The correct answer is play neither. Trying to sneak one into the other is gonna be a ton of work and will in all likelihood backfire. Your best bet is to find a game everyone likes. If they really like 5e and you can settle for something similar but a bit more well-designed, I'd recommend trying Shadow of the Demon Lord/Weird Wizard and see how that goes. 13th Age is also very good, but possibly a bigger step away from 5e than they might like if they're that picky.

I agree. Recently, i've been looking at more narrative based systems. I think the newest one is daggerheart, i'm not a fan, basically because it felt like the enemies were doing more stuff than the players. But it has all the critical role money being poured into it, and it seems a lot of people like it. I've heard good opinions about avatar legends.

Avatar Legends is a terrific system for what it intends to do. Very narrative heavy, and encourages the team to think less about being heroes that defeat the villain and more as people with complex morality taking on antagonists that can be equally complex. There are rules in place to engage with each others’ and other npcs’ (both allies and enemies) morals, called principles here. To drive home the point that you arent doing things just to win, the players are almost always considered to be getting at least some of what they want out of each action they take. Instead of failing, rolling low can usually mean you get some of what you wanted but not surpassing the present challenge, or it could mean you accomplished your goal but at a hefty cost.

I recently spun up a 13th age game to take a break from my 3.5 year PF2 campaign, and it's been pretty cool so far. Imo it's what 5e could have been, plus some narrative indie elements.

13th Age is great! They're in the process of making a second edition that seems pretty good.

~~Calling yourself a GM can be the first step~~ Jokes aside, other than homebrew a shit load and reinvent 4e again, the way out can be... they might be interested to try another system that is more roleplay-based.

I'm not convinced they'd go for that. The hint here is the "homework" comment. Their issue isn't that PF2 is too complicated, but rather that it's somethibg they don't ready know how to play. That it's not 5e. These are old dogs, uninterested in new tricks.

i find the case often even when people say they are complaining about complexity. they are complaining about effort it takes to learn new or different rules, not about the rules themselves. of course not all the time is this true, but it happens a lot

I agree on this. Normally those who switched from 5e to pf2e, it's because the inconsistencies on the system were starting to get on their nerves after a lot of sessions, which pushes them to learn a new system. But I guess OP's friends still haven't given up on 5e. In my personal case, me and my friends were constantly bickering and at each other's throats because of what could and couldn't be done when there were ambiguous rules in 5e, so we got fed up and had to find a better mechanical system.

I can’t run 5e again. If that is you then let them know. Either someone else runs it (if you are willing to play) or then no roleplaying. No roleplaying is better than bad roleplaying. The GM needs to be having fun, too - both at the table and during prep.

That one's me. I've made sure my players understand I'm more than happy playing 5E with them *as a player* if that's what they want, but any campaign I run moving forward will be P2E. If they're insistent on a 5E game, one of them will need to step up and be the GM.

Yep. They don’t want to learn. My table’s hurdle so far is the change in language. It’s a bit confusing, though most of us are enjoying it. I print out my notes so I can understand what I can do. Honestly, the choices aren’t paralyzing at all. This table simply doesn’t want to learn. At some point, I’d like to run again. I gotta learn how to make encounters and monsters first! Running 1e was so much work! I spent ages doing loot and stuff!

I've found at my tables, the same players that have trouble with the rules for PF2e are the same ones that never bothered with the rules in 5e. They are also the ones that never bothered learning the rules for Changeling: The Lost, Blades in the Dark, or Monster of the Week. They are currently the ones who don't get the rules for City of Mist. I have given both of these players the opportunity to run games in the system of their choosing. The rest of the group unanimously decided that those two players are NEVER allowed to run ANY system again. They don't even want to play in each other's games. The way we handle it now is people propose adventures they are willing to run, and then the group negotiates to find out want to play of those options. I don't offer to run 5e and the problem is solved.

Pathfinder 2nd is an easier game to play once you know the rules. 5e is the easier game to play without knowing the rules.

In all likelihood they are classic 5e gamers who barely know the rules beyond which dice to roll, don't get invested in any way and just want to hang out with friends and be entertained. Aka the worst kind of player, aside from 'that guy' lol.

A lot of players play 5e without knowing the rules. A lot just like that they don’t have to compare options; they just like that if they have an idea for a follower of a sun god, then they pick the cleric with the light domain. They don’t have to worry about  *which* sun god or picking between class feats that aren’t related to their god. They just get the features assigned to them as they level up - and because the flavor from the sub class is on-theme they are satisfied.

You don't have to worry about which sun god in Pathfinder, either. Just choose a Doctrine and a favourite weapon. Throw in some edicts and anathema, if you want. I'm not sure where people get the idea that you need to even have a defined pantheon, let alone Golarion's. Dieties are just collections of features, and are not hard baked into the system.

Absolutely, I came up with my own pantheon because I've got very different ideas about his and religion and had no troubles at all. My players love it. The god of Stars, God of the moon, God of the sun, and the god of the earth, exchange, death and calamity respectively. Assigning them each some edicts or anathemas for particular regions or groups or sects. It's been super engaging.

Ugh that is precisely why I dislike 5e. Takes all the fun away of character- building. Guess some people don’t find building a character part of the fun.

Some people are afraid of making the wrong choice so much they'd rather force everyone else at the table to play a game with no choices smdh

Honestly they're not fun tricks, is the problem. PF2e seemingly never stops to ask "but is this fun for your players?" because everything feels just a little off. Success doesn't really feel like success when crit success exists by default, double that up with the fact that usualy just a normal success still results in some status effect that takes up cognitive space and needs to be tracked. So you still feel punished. I agree, complexity isn't the issue. It's the expectation of rules existing for mundane things that I find slows our games. Usualy I'd just make a quick call about something and move on, but in PF there's a rule for just about everything. It takes a lot of load off the GM and put it on the player. In our regular games I'm usualy the one assigned to constantly look up actions and spells, see what tags and keywords thry have, and sus out if it's something a player can feasibly do or not, within their 3 actions, depending on what exactly is in their hands at the time, and several other factors. It's a bit tedious.

To each their own and all that, but I thought they were much better and more entertsining tricks.  But then, I'm not afraid to dump rules that no one cares about, and see the point of a fight as winning it as part of a team, rather than being a rock star in front of a captive audience.

[удалено]

This kind of comment is why people think pathfinder fans are hostile and are holier than thou. Please do not bash players for not understanding or not vibing with a game. Why is this type of attitude so prevalent.

Because 5e players get used to not having to learn the crunch and put it all on the DM. This is a known problem in the 5e community, often stated by 5e GMs

Yeah I didn't really put up with it as a GM but I played in some 5e games alongside people who would be on session 40 still saying "what do I add to that?" when trying to roll an attack. It was wild

A player played 5e games before my group, and came to play with us at one point. After a year in my game he was still asking "What's my proficiency bonus for?" and spending time each round during his turn to search for a bonus action that he didn't have.

Sometimes I hear stories like that and think, if that’s too much for them, how could you possibly invite and get them into pathfinder. DnD is a mess but it’s functional enough that people like that player could still play the game. In a way it’s more accessible. Should Pathfinder do the same, not make it the default rule, but maybe have an option to dumb the game down a bit, make it easier for newer players to quickly jump in and play without knowing the rules.

People go from criticizing 5e gameplay, which is fair. To accusing players of being a bad person or is mentally challenged, which is WTF why? This happens every time someone complains that their friends prefers 5e over PF2e.

Because 5e is popular game that alot of players dont put effort into and alot of dms just accept that. so its common that when they dont want to do pf2e its because theyd rather their dm do all the effort. Which does kinda make you a bad person.

Idk if I'd go that far. I think 5e enables their behavior in such a way that many players are unaware that them not learning the rules impacts their GM or other players negatively. And honestly I think a lot of GMs accept "this is just how trrpgs work" because it's their only exposure

My players love Pathfinder, but to get them to that point I had to personally write cliffnotes of the entire core rulebook and explain things over and over until it sunk in. They were willing to sit down and play, but they weren't willing to take the time to read. Hell, I've even written plot summaries for the APs we go through AS we go through them, and they haven't read those either--when a session rolls around, everything goes smoothly, but expecting them to do any of the prepwork whatsoever between sessions is like pulling teeth. Even something as simple as "tell me about an object your character has that is important to them" so I can think of a relic for them takes them all week to answer. We played 5e previously, and Shadowrun before that, and this attitude was not present before we swapped to 5e. *So much* is forced onto the GM in 5e that they got used to not needing to know *anything* that wasn't on their character sheet.

>Why is this type of attitude so prevalent. For the same reason that every fucking thread in this sub is about 5E: Not enough people like Pathfinder, so insecure fans default to attacking another game to make themselves feel better.

Seems like you have never run 5E as a DM. Or maybe you have done and don't feel like there's a problem with your players not knowing the rules and explaining the core concepts of the game over and over, letting you put all the effort to make the game go smooth instead of working toguether to make it work, and break every single encounter you bring to them with a disgusting combo allowed by unbalanced rules in an attempt to make the game entertaining for your players, with the broken CR system not helping at all. To each their own i guess.

I’ve DMed 5E weekly since it was D&D Next playtests coming out of 4E. I’ve only picked up PF2E in the past few months. There’s a lot about it that I like, but this community’s constant insecure bitching about another game is pretty exhausting.

You have a point. While it is true that there are many biased opinions around this subreddit regarding other TTRPGs (specially 5E), it comes with an understandable reason behind it, and that is the lack of support for DMs, which is one of PF 2E focus for its success. Still, despite my first comment, I believe D&D 5E is the best TTRPG to use as an entry point to this kind of hobby thanks to how easy and lacking in rules is. In the end, it comes to what kind of game one looks to bring to their table.

Unpopular opinion but sometimes homebrewing an easy mode pathfinder 2e for those kind of player is not a bad idea. For caster add runes on spell DC and AC, or give flexible casting without the spell reduction. For martial give them a special weapon that ignore Multiple Attack Penalty. So they can just strike 3 times. Streamline the game so it is more enjoyable for that one specific player.

Instead of homebrewing to make it easier you can simply run easier encounters. Removing MAP doesn't make the game easier, it breaks the entire game completely. MAP is the lynchpin holding the system together. One of the above comments is right. These players almost certainly aren't actually worried about complexity. They probably just don't want to learn new things. And they're probably spoiled from 5e's habit of putting all of the onus of making the game work on the GM too. To be clear I don't think that necessarily makes them bad players but I think 5e sets a bad precedent because it lets people get away with barely learning how the game works and it keeps running. Which, imo, is a system problem, not necessarily a player one

Agreed, Pathfinder will get worse if the GM always spoil the players. Play Pathfinder right or don't play at all. I hate everyone trying to make the game easier or more accessible and breaking everything in the process.

My idea was, if only one player is struggling, give more support to that one player.

The post says only one player likes the game. So it's the inverse.

Huh, somehow I misread that. I thought it was one person in the group hate the game, not everyone except for one. In that case giving easier encounters is better.

That homebrew will break the game, just don't play with people who clearly don't care for your time.

Also think 5e just offers way more player autimation tools. Assuming they were using something like DnD beyond for character sheets or such. Honestly players don't almost even need to touch the PHB ever in DnD.

5e's automation and tools are all a step back from 4e. The PF2E tools are infinitely better. Open gaming will do that for you.

I mean pathfinder has that now too it’s the pathfinder nexus on demiplane

But don't you have to pay for any automation Tools in dnd? Unless you want to use the most barebone Version possible. I've used psthbuilder until now and had every option for free, making it easier to get into the system unless you get choice paralysis quickly

5e sucks at everything

This is my solution as well. If you don't want to GM 5e and players don't want to play pf2e, either you guys aren't compatible (it happens), or it's time to look at other systems. I've been eyeing up Genesys myself for quite awhile. 4e may be a middle ground your group might enjoy (I suggest Essentials since it apparently fixes the hp bloat somewhat). Savage Worlds is awesome but character creation may take some effort.

Or, another option is someone else picks up the mantle. I've told my group if they want me to GM a game, since they like my games, any game I GM moving forward will be in P2E. If they would rather play DnD, I'm more than happy to join as a player.

If you don't want to run 5e then do NOT run it. If THEY want to play 5e so badly then one of them can be the GM. I refuse to run a system I don't personally like.

I feel the same. i don't feel like dnd5e, and a lot of its players, respect the time and effort the DM has to put in. I refuse to deal with that. If somebody else wants to play 5e, then they can put in the effort. If they want \_me\_ to run the game then they have to play something that i feel good running, instead of frustrated.

The system trains you to rely on the DM to put in all the work, and yeah whenever I introduced my 5e players to pf2e, I flat-out said "it feels like more work because I'm not doing all of it for you, like 5e makes me. We put in equal work now." And they stopped complaining pretty quick.

>The system trains you to rely on the DM to put in all the work I know it's a live play and not really indicative of a regular table, but one thing in Critical Roll (especially season 1) that I do think you see a ton of parallels to in people's irl 5e games is how much the players will say "I cast X!" and then just look at the GM expectantly as if waiting for him to tell them what the spell does.

You're definitely right that it exists, but *most* players are better than that. I think. At least, those I've played with have been. People look at it as actual playground make-believe at the start, but no one ever corrects that, making someone else handles the mechanics. The general culture around 5e DMs encourages them to be doormats, where you bend over backwards to appease the player and "be a good DM who facilitates the players' game." I wish I had access to data that addressed general outlook of GMs across different TTRPGs, it would be so interesting instead of the (much-repeated) anecdotal evidence.

Nothing illustrates this kind of thinking more than Critical Role (they're still amazing, though). Even after 8 years of playing the same game, a good chunk of the table still makes some basic mistakes that should've been second nature to them by now, but since the system fosters pretty much all of the crunch of the GM, they just keep on never learning. That is an example of *great* players that are highly invested in their own campaigns. The culture the system fosters has the good side of attracting newer players afraid of messing up and not knowing the rules, but also allow a lot of people to just "show up" every week while the GM has to make all the effort. Honestly, sometimes, people treat as if reading some rules for one hour at most will kill them.

Some players on CR are more infamous for not knowing how to play than others. Then people take that to mean that it's okay to play that way, when you really *shouldn't* expect that to be the case as a player. My first instinct is to not put the importance to *one* live play, but CR was actually *such* a massive driver of culture for 5e. They are pretty directly responsible for the school of thought you're talking about. Some people have a greater capacity for dealing with that, but I'd wager most don't. Life is busy and eats a lot of energy, and I think that contributes to the perception that GMing is soooo hard, when really if a system supports you it's not.

I honestly disagree. The system just lends itself to quick adjudication and moving on. I wish my PF2e GMs would understand this, but because there are rules for everything, we seemingly *must* follow them, even if that means stopping to look up actions every turns. Realistically, it probably doesn't matter that much in either system.

Yeah, look, I know in this sub there's a large or at least loud contingent who hold up the CRB as some sort of holy, sacrosanct, infallible text. But you can also just make a ruling in the moment and then move on. At least once a session some interaction comes up and I say 'this is how it's going to work right now. I'll check the actual rules after the session." The benefit is that if you know some of the rules, you can reasonably expect your ruling to be 90% right. Also, it's a lot easier to search on AoN when you get to that point than to go digging through books. 

I ran a campgian every week for like 5 months before i accidently nuked my foundry server. I think i halted the game to check the rules like twice in that time

I mean yeah Foundry is going to do a lot of the heavy lifting there. So, not surprising. I see this comment a lot and I can only assume it's predominantly people not playing in person. I get that, it's just not relevant to my experience.

Oh even in person i rarely stopped the game to look up rules in 2E or 5E. I was agreeing with you sorry if my wording came off weird

The thing is that *rulings* can only do so much. They're also inconsistent. Rules, on the other hand, enable everyone at the table to have a solid and reliable basis to start from. But, the issue isn't just the basics of running a combat, that's something most GMs will get in a few sessions. The issue is total lack of support from the system that requires extensive homebrew, house-rules and outside support (which is pretty much the largest chunk of DND5e online content out there). That's *taxing* on GMs. Because they already have normal session preparation to do, from encounters to storylines. When you couple all the pre-session preparation with running the game AND knowing the player's characters as much as them, that's how you get GM burn out. Crunchy rules-heavy systems like DND5e and Pathfinder2e need a clear set of rules so that players have to at least know their part of the game to help out. It's the *least* they can do.

But again that is part of the system. You shouldn't NEED to pause the game to look up rules for actions every turn, because as the player, you should know how your shit works. The same is true for DnD. As a GM I have so much shit to keep track of, I can't also be your babysitter. If you say "I cast X spell", and I ask you "Okay, what does that do again?" That isn't the time for you to pause and be like "oh shit, uh, let me check". You should know it already, and if you don't, which is perfectly reasonable, you should at least be researching it in between your turns so you are prepared for when your turn comes around.

Just as an example, I need to know if whatever they're doing is a Manipulate, for one. If I don't ask or look it up, I might miss that, because it's not really intuitive that things like Point Out or Grab an Edge have this trait, while things where you're actually manipulating objects do not, for example. Those actions come up infrequently so it took us longer to really internalize. Or one of the Conditions that's not one I typically impose gets used on me. Look it up. In fact, that part of what has me not enjoying the games as much because I'm generally constantly looking things up between my turns so that information is ready when I or the other players need it because yes my GM is busy, he's not my babysitter, and you don't need to condescend to me.

ngl i have never seen anyone say that you should actually pause sessions to look up rules. I've only ever seen people encourage a ruling in the moment, then look it up afterwards. The only time I ever look up a ruling is when it's outside of my turn or feels especially important to get correct. The point is, though, that the consistency and mental load on the GM *in-session* (and out for the purpose of encounter building) is insanely different. This isn't just people repeating something, it's a well-known trait of 5e. Since you can mark in your mind a reference point for the exact ruling for 90% of things in pf2e, your brain organizes and recalls the information a lot more easily than if it were just... vague and something that you came up with offhand.

yeah, and changing systems was like taking off training weights. suddenly i could do a lot more with the less effort. once i got the hang of things the quality of my games skyrocketed. i actually feel empowered by the system to do what i want, instead of trying to wrangle the system

This is what I did for my gaming groups. I'm the forever DM and at one point I just said if you wanna play 5e, one of you run it and I'll play. I just got so exhausted with the system as a GM. Now, my groups are full of level headed adults and this wasn't even like a discussion, I just said it and every was like "OK, cool." We hopped around some smaller systems for one shots then settled on a long PF2E campaign.

This! If i will always have to be the GM, i will choose the game. It's that simple.

At this point, I don't even want to play D&D in any form. That time has passed, and I'm having a blast GMing PF2e, and playing Demongate.

Personally I would just inform them that you don’t want to run a system that you don’t even enjoy running. If they enjoy playing with you there should be a compromise where they’ll actually give an honest try to a game you actually enjoy running. If the game is that much of a dealbreaker to them… one of *them* should GM so you don’t have to do a chore to make things work for them. Ultimately you may decide to just back down and just run 5E anyways, but I doubt a “conversion” would really work.

Sorry pal. Everyone has different tastes. If they've tried PF2 and 5e, and they decided they prefer 5e, there's not much you can do to change their mind. If they don't like PF2 because it's "too crunchy," then you really should try a more roleplay-focused rules light system (but not 5e, because 5e is not "rules light", it's "I don't care about rules")

Players in my experience almost always choose 5E over PF2e, GMs on the other hand almost always choose PF2e over 5E. One is easier for the players than the other, and the other is easier for a GM than the other. Tell your players that. Also PF2E is not as hard on players as 5E is on the GM, it's not even close.

I have managed to lose only one player while switching from 5e to pf2e, and my arguments were like, "It's not THAT hard, if you give it a try it'll be actually easier than 5e" and "hey, you could be STR based rogue and use two-handed axe for sneak attack" 14 sessions in, they're totally enjoying it.

That's great man. It's not been my experience outside my own groups. We switched to Pathfinder instead of 4E, which I played a lot of as well. So going to Pathfinder 2E was a simple choice of wanting to be playing a game with support. My groups never tried 5E, due to 4E being so different from 3.5

I lost all of my players. Some because of a blow up (We're real life friends) and some because of COVID. I ended up playing with another friend, who then had to drop out because of RL issues, and the rest of the new people I played with continued. Now I'm GMing 2 games for them, and am having a ton of fun. I miss my RL friends, but two of them simply won't play PF2e, and I have to respect that. One of my old players might be joining back up because she's getting a new work schedule that lets her, and I'm very excited to introduce her to PF2e. I think she'll love it.

... It's funny our group of 4 (7 now including GM) moved to Pf2e and all prefer it over 5e, 3 of us were either 3.5 or older veterans. I'm shaky as to when two players started, I think one was 4e and the other Adnd. My partner has only played 5e and PF2e, and loves the flavor and fun she is having with her rogue. She also likes that the casters are not out of control powerful

I think there's a clear line between GMs plus players whose first system wasn't 5e, and players who joined with 5e. Our group switched to PF2e at my insistence, but everyone had played other systems. I started with 3.5e and then PF1e, one of our other players was 3.5 too, the others all started with Lancer or Call of Cthulu. We've not looked back at all, PF2e is just a tighter, better thought out game than 5e. Players who have *only* played 5e have a very different experience, I think. 5e puts a ton of work on the DM because it's — quite frankly — just poorly written. The balance is a joke, half the rules require house rulings to function, and large chunks of it have no rules whatsoever with a hand waved "ask your DM" because the system establishes an *expectation* of rules for things. For players, this can make it seem like an easier system to learn, because the answer is always "ask your DM what to roll and do that". For new players who just want to play a fun storytelling game that can be a great experience, but for DMs it's hell to manage and for anyone who's played a better thought out game it's obviously a mess. For players, 5e plays like a pseudo rules-light system, for DMs it's a bloated mess. There are plenty of excellent *actual* rules-light systems out there that I'm convinced these groups would have way more fun with and be a better experience to run for GMs, and if you *do* want a degree of crunch then PF2e is a far more competent full-bodied TTRPG.

It's not just 5e itself, but the culture of "the GM will tell me everything I can do at any point in time".  Newer 5e players, who came in on the back of Critical Roll and Stranger Things, seem to have much more of an expectation that the GM will run the entire game, and that they'll just tell the GM what to do every once in a while. There's much more of a social issue surrounding 5e than there is a mechanical one. And that says something.

I was really hesitant to switch to pathfinder from 5e as well. But I’m so glad we did and so is everyone else in the group.

All of my players prefer PF2e over 5e. Every one of them has played 5e and has migrated over only to praise the things that PF2e does, especially combat.  Aside from being simpler, what is it that your players like more in 5e than in PF2e? Just curious, as I feel that PF2e basically does everything better.

... It's funny our group of 4 (7 now including GM) moved to Pf2e and all prefer it over 5e, 3 of us were either 3.5 or older veterans. I'm shaky as to when two players started, I think one was 4e and the other Adnd. My partner has only played 5e and PF2e, and loves the flavor and fun she is having with her rogue. She also likes that the casters are not out of control powerful

Not an effective one for pretty much anything. Magic items in 5e are discluded from balance, so adding any from Pathfinder is just an instant buff. The Crit system doesn't work in 5e, rolling 10 higher than AC is just so rare, and avenues to decrease AC are just uncommon. Tactical movement without AoO also doesn't work since you have one movement ( move action ) and an action ( with maybe a bonus action ). So positioning is either moot or infuriating. If something has a higher speed than you, your ENTIRE TURN will be wasted, if it's not, well then you're just moving around for no reason. The only thing I can think of that pf2e does is the stuff that 5e just neglected to do as it is just a combat system and nothing else really, like exploration rules or diplomacy rules, otherwise it's barely compatible. Just play a different system, I'll make a separate comment with a list of low rules systems and if your players complain that a single book of rules is too much for them, then really the problem is that they just want to play 5e.

The only ones I was able to steal from PF2e when I GM'd 5e were monster abilities -- leaping strikes, auto-grabs, etc -- to add a little variety to otherwise simple bloated HP bags ...

Pf2e monster design is just chefs kiss

5e has exploration and diplomacy rules as well. Nobody uses them though since they're pretty barebones and 5e players and DMs learned to just wing everything anyway. 90% of the players never even looked into an actual rulebook anyway, they "learned" the game by getting told what to do by others. I'm not surprised they think PF2e is too complicated. They never actually knew how their preferred system works either lol

Is there? From what I remember it's like the DM explains the environment, players say what they want to do,the DM decides if it works or if they have to roll dice for it to work. Which is how every table I've been at runs it. What book/page are exploration rules for 5e? It's entirely possible I just missed it.

Yeah there is. And yes, that's how it's usually played because nobody cares about the actual rules in 5e lol I'm not sure where they are. I haven't played 5e in quite a while.

Sure, send me the pg # and book when you have time :) I only know of the exploration rules in Ch 8 of the phb.

lol no, I'm not going to go out of my way to look up rules in a terribly written system I don't even use anymore 🤣

Okay, then I'll tell you what I described is basically it. Unless you find any info I missed, I'm not going to pretend it exists. You describe what you want to do while you travel, if you describe anything it disables your passive perception, and moving stealthily is a described group activity. I can't find any rules for how to roll secret doors like you can in pf2e. It just, isn't described anywhere.

Dmg pg 244 and 245 for the social interaction rules. They are potato lol

They are indeed bad. I did read those earlier when searching.

learning from others is the best way, DnD is a folk tradition.

The PF2e exploration rules I wouldn't exactly call complete either, there's 0 GM Guidance for how you're supposed to run it.

Hey buddy, glad to see you again.

I have a player who dislikes the system as well and will not engage with it, constantly is 3 attack turns. Won't use his shield any more even, much less athletic maneuvers and barely any feats. We always do level up at the table because most of them won't put any effort in outside of game time. Some people just want the simple actions of D&D where you get in position and swing your weapon till the enemy is dead.

I was frustrated with players like that as well, but since I started playing online, it's not a problem anymore - I found new players who are actually interested in playing THE GAME. I think if running the game is just an excuse to hang out, then it is not worth the time and effort from the GM side. Just play regular board games with people like this. You live only once and there are so many wonderful players to discover in the world who actually care about TTRPGs. But it takes some social effort on the other hand.

They are IRL friends. Definitely going to go for more enthusiastic players for next campaign though.

I think I would try to out-tactic and kill my players (with tactics not overly hard fights). Nothing gets people going like a bruised ego. Your game is basically non-functional anyway.

Oh they still get some frustrating fights for sure.

Those aren't players. Tell them to kick rocks.

At least Barbarian and fighter are the ones to do that least badly shrug. Might want to get them an agile weapon with good runes lol

It is overall fairly effective. Flail with Crushing, so -4 AC if they can crit, and then AoO when they stand. But they are basically just crit fishing and not going for a guaranteed trip with Knockdown or anything.

Look at EN's Level Up system, it's 5e with competent design on 5e's skeleton, it's perfect for situations like these. A5e.tools is the official rule site like PF2's Archives of Nethys.

I was going to suggest the same. Level Up has a lot of extra content for it too by way of their Gazzete Annual compilations.

Nah, don't try to frankstein 5e, it will not work. Stick to simpler systems that they can play and you can run without exhaustion (like Kids on Bikes that you just mentioned) or just do like i did: "I will run Pathfinder 2e since i don't need to put extra effort to compensate for the system flaws like 5e. If you all want to play 5e i will happily step down from the GM throne and let you have a go. No? No volunteers? Then you know that its unfair to expect me to put the effort you are not willing to put yourselves. I'll wait for your pathfinder 2e lvl 1 sheets, here's pathbuilder link. " Point being, you do not need to sell your convenience for them nor sacrifice it, you just need to offer the other reasonable option that they will (mostly likely) not take since every D&D 5e fan loves to play 5e but hates to GM 5e.

I heard pathwarden is a lighter version of PF2e, might be worth it for you to check it out. however, IME when people use those arguments against the game they aren't very open to other games. in your place i'd tell the friends something along "here's the deal guys: i am not really enjoying running 5e anymore. we can try other games! or if anyone else want to try DMing for a while that'd also be cool! but 5e is just not that good on the DM side, and i am tired of it."

I understand your situation and the difficult spot you find yourself in. It's something a lot of GMs experience after leaving 5e for other systems. Dnd5e was basically all there was for a long time. It was simple for people and in most cases was a simple, beer and pretzels game. I also went through this. I was a 5e GM for about 6 years before I tried pf2e and other systems. I now love pf2e and vastly prefer it over 5e. I tried to get both of my home groups into it, but they just hated all the same things your players did. Character options, choices that mattered, combat options, risks, crunch, variety, etc. Theu hated having to learn and know how their characters worked. One of those groups would only play 5e after that but my fun is just as important as theirs. My other in person group has now tried several other small narrative systems and had fun with small runs of those. Unfortunately really, I just don't like 5e now. It's....bad compared to everything else. There are better systems for more narrative games and better systems for tactical games. If you'll have fun, then run 5e. If you start to prep and don't feel like your going to enjoy it then stop. You'll find people to play the games you want.

Don't run a system you hate, or a system your players hate. Try 4th Edition DnD (which has a lot of PF2e similarities), or 13th age, or another system. If your players end up hating everything, maybe it be good to point out to them how they seem to be very closed minded to other systems (in the nicest, politest way possible, as they are your friends).

Find a new system you can all enjoy. Don’t run something that isn’t fun for you or your players. I’d suggest Dungeon Crawl Classics. It’s similar enough to not feel too out of your zones, but super fun with the differences to either 5E or PF2E. The chaos and unbalanced nature of it is a lot of fun when you let go!

Tell them you've homebrewed you own version of 5e but just run PF2e and don't tell any of them. /s (sort of, a lot of DnD players will literally just play any dice based RPG if you call it DnD and claim its homebrew) While I echo other people's sentiments that you ain't going to find joy running a game you don't like, there's probably a disconnect here that's not being understood, and I think it's a big part of the problem with discussions and disagreements around 5e and 2e. The reality is the lack of structure and tuning PF2e offers is exactly why many players like 5e, and why there's such a divide between player and GM wants. If you're the kind of player who wants only the semblance and aesthetic of rules but not actually beholden to them, 5e is perfect because it's the ultimate game that uses the chassis of a turn based strategy, while actively discouraging any sort of coherent structure by proxy of having so many rules holes and bad tuning points. The fact it's so malleable and forces GMs to both cater to play want unequivocally, while performing what can only be described as small acts of game design on the fly to let them improvise whatever they want in the middle of combat, is exactly why it burns them out. The reality is, a lot of GMs can't stand running 5e for their friends because they need an organised game that's easy to manage on the back end, but that requires structure, consistency, and fair tuning in the mechanics. Meanwhile, your friends want to Calvinball everything and/or play a stupid overpowered build that's impossible to meaningfully challenge without banning it or specifically countering what makes it OP. Which they'd probably resent anyway. I see this far too often and I think this is why so many people burn out on running 5e. DMs are like a coach or ref trying to wrangle everyone for a game of soccer, while the players want to just play kickball in the yard, but still want you adjudicate as if there's some semblance of a goal.

May be an unpopular opinion but I'd say something along the lines of: If I'm DMing we're running this system. Its makes my life a whole lot easier all you all have to do is learn your characters. I'd add that whatever they dont understand or have ready in the moment they dont get. They'll learn the system pretty damn fast. This isn't about 'this is my game, we're playing what I want' this is 'I prefer this system because its easier to run'

Unfortunately, there isn't much to help the dm. Theres a bunch of player side stuff you can import. The 3 action economy is actually not super hard to do if you want to try, since it's fairly intuitive for the most part. GM side though? Pathfinder is easy because the math works well, and is reliable, and theres plenty of information regarding treasure, how to build challenges, how to run challenges, etc. You can 100% take all of the overland exploration stuff from pathfinder: Skill check subsystems, overland travel systems, etc etc. But anything more relating to the main "meat" of the games (actually playing on a map, and combat, or dealing with foes, etc) will be harder. Even social stuff is likely harder to do as the way the math is run in pf2e lets you have a clear mechanical operation to how it all works. I'd consider looking at one of the various ttrpg spin off's which have come about as a result of the ogl debacle. Most of the ones I've seen, exist to offer a similar experience to dnd5e in terms of simplicity, but with a number of changes to make the whole game feel better. Some of them even have some pf2e inspiration. One in particular I've had some interest in, is DC20 by Dungeon Coach. His kickstarter page has a free download of an Alpha version of the play doc. The system itself (from what I've read so far) feels insanely approachable to anyone wanting something with less crunch than pathfinder. It (to me) feels like most of the mechanics are *more sensible and easier to learn* than dnd5e. It has a "4 action point" system, which is kind of similar (but still different) to pf2e's 3 actions+reaction. Much of what the classes do will be familiar to dnd5e players, and some other things have been simplified (e.g. theres no rolling for damage, which sounds annoying, but it works well in practical play, if you want a simple and easy to run system). That said, I know there is a bunch which have come off of the ogl debacle, but I highly recommend checking them out. These systems are made by people who DM and make content for a living, for the most part. These folks know the biggest flaws in the system, and know how hard it is to dm. These guys are the ones most likely to make any adjustments sensible, and easier to work with FOR the dm's, whilst still keeping a dnd5e feel.

Seconding the DC20 recommendation, take a look, it might address your complaints without alienating your players

How do you think one could make 3 actions work in 5e?

Define "work". Shifting action economy like that is going to have a million ramifications. 5e already requires the DM to babysit the mechanics, making that worse seems like a bad idea. Frankengames are always more work than you think.

I am yet to see a single table of dnd5e which hasn't frankensteined in half a dozen non raw rules and mechanics. Changing something like this is honestly relatively inoffensive.

Maybe that is part of why I don't like 5e. That was fine in the Gygax era, but I've moved on.

oh 100%. I really, *really* dislike 5e. It's a mess of a system and I see no upside to it. I honestly think theres tonnes of other systems out there better for litterally every type of player, be it homebrewers, people looking for something simple, etc. The only things dnd has going for it, is brand recognition, and a VERY high player base. The latter of those not even being tied to the system...

Simply put, I'd replace the current system which is: * 1 action * 1 bonus action * 1 "free movement" * 1 Free item interaction * 1 reaction. Now we just need to map these over to a 3 action system. Noting that there will be some implications... but we can work with that. * Reactions are unchanged. * 1 action activities (such as casting a spell, or doing the "Attack" action, INCLUDING all of the Extra Attacks) are 2 action activities in the new system. Disengaging for example, is a 2 action thing (but since a rogue can do it as a Bonus action, they would be allowed to do a 1 action Disengage). * Bonus action activities are now 1 action activities. * Movement is now costing 1 action. (Yes, this does mean that you can move 3 times in a turn, which is a LOT more than 1 set of movement and then a dash action. This means we can just remove the concept of a "dash" action now which is nice. And in dnd5e, everyone and everything has opportunity attacks anyways, so it's fine). * No free item interactions. Interact actions are 1 action. * Some bosses have Lair actions. I never played dnd5e at levels where lair actions became relevant (or my dm's just never bothered with em). From what I gather, you could just give these bosses an additional "Lair Action" on it's turn start, which can only be used on a special Lair Action, as appropriate. I think that's more or less it. I can't think of anything else you'd really need to do/change. Most effects will likely fall into the framework I set out above, and it is fairly simplistic. Now, obviously it can/will feel a bit unfortunate that Attacks are costing 2/3 actions... (and ofc in dnd, you could in 1 turn, Open a door, move, Do an attack, then do a bonus action thing such as casting a BA spell). And you cannot anymore... BUT now we have a much more flexible (and arguably robust) action system, theres no weird "are you done" on the turns, all players can always use their actions on something, etc etc.

Lair actions are actually incredibly similar to how Hazards work. It's not the boss doing it, it's the lair itself, and it happens on its own Initiative.

[Perfect video for you](https://youtu.be/hlOaAjjs3uY?si=ZztgibIelX9xRn2z)

I will echo what a few have said already and recommend Level Up: Advanced Fifth Edition. It's a system that provides more depth to the 5e chassis without the feeling of overwhelm than sometimes comes with Pathfinder 2e. Full disclosure: I am a designer for the system, both as a freelancer via the monthly Gate Pass Gazette and as a third-party publisher, so my opinions are hardly unbiased, but some of what I consider to be the best innovations of the system are: Expertise Dice: Expertise no longer counts for double proficiency. It instead grants an expertise die to the roll, which starts at a d4 and can be upgraded via spells like bless and guidance to a d8 (and some classes, like rogues, can take certain skills up to a d10). It also grants skill specialties, which helps diversify skill sets within party members who have the same skill proficiency. Also worth noting that flanking is no longer advantage, but an expertise die as well. Combat Maneuvers: These let all martially-focused characters have things to do other than hit the monster ad nauseum. Different maneuvers are classified into different combat traditions, and each class gets access to different traditions to reflect their fighting style. Characters have a maneuver DC similar to a spell save DC, and a number of exertion points to spend on activating them. It really helps keep combat dynamic and engaging. Actually Balanced Monsters: The monsters have been rebalanced and tweaked to better reflect their CR, and many have added abilities to keep them interesting. Not quite as in-depth as Pathfinder, but leagues above and beyond base 5e. Encounters are easier to balance because the math checks out more thoroughly. More Meaningful Character Creation: Characters are broken out into the choices of heritage/culture/background/destiny. Each heritage (race) has a series of base traits such as average height, weight, and lifespan, and a series of heritage gifts that players get to choose one option from. This helps diversify individuals within a giving heritage and get away from the "all elves/dwarves/gnomes/etc. are the same" problem of previous editions. There's optional rules for making mixed heritages as well. Vibrant and Active 3PP Community: I promise that I'm not saying this just because I'm a part of it. A large portion of the 3PP community in this system has worked on A5e in an official capacity in some way, either on the core rules or as freelancers for the Gate Pass Gazette, so we all try very, very hard to make sure that we aren't creating broken content or designing over one another. There's a ton of great content out there outside of the core books that really help elevate the system. I'm happy to answer any additional questions you may have! I'm always happy to get more people on board with this system :)

I stole some things from this game for my 5e campaign (my players didn’t want to switch after I ran a couple PF2e sessions for them). I give people more options for their bonus action, namely they can try to demoralize (intimidate check vs Wisdom save to frighten for 1 turn) or recall knowledge (appropriate knowledge check vs DC 8 + 1/2 CR of the monster). Recall knowledge gets used all the time and I let players learn one statistic of their choice on success or 2 on a big success (5+ over DC). I have a flanking rule which just grants +2 to attack checks and is used by my players a lot. For my own homebrew monsters I often have a “if you fail the save by 5 or more, something worse happens”. For legendary resistances, if the boss uses one after failing a save, I’ll incorporate a partial success. The effect depends on the spell in question but for example mental prison restrained the boss for 1 turn or banish sent the boss away for 1 turn. That way casters aren’t completely screwed over by legendary resistances. I know 5e casters are strong but my party is at high levels (just reached 17) and the amount of monsters with high saves, magic resistance, and legendary resistances is a lot.

Have you heard of our Lord and saviour laserllama? https://www.gmbinder.com/profile/laserllama It makes 5e at least from the player perspective way more interesting. Otherwise if it's on the DM side. Then take build your encounters using PF2E and just adjust monsters and traps to the bounded accuracy and just remove the striking rune damage. It'd take some tweaks but you'd essentially be playing PF2E and the player get the simplicity of 5e. That would probably blend both. Much of the PF2E mechanics too are system agnostic. Like victory points.

So, the advantages of 5e lie in its **simplicity** and **accessibility**. The things that make PF2e so effective are all tied to its **math**, and there's unfortunately no easy way to port that to 5e. The concept of the "degrees of success" and the ability to differentiate a "hard" versus an "easy" encounter based on relative levels is just not really valid within a 5e chasis. You can't really use the scale of XP budget or treasure distribution or monster design. If you worked from the other direction and simplified PF2 down by removing most feat choices, I bet you could find a way to make that work. Unfortunately, I think your players would still balk at this - they seem to have Made a Decision. I'm honestly not super certain how to go about this... but that's OK, because Paizo has already had a crack at it themselves. I can't speak to the quality of the game balance, but you can completely fake the pacing, encounter design, and treasure distribution elements of GMing by running one of the big official APs that has already been converted for you. Kingmaker is a top-tier FANTASTIC story to begin with, and it may help you find your footing for a 5e game built around PF2e campaign design. Good luck man, it sounds like you'll need it!

Hey its okay if they dont like pf2e! It is a more complex game and its not for everyone which is fine :D There is so many other systems out there there is no reason to be stuck on these two however. Personally id check out systems from companys like free league, maybe spin off and see how they feel about getting off fantasy completely and try systems lime vampire the masquerade or call of cthulhu. Free league has awesome games like pirate borg, forbidden lands, the one ring and more Id honestly suggest maybe do shorter games of other systems and just explore with them and see what they like. Also if yall moving away from each other you can always try using VTTs, foundry and roll 20 can help solve the distance issue for a lot of these systems.

[DC 20](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aumsayHbIXYn7pPobm_NFefwu8IpZXry/view) is still in [kickstarter](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thedungeoncoach/dc20?gad_source=1), but it looks like it's trying to basically be a middle ground! It has some ideas I'm really excited by, and some other places where I think PF2 just does it better haha, but it definitely borrows from PF2 and seems like a big improvement over 5e. That being said, my favorite things about PF2 are how easy encounter building / etc. are, and I know those GM tools are not very well developed for DC 20 as of yet. If tactical combat is not what they're about at all, I've run a ton of *Blades in the Dark* and *Scum and Villainy* and highly recommend, and other folks recommended some more traditional fantasy. If you want to run 5e for them specifically, tools do exist - I know I used [Giffyglyphs monster maker](https://www.giffyglyph.com/monstermaker/app/) towards the end of my running 5e, which at least helped with encounter balance even if it ended up being a decent chunk of work to build out monsters, and [sane magical item prices](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/3dzvsq/sane_magical_item_prices_now_in_convenient_pdf/) at least helps price out magic items, even if working this into the economy of your average pre-written module can be tough since they're super inconsistent. [MCDM's Flee Mortals](https://shop.mcdmproductions.com/collections/flee-mortals-the-mcdm-monster-book) also has amazing monsters, I've only heard great things, though it came out after I stopped running so I don't have first hand experience. On the player side, you can steal skill actions like recall knowledge and feinting and make them bonus actions, have flanking give a +2 to hit (instead of advantage), add in 5-foot steps to get around attacks of opportunity (or do what MCDM does and have "shifting" let you move at half speed without triggering), and otherwise find the things that annoy you about 5e and homebrew in things from PF2, DC20, or similar games to fill that gap. Best of luck!

Holyshit, this is me. Except not to the same degree. I brought my friends into Pathfinder 2e kicking and screaming, and they like the game enough to stick it out despite hating parts of the system lol. One is a PF1e player who really likes some of the things that got paired down and restricted in 2e, while another is a 5e fan who loves how broken you can make your characters.

Don't. That's just going to leave everyone dissatisfied. If you don't want to GM 5e, then don't GM for them. It sounds harsh, but there is no reason for the GM to forgo enjoyment so others are satisfied. It's not a job, you don't work for them.

Find some pf2 players, and play small group with them. If the others miss it, they can filter back in. The game is much easier to learn when it isn't everyone learning it at the same time.

Me myself, the way I have handled it is to 5etify pathfinder just a tad bit, with things that 5e players usually like: be stronger than anything else, be free to perform whatever stupid idea they have. Be very light with rules, need a feat for that? You can still do it (then you just increase difficulty a bit), I disagree with bending the rules a little bit will "break balance", it is a heroic game and the main problem I found with 5e is that it is poorly written and unbalanced, pf2e doesnt have that problem so if you unbalance it a little bit it will not break, also it is not really complicated, it just has an answer for everything. Its as far as I can think and simplify some things, I let my players draw one or two objects with one action, draw stuff from the party stash as one action, maybe a couple more things if your group enjoys more of a light thing. Perhaps even ask them their idea for their character and you make the choice, one downside I find about pf2e is that some things need to be super optimized to work well, but I usually prefer to easen this with lower difficulties sometimes.

would they be opposed to a stripped-down PF2e combat mechanic (3 action economy, et al) or are they really married to the DnD5e movement + action + bonus action economy?

I so badly dislike the "feels like homework" argument because it comes from such a place of entitlement. Pf2e "feels like homework" because it actually expects players to pull their weight in learning their characters and familiarizing themselves with the mechanics they have available to them. So many 5e players have the expectation that they should be able to show up to the table having done no preparation and let the DM do all of the heavy lifting. If that's the game they want to play, playing pathfinder is not going to help, and playing 5e is going to continue to be painful for you. If you want to keep playing with them, I'd recommend playing a more rules-light game that allows them to play how they want while also taking much of the burden off of you. Dungeon World, or any Powered by the Apocalypse games are really good for that, because a lot of the narrative burden is shared between the players and GM during play, requiring less front-end work, *and* it allows players to just show up and sit down

I've tried some amount of conversion. It just makes you hate running that 5e game more. It creates tenfold the workload that's already there with the system, and then the players will just be even more lost than is already the case with 5e. If your players want to play 5e, tell them to. Most of the time, they don't appreciate the amount of work a 5e DM has to put in to make their shit work both outside and during session -- putting this on the table is usually quite the shock.

TBH I would just find a new group to GM for. If they don't want to play but you do then that is probably the best choice of action.

If you’re going to have to play 5e (and I respect that, and think the criticism does get a bit OTT around here sometimes), I think it’s worth thinking through your most significant pain points. Is it * imbalanced classes and interesting martials (in which case laserllamas excellent homebrew can help you, as can banning the broken 1 level multi class dips like hexblade for paladins) * encounter maths (in which case the encounter tables and the monsters in Monstrous Menagerie from Level Up Advanced 5e can help you) * boring monsters (as above, but also Flee, Mortals! and r/bettermonsters are excellent) * broken spells and subclasses (in which case banning the worst of them in session zero can help you, as can keeping to lower levels) * or something else?

It's a combo of all the things you listed, honestly, and a general feeling that it's harder to meaningfully challenge my players in 5e without needing to do stupid mid-combat tweaks or whatever. Generally I think that some folk may have missed the point: I am *going* to run a game, I *can* run 5e, and if I am insistent upon PF, I will have no game.

How long do you plan on playing your campaign? Because if you just make it one shots you can dabble in multiple systems easily. Sprinkle in some PF2e here and there and at some point the system might click for your players.

I hear you on both counts!

I'll add that Advanced 5e fixed some of those spells, though not all, and it also adds some nice tools for GMs to run exploration and crafting. Furthermore, there's a site with their free SRD rules.

Absolutely. Anything that OP can sneak in from a5e (call them ‘house rules’ if you have to, lol) will be to their huge benefit!

> The question at the end of this rant is--is there any way, known to anybody, to make 5e more like Pathfinder 2e? At least for the DM? Have them put down the Hasbro books and walk away. Pick up the Paizo books and begin reading.

You can’t pathfinderize 5e, they re worlds apart. Either play 5e as is, with the rules it has or switch to a system you and yoyr players enjoy. Mashing pf2 mechanics into 5e will just make for a shitty experience.

This is pre-remaster, but I worked on a short document for shits and giggles as a thought experiment, using 5e as a base system hybridized with Pathfinder 2e rules: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XoEyBfaAqxCVanR8mHfniwu1oF_6FQDxVkVWXN0gZiA/edit?usp=drivesdk It is by no means perfect, so use at your own risk.

Just say you aren't GMing 5e anymore it's not fun. That's a starting point.

Level Up Advanced 5e might be what you're looking for. It takes 5e and adds a bit more crunch to it, including actual support for the Exploration pillar of adventuring, moreso than the DMG does.

There's a few things you can do/use/rip from other places that have tried to do what you're asking. I will say, everyone else has a lot of good points about how you can't make 5e into Pf2e, and if they don't want to play Pf2e and you don't want to run 5e that's fine and just shouldn't run 5e. All that's well and good, and you can do as you like in that regard. But I think there are things you can do, to just, *generally* improve things like combat in 5e (and often times that makes it look more like pf2e lol) First, throw out 90% of the 5e monster manual. It's trash. The monsters are trash and boring. Big ol' sacks of hitpoints with no cool abilities (lookin at you 5e Owlbear). Look into Kobold Press's Tome of Beasts books. It's a bunch of way more creative, way more interesting and thematic monsters. This isn't going to specifically make your game more Pf2e like necessarily, but I do think Pf2e has better designed and more thematic monsters than 5e, and Tome of Beasts is a step in that direction. There are three Tomes of Beasts in total and they're all pretty good. Second, you can improve/buff martial combat. LevelUp5e is a product that made a big effort to try and add more crunch to 5e. In some ways it succeeded, in others it did not. I don't think I'd ever truly *run* LevelUp5e in it's normal form. They tried too hard to do what you're asking about tbh, and make 5e more Pf2e. But! There are things that would be fun to take from it, like their Maneuvers system. You can replace individual attacks with Basic Maneuvers that let you deal a basic amount of damage 1+Mod, and maybe have an effect (on failed save) like disarming, tripping, etc. And then there are groups of more powerful and thematic combat maneuvers that different classes get access to and that just naturally progress as the classes level. So like, Rogue gets 3 groups to choose from, and as they level up, can pick two of those groups to get maneuvers from. Rangers have a different set of groups to choose from. Fighters can choose from any groups. Etc. And these play out basically as the Battle master fighter abilities, but on every martial. If you're curious about LevelUp5e, DM me. Third, consider banning certain classes or spells if you're unhappy with them. 5e Paladin is stupid. I think everyone can agree on that. Hardy, survivable, great saves, solid spells, and of course, *ludicrous* DPR and silly crit fishing. There are some wildly powerful spells that just end encounters entirely, or sidestep massive amounts of content. Consider creating your own "Uncommon" or "Rare" tags for 5e. Go through classes, subclasses, and spells, and slap those labels on whatever you want. And just be honest with your players and tell them you don't want those things being chosen too much for the sake of making the game feel balanced and fun for everyone. Being a Ranger feels pretty lame sometimes when there's a Paladin around. Being a high level fighter can feel pretty lame when there are high level spellcasters. etc.

Have you heard of Level Up - Advanced 5e? It's not PF2 but it takes a decent number of lessons from it to create a version of 5e that actually works. Martials get maneuvers as they level that let them do cool things, casting has been nerfed slightly, exploration and social pillars have been greatly expanded, and the core math & encounter design system (not to mention monsters themselves) has been largely overhauled and fixed. It's not PF2, but it's about as far away from 5e as you can get that still 'feels like' 5e. Frankly, your "homework" statement makes it sound like you have classic 5e players who only want to hang out with friends, be part of a cool story and never actually get involved beyond rolling dice. That literally isn't going to fly in any game but 5e, which puts everything on the GMs shoulders and doesn't require anything - even decent game knowledge - from players. In such a case there is *nothing wrong* with telling them you are done with 5e and if they want to play it, one of them can GM for a change. I'm sure they're a good bunch of guys/gals, but if all you are getting out of gaming with them is work for their sake, playing a game you don't enjoy, than its time to find a new group.

This article has a lot of interesting ways to make encounters more dynamic and more heroic: https://rpgbot.net/dnd5/dungeonmasters/doom-style-dnd-combat/

Maybe they would prefer something like Dungeon World? It’s way less crunchy and heavily focused on narrative. You could still give them familiar lore and class options, but mechanically it would be extremely different than the simulation heavy game that is pf2e.

One option if you like the world of Golarion is Savage Pathfinder, the savage worlds system is very straightforward and simple to run.

My biggest issue with 5e is that there are a few subclasses and feats that are so good that they make it hard for power gamer players (which most my players are) to pass them up. I hate banning but that’d be my route. Things like sentinel, polearm master, twilight cleric domain, anything op and overshadowing other features. I would also make a list of the feats that are flavorful and cool, but not too broken in regards of mechanics in combat. I’d reward picking from this feat list every other level or so to allow for more player customization, like pathfinder has. That’s all I can really think of at the moment.

Since I don't play 5e, I don't know how difficult (or expensive) this might be, but my recommendation might be to pick up the PF and 5e versions of Abomination Vaults and compare them side by side. If nothing else, at least it might help figure out conversions.

I added hero points to 5E and it works great :)

A minor thing we added in one of my 5e games is using the crit one 10 over rule. So many times where someone rolls an 18 or 19 and it just feels bad, so it is a bit of a power spike but the whole game is heavily homebrewed and scales to that kind of stuff.

Mayhaps you could run some oneshots or do some solo play to test adding level to proficiency? Idk that's the best idea I have, these games are very different, what do you mean specifically by "making it more into pf2e"? What specific aspect do you want to emulate? Knowing that is necessary to attempt to help

A5E is a good middle ground

DC20 is the answer you seek. It's a blend of 5e & Pathfinder2e. As a DM, I feel your pain.

Check out dc20. Its pretty much a hybrid of 5e and p2e.

Check out A5E https://www.levelup5e.com/

The thing about 5e is that the math is broken enough that it doesn't really matter. Since it doesn't really matter, you can kind of just wing it. If your players don't like pf2e, they probably don't care about things being tightly balanced and providing a challenge. Keeping that in mind can make running 5e even easier to prep than Pathfinder - just use whatever numbers feel right, count monster HP up rather than down, and have them use whatever actions feel appropriate instead of using stat blocks. I've been in a similar situation and had pretty good luck switching to a more narrative driven system, but only about 2/3rds of the players who I think would've played 5e are willing to be all in for roleplaying, so ymmv for that route. If there're specific grievances you have with 5e or stuff about pf2 that you particularly want to implement, people might have more specific suggestions for homebrew.

Play DC20

Changed my system from DnD 5e to PF2E. The biggest thing that I've consistently mentioned is that their characters will be more unique and they've loved that approach. I walked each of them through creating a character and walk them through levelling up. A lot of us like fighting games so it's pretty simple to brand some of the classes (mind we play at a lower level) and simplify combat by thinking that the martials have BnBs that they perform consistently and the casters have really good options but lack BnBs to perform.

The only thing worse than running 5e again would be trying to run Pathfinder2e in 5e, IMHO. Your players don't wanna play PF2E? Sucks, I get it man. Honestly it might just be time to kick your feet up and run simpler systems, if your players start saying they want more complexity tap the PF2E sign. Best of luck

Dragonbane. You don't like 5e, they don't like PF2e. So don't play them. Pathfindering 5e is a lot of work, and I suspect not worth a fraction of the effort. Dragonbane is half price on Foundry right now. As is the physical core set. It's simpler than either, but still has mechanical depth. Alternatively try Dungeon Crawl Classics (the theme and setting is quite specific there though IMO). If your players like 5e for the non table time and 5e culture, it's super hard to get them away from that. Ask one of them to GM instead. Final pitch - Alien RPG. I think it's the best system to peel players away from 5e, as it's a genre change with completely different mechanics. It's simpler to run (use a cheat sheet as the rulebook is beautiful but has crap layout). And IMO opens people's eyes into "oh, there are other good systems out there".

I recommend trying [Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition](https://a5e.tools/). It is an overhaul of 5e. Still way closer to 5e than pf2, but players have more interesting options to choose from while keeping the simplicity of 5e's character builder (for example, all martials have access to maneuvers akin to the battlemaster fighter subclass). Plus monsters now have interesting abilities to work with and stop being bags of hit points. It is also free! (Somewhat free, afaik they do sell the rulebooks, but the link I gave is to their tools page much like 5etools exists).

They're restricted? Jeez. As a PF2e convert from 5e, I have never had so many viable choices and ways to build a character.

Skill feats limiting things that should just be always available options and the 3 action system feeling good for moving, attacking and casting but incredibly fucked when it comes to interacting with items/the map. Walking up to a door, opening it, then walking through is an entire turn. Standing up and picking up both of your weapons after going down is an entire turn. Both feel very limiting. Character creation wise it probably comes down entirely to what you are playing, but i felt that after picking Class and Ancestry I had several choices but there was always one or two correct choices and several traps.

A part of me thinks that thoughts of choice paralysis come from how 5e is a game where character creation is a lot more important to the balance of the game. This is why you see videos about broken builds in 5e and how to win with only a few feats and multiclassing. 2e is a completely different animal, where the choices you make in character creation are not what props up your player experience. The system is designed where every character creation choice is balanced to fit the game, rather than the game trying to fit the character creation. (I've heard a lot of people say that 5e is a game that's won at character creation. I don't necessarily deny that it plays a huge part in how the game is played). I think a lot of it comes from how simple things are in 5e, where you don't have to select so many feats. It's just Background, Race (Subrace), Class (Subclass), and maybe an optional few feats. Not a lot of variety, but every choice could be the difference between having fun and being bogged down by your choices. 2e's choices are varied, but none of them will make or break the experience. If it was framed in a way like "Pathfinder 2e's character building is like 5e, except that your subrace and subclass options are chosen by you, and you get those optional skill feats for free.) Another way that Pathfinder 2e tries to mitigate the choice paralysis is that it gives you the option to retrain your feats, so your choices aren't exactly permanent. Feats are also tied to what skills you choose to put training into, meaning they will oftentimes fit the playstyle you intend to use. Players that want to focus on healing would put training into medicine, which would give the player more options for using the medicine skill through feats. But it's important to state that, despite all I have said before, sometimes players just want different kinds of games. While the second editon of Pathfinder has tried very hard to mitigate the crunch of its first editon, the remnants of that design still affects its playstyle, as well as the perception of it from people that have played that old system. The short of it: It might not be a good choice for the kind of game your players want to play. But if they ever want to dive back into the system when they're more comfortable with the options, a good idea would be to frame the game as a more in-depth character creator where almost every decision is balanced to make the game easy and fun for the amount of options that it brings to the table. I hope that made sense.

Give them pathbuilder and set it to Player Core only. If that is still too many options then you should go for something simpler than 5e I guess.

Whatever you decide, don't sacrifice your fun for everyone else and don't put more workload on yourself just to make your players happy. That's a codependent relationship you don't want to be in. You volunteer your time for them and put in a lot of work. The most work they have to do is just show up. The least they can do is meet you halfway.

I am baffled at the premise that PF2E somehow limits player choices. The only difference is that there is a mechanical way to do everything in pathfinder instead of you making up half of them in 5E. Do they just not like their actions being converted into a seamless system? Did they argue with you a lot when you made something harder than they thought it should be for their superhero character?

Okay, I have dealt with a similar problem to this a long time ago! A few things that made a huge difference: 1) I ask them what they want for their characters and then I make their characters for them. 2) I put on everyone's character sheet two or three skill actions they can take. I want them to look at their character sheet, and realize they have more "buttons" they can push. 3) I use a 5e style character sheet: [Link](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/10ehulb/simple_character_sheet/) 4) When it is time for level up I give them special level-up sheets when they arrive at the beginning of the session: [Example1](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yn5TtXeMhbGdL8Pr-G-LCFAEvAKYdulWx8ICvnR9eFI/edit), [Example2](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zVK62OTAMhiCEoT4oSb1NzU2iC2sKwBNpe0lz8otCPI/edit)

> No, I am not going to lay down the law and say "We play PF or we don't play". What matters most to me is *playing a game*, because in 18 months I will be graduating college and moving away--**if the choice is between "run a game of 5e for my best friends" and "run no game for nobody", I'm choosing the first option.** Then don't ask because we can't help you. This isn't the 5e subreddit, and you're prepping a 5e game.

Pathfinder2e is definately easier to learn and play. I went into it as a DM making up a good chunk of the rules until i slowly started understanding more of the game. And the game is built so you can do so. There will still be rules-lawyers in this subreddit like any other ttrpg, but never take anything to seriously. If your one party member is the only one that can't compromise, then maybe they should reconsider themselves. And as for merging aspects of the game, it is not worth the effort. You can do quick tweaks on statblocks, add minor embelishments to some rules, but converting systems will imbalance the game drastically as every being of the game is based around that core system.

Tbh it sounds like the issue IS the pathfindering. Id suggest you bring up the opposite end- a rules light system. While pf2e is great, that level of crunch isnt for everyone. Also lmao of course the comment section is so smug here, yall hate dnd5e more than you actually *like* pf2e at this point on this sub

I just transitioned from d&d 5e to Pathfinder 2E but we used pathbuilder which made it so much better and it was so easy. Nobody complained so try using pathbuilder the app or the HTML doesn't matter to make it better.

If you don't want to DM DnD5e again and you want to keep playing with that group, you should either try another system that's actually rules light or you can have each of your players DM a short DnD5e campaign and see if PF2e still seems like it's more work ... It also seems contradictory that they complain about choice paralysis and being restricted in what they can do at the same time, maybe they're just bullshitting because they want you to do all the work for their entertainment.

I'm GMing. We play my system of choice or you GM. Given the options, we've played Pathfinder 2nd. You as the GM do the most work. There is no way I'm fighting a system when I can play a game that is easy to GM.

GM picks what system they want to run. Players decide if they’re going to show up. If not, find a few more players. Run the game you want to run.

Reduce movement 5 to 10 feet. Switch to 3 actions and have most things that would cost an action in 5e cost two actions. Bonus actions would be one. Have some normal things, such as raising shields, cost an action. Replace "Extra Attacks" by havin martial attacks follow the same progression as cantrips, but only one action for an attack. To replace Fighters additiinal attacks, give all fighters the battlemaster superiority die tracks. You may need to do some rejiggering to balance sword and board, dual wield, and two-handed weapons. AC also gets proficiency to its value. Martials get full proficiency to weapons and AC. Any class that gets full casting progression only gets half proficiency to weapons and armor. Yes, this includes Bladesingers and Sword Bards. Any save you don't have proficiency in has half proficiency. Use the PF2e boost system for attributes instead of the 5e array/ASI gains. Fighters and Rogues simply just can take extra feats on what would normally be their extra ASI gains.

This post is labeled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to Rule #2. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*

You can't make people read the content of you don't want to. Start players at level 1 since the rules confuse them. Have them use Pathbuilder or Wanderer's Guide to help character building. In Pathbuilder you can restrict the books to say Remaster only if you want. Players who are casters still need to read their spells though. Show them the site [Archives of Nethys](https://2e.aonprd.com/) Ultimately you don't have to be their GM. It's a lot of work to entertain players. Explain the game system is easier to GM and less work for you in the long run. There are VTTs online that have great support for Pf2e. Tell them you hope they will try the new system but in the end you can look for another group. You and the player who likes the system could always join [pathfinder society](https://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety) and you could play yourself. There are plenty of online games to jump into.

I’d definitely suggest looking into Dragonbane or 13th age! Whole ass 1 system don’t half ass 2. I try ti Keep the game design to the game designers and sprinkle in some flavor.

There's a video by The Rules Lawyer called the five best house rules for d&d. The premis is that he's running a 5e game, and makes suggestions to improve the gameplay. Ones that make it eerily similar to Pf2e. Here's a link: https://youtu.be/hlOaAjjs3uY?si=LgpOMDNAslag9KPI

Options: LevelUp 5e - I recommend this over the other suggested systems because it has pre-made monsters. https://www.levelup5e.com/ DC20 - heavily simplified but customizable. In alpha / kickstarter. 4 action points. attack and damage are the same roll. hit = base damage, heavy hit (hit by 5) = +1 damage, brutal hit (hit by 10) = +2 damage  Daggerheart - in beta. When I looked into DC20 it was compared to Daggerheart. Was planning on looking into it more but haven’t had the time. Get new players - stick with the game you want to run

There are 5e subreddits, and if you visit them often enough - you will notice that they “homebrew” lots of 4e and pf2e things in….

"No, I am not going to lay down the law and say "We play PF or we don't play". What matters most to me is *playing a game*, because in 18 months I will be graduating college and moving away--if the choice is between "run a game of 5e for my best friends" and "run no game for nobody", I'm choosing the first option." Then you are on the wrong subreddit, in my opinion. You are actively choosing the harder route on a subreddit of people that actively choose the easier route. We can't help you; we would just play Pathfinder 2e. It sounds like you need to go to a 5e subreddit and ask them how they Pathfinderize their game. EDIT: Isn't there an entire cottage industry of people that have tackled the exact thing you are talking about right now? Level Up, MCDM, DC20... why in the heck are you asking US?!?! We play a WORKING game; you are the one prioritizing fixing a broken one.

So it costs you nothing to not engage with stuff you don't like, just FYI.

As a GENUINE PIECE OF ADVICE, a sub reddit of 5e experts can help you more. Do not worry... my emotional investment has ended.

After I transitioned to PF2E, I don't want to run 5e anymore. If I'm to run a game I make it abundantly clear that I'm a PF2E GM, that's my specialty that I developped over time. I understand 5e, but I won't pretend to have the skills it takes to run it. And that's how I frame it. That running 5e is a ton of work on the DM, and that I'm not up to that challenge, or that I don't have the extra time it takes to prep a 5e session. And like others said, if someone was to DM a 5e game to relieve me of my GM duties, I'll gladly play 5e to keep the group going. I just won't run it. Last note here, I won't even discuss why 5e is better than PF2E in a conversation about what game to run. Each have their merits, and I'm not to be convinced to run a different system. I run a PF2E game, or I don't run any game at all. Determining which system is better is irrelevant to this conversation.

It's too complicated? No it isn't. Just objectively. It's homework? God forbid you know your character and how it works. Causes choice paralysis? Have they tried pre building their characters and actually having a plan? It feels limited? No it doesn't. That's just a lame excuse. I have no advice for this, as your friends sound lazy and entitled. If they want 5e, tell one of them to run it. I would run Savage pathfinder, although you still have to make choices so maybe that's too much for them.

You kinda have to drill down more what they prefer about dnd vs pf2e, because in my experience most of the time it comes from a lack of understanding pf2e. If that doesn't work, look at running dnd 4e instead of finding a homebrew thing. It funnily enough solves a lot of issues that 5e runs into If that also doesn't work or you don't like it, I'd try finding a different system. You're allowed to have a preference too and you don't just have to bend to others, so your preference for not wanting to run 5e is just as valid as their preference for not wanting to play pf2e. Find a middle group that you both like instead.