in the throat?

D&D 3e says no. You can only hit them on a natural 20. I think PF2e also says no in the same way.

D&D 5e tried to say yes, the archer should be able to hit the knight. The knight’s armor is probably ~22, and the archer is rolling at +5, so there’s decent odds. But he certainly won’t be able to kill him, because HP is what scales up with power.

Other systems are more deadly.

Personally, I don’t like the “these goblins can’t even touch me anymore” mode that much. I prefer less superhero heroics, where a goblin with a knife can be a real threat

i do have a group that we’ve been playing since covid lockdowns via roll20 and later foundry and Unfortunately i don’t have blocks of time for more games (i wish i did!). My comment was mostly just aimed at that all local my friends play d&d and don’t want to switch.

But if you’re looking to play pathfinder2e online there are communities like the pathfinder2e subreddit which has an active discord community. Foundryvtt has a very active pathfinder2e community (but LFG is done through main foundry discord).

And if you’re not opposed to Organized Play (paizos version of adventurers league) then they have in store and online one-shots you can join. It’s actually how i met my group but we branched off and did our own thing.

I have never seen that happen in PF2e printed adventures. A lot of the time they use monsters straight out of the Bestiary without modification, and when they don’t they usually put the statblocks in the back of the AP so that they can all be referenced from wherever they need to be.

I just pulled down my copy of “The Enmity Cycle” (the closest Paizo adventure I have at hand). It’s a level 4-6 adventure published in 2023. I haven’t read it since shortly after I bought it, but the encounters go like this:

• The first encounter is with 4 bandits, and it references the Gamemastery Guide directly for their statblocks (though you can also get them on AoN). There is a note about a change to their favored terrain and what skill they roll for initiative (in PF2e, you can roll different stats for initiative depending on what you’re doing; usually it’s perception, but in this case, the bandits roll their stealth for initiative). It also notes their tactics (they try to threaten the party before attacking, and if you kill or capture two of them, the other two flee). This is standard for any encounter.

• The second encounter is with two sand wolves, the stat block for which is printed in the back of the module.

• The third encounter is with four gnoll hunters, taken straight from the Bestiary, page 178. If this were a more recent, post-OGL book, it would’ve referenced the Monster Core instead (page 208).

Then the party enters a temple (read: dungeon). Here the encounters are themed, but they don’t pull any shenanigans like you mentioned. There are encounters…

• with two Scorching Sun Cultists (stat block inline with the adventure, mechanically and visually distinct from previous enemies) and a Filth Fire (Bestiary 2, page 110);

• with three cultists (this refers GMs back to the statblock printed above);

• with two cultists (again, reference back to the previous page) and a named priest of the cult (who is similar to the cultists, but also has some unique features befitting his position);

• with an atajma (an undead cleric monster who honestly looks super cool; reference to Book of the Dead p112, though I can’t find it on AoN for some reason), and two more cultists;

• and an elite poltergeist (reference Bestiary, page 264). “Elite” is a template you can use to make a regular poltergeist more scary, so in fairness that is a way that they could do what you’re saying, but they don’t here.

That’s the end of chapter one. Characters are supposed to level up around this time. In chapter 2, you fight:

• four elite nuglubs;
• a named jinkin boss;
• elite jinkin mooks;
• Usij cultists;
• sand wolves;
• several Scrapborn;
• two Scrapborn with the “weak” template;
• a named Ceustodaemon;
• a clockwork soldier;
• and a named gnoll priestess

…in various configurations, both before and in the dungeon. All of the enemies here refer to the same statblocks each time they appear, with the exception of the ones that have the “weak” template (which is like the “elite” template above, but in reverse). The sand wolves are the only repeated monster from chapter one, and they seem to be used as a power level indicator to show how much stronger you are, so they also appear with the same stats.

In chapter three there are more sand wolves and more cultists, some new creatures, some creatures that have been seen before, but none of them are reskinned soldiers dealing suspiciously different damage.

That was fun, incidentally. Makes me want to run this adventure I bought two years ago. Alas, the enemy of every campaign is the schedule.

And as we all know, Nintendo suffered for their terrible decision. /s

I mean, yeah, it wasn’t the most consumer-friendly choice. I’m just saying I get why they made it.

That does seem nice. One of the many reasons I DM 5e from a “does it make sense” perspective over a rules as written perspective.

I think the level scaling fits Golarion, since “becoming a god” is a semi realistic goal for someone to set for themselves

But people who want to play in grittier settings do use the proficiency without level rules, and from what I’ve seen all the major third party tools support that option. As a gm, It can be hard to balance for though! The +level to everything mostly serves to give your level 10 cleric a fighting chance on their stealth checks, and without that boost there are some actions some characters just can’t perform.

As the other commenter says though, this isn’t true for most other systems.

It was true for 3.5. Nevermind 4e, which was a naked play to shoehorn D&D back into the then-lucrative war-gaming miniatures market.

Also, I don’t even think it’s necessarily a bad thing.

I don’t think it’s bad either. I just find it’s a design decision that shifts how the game is played.

You lose a lot of the more avant guard aspects of table top RPGs in favor of a ridge, easier to export system.

I think the level scaling fits Golarion, since “becoming a god” is a semi realistic goal for someone to set for themselves

First you get really really drunk.

It’s only a TTRPG if you can win it in character creation. Everything else is just sparkling video game.

And then you take the Test of the Starstone. As a joke, of course.

Accidental ascensions are never the punchline to a joke.