EVERYTHING you can do in Pathfinder 2e's Three Action Economy (Rules Lawyer)

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

I should've specified that Interact includes drawing a stowed item (including a weapon) and stowing a weapon away. Plus, when you are knocked out in combat, you drop everything in hand. This feels restricting to people coming from 5e, where 1 interaction per round is free. I will cover the effect these decisions to RESTRICT what you can do in PF2 have, in the next video! EDIT: The Remaster states you can swap 2 items with a single Interact action! Gods be praised!

[@eostyrwinn5018]

"Why I prefer pathfinder over the market leader" is a very lawyer way to take about D&D

[@Aidan8et]

It doesn't help that WotC is very litigious towards anyone they don't appreciate.

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

@@Aidan8etI wouldn't mind being sued by WOTC and having to defend myself in court. I see no better way to promote my brand! lol

[@benjaminhoare5927]

"WOTC deploys men in suits to bully a benign KZbinr." Why does this (purely hypothetical) scenario feel so familiar?

[@davidbowles7281]

@@Aidan8et They can't stop you from mentioning their name. Trademark rights aren't THAT strong. In fact, comparisons are a specific carve-out in the trademark legal space.

[@Mark73]

​​@@davidbowles7281College Humor used to have a BioShock themed parody of the song "Under the Sea". Disney made them take it down when the new Little Mermaid was about to come out. CL complied even though Disney didn't have a legal leg to stand on, parodies being protected speech. What Disney _does_ have is an army of lawyers and de facto infinite resources.

[@franciscoteixeira174]

Forgot to comment that after using Demoralize, success or fail, the creature is immune to your demoralize action for 10 minutes. As powerful as this action is, it's a once a combat thing

[@canamrock]

Once per enemy per fight, indeed.

[@ssfbob456]

My players just fought a boss creature that was immune to fear and fleeing, and one player's opening action is always intimidating glare. As soon as he used it I'm like, "Instead of looking frightened like you're used to, it locks eyes with you and grins. You get the distinct impression that you've just issued a challenge, and it's been accepted."

[@Sunny_Haven]

@@ssfbob456 That sounds fucking awesome, I wish I could be more creative like that when I'm GMing an encounter.

[@ssfbob456]

@Sunny_coolgamer It gets easier once you've learned your players' habits so when you're designing an encounter you can make reasonable assumptions about how they'll act.

[@Sunny_Haven]

@@ssfbob456 I know my players pretty well (we've all been friends since middle or high school), so idk if that's the problem. I just struggle a lot with multitasking so often when I'm GMing a game, I just focus on the mechanics of what's happening and often forget to add more roleplay elements of the combat encounter, and it makes it harder to come up with stuff like that on the fly.

[@bazs7722]

Just one addition to the Pros part: I found the while the 3-action economy sometimes allows you to do more than in 5e, sometimes it's more restrictive. For example, if you get knocked to the ground unconscious, you need to use your action to stand up, another one to pick up your weapon and maybe even your third one to pick up your shield. Contrast in 5e, you get up from half of your movement, pick up your weapon with an environmental interaction and you still have an action and potentially your bonus action and half of your movement. I don't really say this as any negative or positive to the system, it's just an observation we had as we learning Pathfinder 2e with my group.

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

Yes! I go more into why "restrictions are good" in the next vid!

[@bazs7722]

@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I personally like PF2 more in this regard as a DM. The example I mentioned makes the combat more high-stakes, because when someone goes down, then they probably lose out on a full round and probably the healer too, who's going to try their best to pick that party member up from the ground with enough hit points that they don't go down in a single hit again. My players needed some time to adjust, but they kinda came to the conclusion that they need to pay more attention and can't zone out in combat like in 5e. Looking forward to show them the "restrictions are good" video, because that is currently the biggest grumbling point in the transition to the new system haha!

[@duncbot9000]

just watch the video where the dwarf cleric with hammer and shield falls in the water in the Abomination Vaults campaign... They need to swim, pickup their items (both of them), then put away their weapons, then climb, then brandish their weapons again.. More than 3 actions!

[@nahuel3433]

​@@duncbot9000Well tbf that would be like 3 turns in DnD too

[@duncbot9000]

@@nahuel3433 the distances were very small though. It might be two turns tops. I'd rule it half speed to swim and climb likely an athletics check. May or may not require an action for the climb, but either way there was no enemies in close proximity so no chance to attack (but might have allowed a spell to be cast once they got up top.) Stowing weapon and shield as a free action and retieving them on next turn as a free action. Honestly that's only one turn + free actions on next turn. Movement has very little consequences in 5e.

[@vidgamer444]

I think one potentially important action that isn't mentioned enough in these scenarios is retrieving a worn item, if you want to use a potion, scroll, or alchemical item on your next turn for example, though of course you need a free hand to do so, which means this is typically easier to do on a caster (or monk), which does limit the usefulness a bit

[@IndieGoFigure]

Best use of 3 actions? True Strike + Spellstrike baby, magus for life.

[@nicholasfoster2564]

It's great to see certain tricks persist across editions.

[@Zedrinbot]

The big consideration with the three-action economy is you have to consider how there are sometimes little taxes to account for. Instead of draw a weapon being a clunky "once per turn free interaction" or "optionally as part of your movement or charge, if you have at least a +1 base attack bonus," it's codified as an actual action. They're in there for a reason, and I don't actually hate them myself, but it's important to be aware of them cause if you take some things for granted, you will wind up starved for economy. It also means things like slow or stun aren't just "congrats, no turn for you" conditions. And despite having more actions so it's more appropriate to have taxes like this, many actions are more powerfully weighted in a way that scales well. Overall damage in PF2 comes from stronger attacks, not more of them, which is something I love (not that some options don't focus on multiple attacks instead of just single, strong ones). A single attack with varying degrees of striking runes in PF2 is closer to a full attack in PF1 or Extra Attack in 5e.

[@AnaseSkyrider]

One D&D implemented a condition called Daze (different from the BG3 version entirely, functioning more like an old-school flat-footed that removes DEX to AC) which forces you to choose 1 between your action, movement, and bonus action. I could imagine there being a more incremental version, where you choose 2, and then choose 1. Maybe it could include Interaction as a codified action, instead of a convoluted "as part of your action" gray side-bar that mostly exists as a community term rather than game term (the same way "Skill check" does not exist in 5e, but is said by the community for "Ability check with a skill proficiency")

[@ehoffmann9102]

Thankyou for making this. I run for new players a lot and it's always really hard getting accross to them what they can do with their actions, this will help massively

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

ADDITIONS/ERRATA: -Benefit #6 of the 3 Action Economy: Easier to homebrew actions! A player can do their wild and crazy thing and it won't cost them their only Action. And it's easier to figure out how many Actions something takes versus whether it should be free, an Action, or a Bonus Action.

[@ecothunderbolt257]

The easier to understand thing has been surprisingly difficult to explain to some of the diehard 5e fans I know. I guess once you play 5e for multiple years its hard for some people to realize that the differentiation between Action and Bonus Action isn't intuitive. Regardless, I think that the 3 Action Economy is far superior for sake of simplicity. In teaching my own players the new system, it was incredibly easy to explain that everything is an action, however some things use multiple actions. There's some downsides, certain strategies in combat aren't as viable as in a system like 5e and that has annoyed my players on occasion as a result of action taxation. But overall it seems a better system for actions in my own game.

[@boris_bulletdodger9109]

Positive comment

[@huntsman0865]

egregiously over the top negitive responce.

[@JessieTrinket]

Agreeing reply

[@Tecnodoc32]

​@@huntsman0865name calling!

[@zolgathor]

Positive reply in relation to aformentioned comment.

[@devcrom3]

Negative remark that devolves into a racist rant.

[@Kiaulen]

I love the three action economy. It doesn't cost your strike to disengage, level 1s can attack 3x, spells cost more time than melee attacks, etc. That and having focus spells (encounter powers) and lots of at will options means thus feels like the best of 4e and 5e and then some.

[@ecothunderbolt257]

Not needing to wait to get an extra attack is so nice. Despite it not being the most optimal, I can tell my players love being able to attempt 3 attacks in one turn. I've also got one particular player who's kinda addicted to making gambles in TRPG. He does the 3rd attack a lot. And he hasn't even always missed when doing so.

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

3rd attack is actually viable when you're a martial dealing with enemies much lower level than you. Doesn't happen at Level 1 for obvious reasons tho

[@SigurdBraathen]

Create a Diversion: (@17:10) : You make one single check, but you do not necessarily fool them all. I suppose each individual has their own DC which determine if they're fooled. Thus, you may fool none, some or all your foes.

[@mustardman1119]

As someone whos been playing 2e for a while, it is really hard to change after the toxic relationship that was 5e. We moved to 2e in 2022, grappling on like a messiah, so we were confused when combat could be churned out stale for us. You're videos have shown us that we have to actually put in the effort in combat and the true depth it has. I cant take cover because I'm not close enough? Next time I'll think about my movement more deeply. The other players are struggling to hit? Next time I'll choose to forgo my most accurate attack to raise the chances for everyone else with a trip or grapple.

[@mustardman1119]

And I'll remember to give my damn caster a crossbow next time

[@davidbowles7281]

@@mustardman1119 I threw mine in the trash can to save bulk. Xbows are very useless.

[@Tricnic]

Technically (the best kind of -cally), D&D does use a 3-action economy - Action, Move, Bonus Action. The main difference being that their 3 actions are limited in what you can do with each. And before you say it, Extra Attack is a single action, just like PF2E Monk's Flurry of Blows but without the multiple attack penalty.

[@gregallan4291]

It's not really a 3 action economy. You can't utilise the bonus action unless you have an ability that states you can, and movement is a resource often wasted since 5e dicentivises movement within melee range. There are three resources you can potentially utilise, but unlike a true 3 action economy, you won't be consuming all three every turn.

[@duncbot9000]

This is a great timing for this video as we are waiting to begin when the remaster books release when I will want to show this to new players, but I am also eagerly awaiting an updated video shortly after with any new rules (c'mon Aid, Disarm, and Recall Knowledge!)

[@couver73]

People'll always be mad that some things cost an action in this system. But it's a GOOD thing. I'm of the mindset that increasing the chance to make better tactical decisions in combat involves removing any "mindless" actions. By mindless, I mean things that usually don't take an action on your part and can be done every single turn all the time. Pathfinder 1e had this issue with 5-foot steps and attacks of opportunity, as they didn't take up your normal actions. 5e has its movement and object interaction. This system pushes you to think things carefully.

[@aliasalias8681]

Just started playing Pathfinder with my friends. I’ve been watching your channel for a little while, I am not remotely familiar with all of your content. That said, if you haven’t already, I would really appreciate a series on all of the in-combat and out-of-combat actions that can be performed with various skills. Athletics seems like the most useful in-combat skill to have training in, here two games into my first campaign of Pathfinder to eat.

[@lennartmeyerstenfjeld9473]

After having played D&D for 25 years, when I first heard about PF2E’s three-action economy, I had an epiphany. I just thought: “This is it. This is what’s been missing from D&D all these years. It’s so simple. The solution was right in front of us all along.”

[@Dharengo]

The funny thing is, 4E had something very close to it. They were so close, then they borked it.

[@gor6518]

Great video for newcomers, thanks!

[@AccelTurbo]

Thanks for this. Trying to get into Pathfinder and this helped visualize a few things.

[@xdan-]

Fun fact: there is a 5e based game called Nimble 5e that DOES use the 3 action economy, and it's fully compatible with all 5e adventures, so it's not as bad an idea as you may think!

[@SwingRipper]

8:00 Grappling is powerful you say lol

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

I regret not randomly putting your face up on screen when I said that

[@cjphillips90]

Thank you for the video. Commenting for the Algorithm.

[@simonpelletier8047]

I know 5e is very big so I understand and appreciate the comparison, but I'd love to also hear comaprisons to PF 1 (whcih would also compare to 3.5), also i know I'm late to the party so I dont know if it's something that would be interesting going forward

[@camtoantran8128]

you really need a list show all 15 courses of your video, cause i cant find the 15th video here

[@Limpfire]

Using BattleMedicine is still overpowered. i am Dwarf, Druid lvl6 with BattleMedicine, Ward Medic and Godless Healing... if i crit (and i do in 2 of 3 cases) i heal a lot (even more for myself)... and its hilarious. imagine an ifrit firedruid dwarf who is also a ghost, grabbing some moskitos out of the healingtool and stick it in the back of his vampire teammate to heal her for around 35hp (still ONE action) ;D i dont need "Heal"spell ... so end of it is: i stay back, cast spells and stuff and if someone is nearly dead, they come to me to get healed or i run around for everyone to heal (put some fresh meat in the mouth of our ghoul or something xD ) (yes u cant heal "undead" creatures, but the gm allowed it cause we are 3 undeads and one living in the party... its an evil campaign)

[@ogun6464]

I'm curious what area of law you practice, as much as you are comfortable sharing. I follow many law channels on KZbin and find it interesting to know their legal focus, and how it informs their perspectives

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

For the civil rights group BAMN. And it doesn't really pay, hence my KZbin and GMing gigs!

[@ogun6464]

@@TheRulesLawyerRPG thank you!

[@survivordave]

It's funny hearing 5e players dismayed at how little they get for free now when 3 standard actions a turn feels very freeing to a PF1e player like me!

[@Rengis33]

Can duel weilders use one weapon to block like a shield and the other to strike?

[@nathanstruble2177]

I wish there was, like, a deck of cards or something that I could give my players covering just this stuff.

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

There are some very useful player references. Google "reddit Pathfinder 2e action guide" and you'll find a few. Also, the Beginner Box player reference card is a nice simpler one to start with (but alas it doesn't look there's a good image out there in the wild, it is part of the BB box set though)

[@haydongonzalez-dyer2727]

Very useful

[@Akasen1226]

Hey Ronald, question for ya. You mention around 16:50 the idea "doubling the number" in our heads when we're thinking of things like penalties and boons. I get that they're important, but what's the logic there of also considering the number as doubled? Like in what sense exactly?

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

It's only important when acclimating to PF2 if you come from another system. Hearing +1 can sound inconsequential, but if it's "+2" someone coming from PF1/3e for example will compare it to flanking, or from 5e will compare it to a +1d4. Raising your Shield "only" gives a +2, but no one in any system will say no to getting +4 to something, etc.

[@StabYourBrain]

He doesn't mean it in a literal sense as of multiplying the numbers by two. He means that every bonus essentially counts as 2 bonuses due to the critical system. For exampel if you increase your AC by 2 (due to raise a shield) you not only decreast your chance of getting hit, but you also decrease (or sometimes flatout eliminate) the chance of being critically hit, because for a crittical hit the enemy has to roll 10 over your AC, which possibly cannot be done if your AC is too high (except for if the enemy rolls a Nat20). Same goes the other way, if you gain a +2 bonus to your skill check you not only increase your odds of success, and maybe even have a roll modifier so high that you cannot critically fail anymore (except for if you roll a nat1). Ultimately reducing the chance of critical failure maybe from 15% to only 5%.

[@emilyliedtke7059]

I think the concept of doubling the number is a helpful shortcut when comparing the influence a bonus/penalty has compared to DnD and other d20 systems. A +1 in most d20 systems means you get a +5% chance of success. That, in turn, means a 5% increase in average Damage when talking about attacks, and a 5% increase in the average of whatever other effect you might apply (a +1 on an action that would give an opponent a -1 on something means, on average, increasing the penalty by 0.05). In Pathfinder, however, you get a +5% chance of success and a +5% chance of a critical success (I'm counting a critical success as an upgrade to a success instead of sth else entirely). So, let's do the damage example again: the +5% success chance means a +5% increase in average damage. Additionally, the +5% chance for upgrading a success into a critical success means that, since a critical success doubles the damage, an additional chance of 5% to deal the same damage again - so another +5% increase in average damage, meaning a total of +10% average damage. Same with the penalty example - whatever the average penalty you apply is, a +1 increases the penalty by 0.1 instead of 0.05. And the same applies for every other penalty and bonus: a -2 penalty of AC means a +10% in average damage taken from all affects that target AC. And so on and so forth. It's a little different for saves, but that has more to do with how the four degrees of success make saving throw effects very different from other d20 systems. Now, most people don't like to think about this in terms of math. They have a feeling that tells them how good a +1 is, shaped by their experience from playing the game. So, where this idea is useful is if you have ever played DnD or any other d20 system - any bonus/penalty in Pathfinder 2e is as good/bad as twice the same bonus/penalty in DnD/Pathfinder 1e/most other d20 systems. (It's also twice as good as you would intuitively think if you have good stochastic intuition, but as a Mathematician, I know that almost no human has that)

[@emilyliedtke7059]

I should clarify, the increase to average damage is not 5% of the average damage but 5% of the base damage (or 10%, or whatever percent later). Just for anyone trying to follow the math. The TLDR remains the same - any bonus/penalty in Pathfinder 2e is as good/bad as twice the same bonus/penalty in DnD/Pathfinder 1e/most other d20 systems.

[@ExatedWarrior]

A +1 in other systems increases your chance to hit by 5% which is a 5% increase in average damage. However, in PF2e it actually increases your chance to crit by 5% so you have a 5% chance of dealing double damage so your average damage actually increases by 10%.

[@lincr.1988]

What do you think of the Dying system? It seems to me that the characters are.. way too resilient and durable, I don`t often see storytellers hitting the ones who are already on the floor, so at least in the games I`ve played the 2 occasions with the highest chance of killing characters normally are spells with the Death trait and persistent damage.

[@OrangeGills]

Going down is very punishing (you waste 2 actions next turn picking up your stuff and standing up), so its tense and you're incentivized to avoid it. As for actually dying? It's up to the GM whether or not they make death a central threat to characters. A more dangerous campaign doesn't have to involve explicit death from combat - for example unconscious party members could be dragged away by monsters, or threatened by intelligent enemies as a bargaining tool. Both of those create tense experiences that include the rest of the party.

[@maromania7]

That is absolutely your GM's choice to make them resilient and durable, and the choice should not be taken from all GM's. A Dying character can quite easily become a dead one on the enemy's next turn, or the next enemy's turn before the player gets a chance to roll. At the very least they can easily make the odds against you. If your GM is choosing not to, that is not a system issue, it's a style clash.

[@iCarus_A]

@@maromania7the PF2e GMG recommends that you do not attack characters that are down. Pg 493 "only the most vicious creatures focus on helpless foes" -- the design intent is that characters who goes down do not take any more hits outside of AoE or persistent damages

[@scottbarnes1364]

Great video

[@raylast3873]

Is this actually implemented in Kingmaker and WotR?

[@emilyliedtke7059]

Those are Pathfinder 1e, not 2e (and in some area's they're kinda playing fast and loose with that system as well)

[@shiro_the_trap2513]

On the note of Disarm, an alteration I'd make to it is Critical Success: 'You wrench your opponent's weapon out of their hand, gaining control of it. If this action was performed with a whip you pull the weapon toward you' Success: 'You knock your opponent's weapon out of their hand, where it drops onto the ground within 5 feet of them in a space of your choosing' Fail: N/A Critical Fail: 'You overextend in your attempt and are disadvantaged by it. As a reaction, your opponent can use their reaction to Disarm you with a +1 Circumstance Bonus.'

[@falseanteater]

Do you realize how fast combats would spiral if a single boss enemy could wrench your fighter's weapon away with an athletics check that probably beats their reflex 60% of the time

[@nathanstruble2177]

Comments for the Algorithm!!!

[@jeffmacdonald9863]

Annoys me that you can't do a 3 action Ready to Ready something that takes 2 actions - usually a spell.

[@duncbot9000]

But that would be 5 actions. You use all 3 with Ready: 2 being used to prepare yourself and keep a lookout for the trigger and 1 to perform the action.

[@jeffmacdonald9863]

@@duncbot9000 Ready is a two action thing. "Choose a single action or free action you can use, and designate a trigger. Your turn then ends. If the trigger you designated occurs before the start of your next turn, you can use the chosen action as a reaction" There's no reason to think you can't have done another single action first. That you explicitly keep your existing MAP strongly implies you can.

[@duncbot9000]

@@jeffmacdonald9863 Ah. I am still waiting for remaster to play. A Stride then Ready sounds like the perfect turn then. It made sense to me before why you gotta go and tell me the truth 😅

[@jeffmacdonald9863]

@@duncbot9000 Yeah, Stride then Ready works well. It's just odd that it doesn't work as well for casters as for martials.

[@fernandozorin204]

I try savage worlds and the free action with -2 to each action for additional one is way more flexible and understanding and movement didn't got your actions

[@westerstorm744]

usefull thx

[@devcrom3]

Spam and clickbait! This video is only 20-something minutes long and can't mathematically have EVERYTHING you can do! I'm unliking, not commenting and unsubscribing from SwingRipper!

[@blueThumbnail]

show cat

[@TheRulesLawyerRPG]

Alas, Megan is at a another house this month, since we have to set out some mouse traps! She will make a return tho!

[@gethriel]

You forgot to add "...that you could do much easier and more fun in any other system." To your title.

[@ankitk236]

Ambiguous passive aggressive comment 😝

[@RickandPenny]

the same 3 things over and over. That's it. Its bullshit. People do the same 3 things over and over. So why do it. AD and D and 2nd and 3rd to 3.5 and Pathfinder 1st made it where you have to chose what to do and what all you can do. It makes it where you have to choose and it matters. You do the action. Much better. But 2nd Pathfinder is lame at best. But i'm an old man and find it anything but D and D

[@justicar5]

MAP aka forcing you to do boring, uninteresting things you want nothing to do with....3 attacks at level 1! Great! Oh...2nd one will probably wiff and 3rd certainly will? Why give them to me then? Just let me hut stuff...

[@nathanstruble2177]

If you consider "I roll to attack" "I roll to attack" and then "I roll to attack" interesting then this isn't the game for you. That said, you can play the Flurry Ranger to roll a bunch of dice if you prefer. That said, moving into proper position, interacting with the environment and coordinating with your party will always be both more interesting and more optimal, mainly because of how it interacts with the +10/-10 Crit system.

[@a_wild_Kirillian]

D&D 5e is right over the corner. Built exactly for you, it seems.

[@justicar5]

​​@@nathanstruble2177no it won't. Or rather for it to be the system needs to be much deeper than the mind numbing boredom PF2 manages. That's why skirmish wargames exist. Given that 'I attack' inflicts the dead condition, the best condition, why would I bother with showboating

[@LadyKjell]

Thank you for pronouncing "bon mot" correctly. Also this is a good summary! Helping me figure out some summoner tactics.

[@henridehaybe525]

He does not, though. "on" is a single vowel-like sound in French. There is no "n" sound in "bon". However, you pronounce the "n" if the next word starts with a wovel. But in that case "on" is no longer a single sound.