Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.
I thought this thread was going to be about which way round the alignment grid is displayed.
Yes, eliminating the last few inconsistencies would be good. There are other, perfectly good games where roll-under is a thing; they aren't this game.
Teleport is another one. Mishap should be if you roll 01, not if you roll 100.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'd rather not see percentile charts for things that don't need 100 different possible outcomes. If something should happen less than 5% of the time, I would rather see a D20 roll with a possible save of follow up check to control the outcome.
For example, Critically failing the casting of a teleport spell could result in a mishap, a will save could then determine if the misfire is something more or less terrible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont mind the inconsistencies on things that dont matter like this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I'd really like to see magical navigation require a skill check for success. Teleportation is a little too easy a means of transportation in the current edition of pathfinder. Why wouldn't you need to make a knowledge geography, local, or planes, to teleport?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'd rather not see percentile charts for things that don't need 100 different possible outcomes. If something should happen less than 5% of the time, I would rather see a D20 roll with a possible save of follow up check to control the outcome.
For example, Critically failing the casting of a teleport spell could result in a mishap, a will save could then determine if the misfire is something more or less terrible.
A d20 roll has lots of ways to manipulate it. There are at least a dozen general reroll mechanics for it. Percentile dice are a convenient way to handle anything that shouldn’t be broadly easy to influence.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.
I just let the person who cast confusion roll the percentile check—that way they want the results at the bottom of the table, and rolling high is good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That wouldn't slow wizards much, given they have all knowledge skills as class skills and a load of skill points thanks to their maxed INT.
This line of thinking is erroneous in my opinion. Wizards and other INT-based classes have "skills needs too" (Disguise, Perception, Spellcraft and Stealth among others for 'typical' Wizardly types), yet an awful lot of people expect them to take all or almost all of the Knowledge skills. Functionally, a Wizard only needs one of them. The other 9 (or however many there will be in PF2e) are purely optional.
One would hope that the other characters pick up some of the slack - especially in their own class' Knowledge skills that are on their class skill list. At least one of 'em. Maximized INT does not have to result in this expectation. If they had 4 or 6 base skill ranks per level, this could be different.
|
Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.
Additionally, codifying how to roll a 20% or 50% miss chance (at least indicating that high is good (hit), low is bad (miss)) also would allow you to create abilities that could add modifiers to these rolls as well.