|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
StuffThis is probably the best argument I've seen for resonance, but still see a big problem. While it differentiates what is THE best option for a certain race, class or build, resonance pretty much punishes non-optimal choices, as it uses the same pool for the strong/optimal AND for the fun things.
What are the "fun things" that seem like they're getting pushed out? Since all the magic items aren't in front of us, it's kind of hard to tell what fun little widgets might look like or how much resonance (if any) they're actually going to cost. We know from the preview that the cloak of elvenkind gives you the ability to cast ghost sound without consuming any resonance beyond the initial attunement, so we know that options for gaining abilities that don't consume resonance on use exist. If, for example, attuning an ebon fly allows you to attune it and then use it without additional resonance costs, it would be a fun and also optimal choice for gaining flight on a character with low resonance, while grabbing a (presumably) more versatile wand of fly might be more attractive to a character with resonance to spare. Without seeing the full spread of magic items, we really don't know whether or not it's true that resonance could be pushing out the fun things, we're just afraid of that possibility.
Anecdotally, one thing I like about resonance replacing limited slots is that it actually opens up the door for way more fun things. I absolutely love magic rings, but I almost never get to use any of the fun ones in the current system because it's too important that I have a ring of protection. If I'm playing an arcane spellcaster, a ring of wizardry is just too good to pass up. Since I can lean on resonance in the new system instead of being limited to just two rings as the method of maintaining balance, I'm going to be way more likely to actually pick up something like a ring of x-ray vision or a ring of telekinesis, so from my perspective resonance took an area where the current system was telling me no and preventing me from having fun things, and opened that up so that I could actually have the fun things without forcing a choice between fun and power.
I run games mostly, don't play them much. My players spammed wands because I don't like the idea of just removing them. They existed and thus were the best options. By consequence time became a much greater factor in many of my games.
And of course I would pick options with downsides sometimes, so long as those downsides present a meaningful choice against the other item downsides. You keep insisting that Resonance always forces a best option, while completely ignoring examples of how it doesn't.
I've lowered the amount of charges base wands have and messed with the prices of them and potions. My own players tend to forget wands, make deals with local clerics, and pick up some potions/healing kits. They are still bad about remembering them though(players, what can you do?). Though in my experience, even before telling them up front about the changes, I tend to get a Cleric's worth of healing from them anyway(Like a bard and wariest, or a Alchemist and Skald.) and that's a rough guess/number.
Can you give me an example? I have yet to see where taking the worse option is better under the Resonance system. Outside of niche instances and even then you can compare stuff to find the best. Oh boy, I can pull rush this guy from range because I don't want to kill him for some reason to save my ally! "Or I can just cast Hold person" Or you can cast hold person yes...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are the "fun things" that seem like they're getting pushed out? Since all the magic items aren't in front of us, it's kind of hard to tell what fun little widgets might look like or how much resonance (if any) they're actually going to cost. We know from the preview that the cloak of elvenkind gives you the ability to cast ghost sound without consuming any resonance beyond the initial attunement, so we know that options for gaining abilities that don't consume resonance on use exist. If, for example, attuning an ebon fly allows you to attune it and then use it without additional resonance costs, it would be a fun and also optimal choice for gaining flight on a character with low resonance, while grabbing a (presumably) more versatile wand of fly might be more attractive to a character with resonance to spare. Without seeing the full spread of magic items, we really don't know whether or not it's true that resonance could be pushing out the fun things, we're just afraid of that possibility.
Anecdotally, one thing I like about resonance replacing limited slots is that it actually opens up the door for way more fun things. I absolutely love magic rings, but I almost never get to use any of the fun ones in the current system because it's too important that I have a ring of protection. If I'm playing an arcane spellcaster, a ring of wizardry is just too good to pass up. Since I can lean on resonance in the new system instead of being limited to just two rings as the method of maintaining balance, I'm going to be way more likely to actually pick up something like a ring of x-ray vision or a ring of telekinesis, so from my perspective resonance took an area where the current system was telling me no and preventing me from having fun things, and opened that up so that I could actually have the fun things without forcing a choice between fun and power.
To me it's due to them saying that Resonance is supposed to be used for the biggest numbers. Lemme get the quote.
It puts the focus on the strongest items. Because you can't activate items indefinitely, your best bet is to use the most RP-efficient item, not the most gp-efficient item. You want a high-level healing wand because you get more healing for your Resonance Point rather than getting a bunch of low-level wands because they're cheap.
Now while it's a reference to the Wand issue, to me you can also apply this to ALL other magic items. You can wear those two rings yes, but are they worth it? Are they the strongest items you could be using? This is Resonance asking, is that really the best use of me?
Side note, my groups use Auto Progress so required Cloak, Belt, Ring and what not were dead to us anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And we've still got the fact the Resonance lets you have multiple items good to go. I can five different flavourful rings ready (can't do that with slots as the restriction) and maybe I can't use them all in one day, but I can use them if the situation arises, as opposed to only wearing the best 2 because they are even marginally more useful slightly more of the time.
I don't see that changing in PF2. At best you can wear but not use all those fancy rings. You'll still put on the best two.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me it's due to them saying that Resonance is supposed to be used for the biggest numbers.
They're referring to the fact that Resonance lowers the viability of replacing big items with tons of small items. Currently you can get something akin to three times the healing for half the price by using CLW wands instead of upgrading to a higher level cure spell. Adding in resonance means that CLW use is no longer strictly better than CMW/CSW use.
Resonance actually does the opposite of making you chase numbers; it gives you options and creates a sliding scale of value based on your character choices. Are you a halfling bard with resonance to burn? Than it might still be worth your time to burn the cheap charges on low cost wands every now and then. Did you decide that instead of resonance and Diplomacy you wanted better Will saves and Perception? Than you'll probably want to lean more into the level-appropriate gear.
Under the current system, you only have two metrics for determining an item's effectiveness: time and monetary cost. Whenever I have enough time, I always want the item with the lowest monetary cost. That meant that unless every single adventure involved the GM riding a sleigh behind the party mushing them onward with a whip made out of imperiled NPCs and doomsday clocks, low cost items were always better than high cost items, which really doesn't make a lot of sense. By adding the third metric of resonance, you add context and variance to the game. The GM doesn't need to keep every single monster lining up at the door and preventing you from breathing to keep encounters balanced, nor do they need to always have a noble with a blade to their neck or a wizard moments from destroying the world. You can have a realistically paced adventure that includes travel and exploration without undermining the economy of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me it's due to them saying that Resonance is supposed to be used for the biggest numbers.They're referring to the fact that Resonance lowers the viability of replacing big items with tons of small items. Currently you can get something akin to three times the healing for half the price by using CLW wands instead of upgrading to a higher level cure spell. Adding in resonance means that CLW use is no longer strictly better than CMW/CSW use.
Resonance actually does the opposite of making you chase numbers; it gives you options and creates a sliding scale of value based on your character choices. Are you a halfling bard with resonance to burn? Than it might still be worth your time to burn the cheap charges on low cost wands every now and then. Did you decide that instead of resonance and Diplomacy you wanted better Will saves and Perception? Than you'll probably want to lean more into the level-appropriate gear.
Under the current system, you only have two metrics for determining an item's effectiveness: time and monetary cost. Whenever I have enough time, I always want the item with the lowest monetary cost. That meant that unless every single adventure involved the GM riding a sleigh behind the party mushing them onward with a whip made out of imperiled NPCs and doomsday clocks, low cost items were always better than high cost items, which really doesn't make a lot of sense. By adding the third metric of resonance, you add context and variance to the game. The GM doesn't need to keep every single monster lining up at the door and preventing you from breathing to keep encounters balanced, nor do they need to always have a noble with a blade to their neck or a wizard moments from destroying the world. You can have a realistically paced adventure that includes travel and exploration without undermining the economy of the game.
You know, I find it weird that it's suppose to fix the problem of using a lot of small items to replace a big item. But the only example is Barrel of CLW.
Your Halfling example is odd. It's okay to get level appropriate gear but... not to use the wands? What? I don't see a difference in the halfling buying Leather Armor+1 and Wand+1. Why would you keep having your Halfling use a worse option? Besides for money reasons.
You're adding a third metric. To everything. And tying them together back to said metric. As an example, if I have Magic Item that does X/3 times a day in PF1, I'm only really weighing that against items that take that slot or do the same effect. And if I make a bad call at using it's daily power, eh, unless it's a major screw up not that much of a loss.
Now, in PF2, the system itself is asking me to weigh it against EVERY Possible item I have on my person or could easily get a hold of. AND if I use said item on a bad call or get a bad result, I am down usage of EVERY item.
But it seems I'm playing the game wrong if I do or don't do anything. I stack some small items, which is wrong, but not barrels of the stuff, which is also the wrong way to do it. I like getting to big items eventually when I get the cash but this too is also wrong!
PF2 solves this confusion of what's wrong and right. It wants you to use the biggest numbers and will ask you to go for the biggest bang for your buck. Because you only have X points, spend them wisely.
At the very least I can stop worrying about "Is this right or not" when talking to the community.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And we've still got the fact the Resonance lets you have multiple items good to go. I can five different flavourful rings ready (can't do that with slots as the restriction) and maybe I can't use them all in one day, but I can use them if the situation arises, as opposed to only wearing the best 2 because they are even marginally more useful slightly more of the time.I don't see that changing in PF2. At best you can wear but not use all those fancy rings. You'll still put on the best two.There is a massive change in opportunity cost. If you can only have two you pick the best two. If you can only use two but can have as many prepared, you keep hold of less useful ones that might still have a moment to shine. Of course this actually depends on the action cost of investing, they could make that too punishing and I'd likely give feedback on that.
So lets say I've got two rings I like. A Ring of the Grasping Grave and a Ring of Ferocious Action. Now I find another ring, and ooh its a nice Ring of Strength Sapping. In PF1 I have to pick one of my other rings and not wear it, making it worthless and I should just sell it. Afterall the other rings are kinda conditional where I can use the Strength Sapping in pretty much all combats. Thats a clear best option and an obvious choice. So I lose one of my fun rings. In PF2, I can wear all three rings and the conditions for all three could come up and be useful, so I might as well keep them all on. Now if the moment comes up where my Ring of Grasping Grave would be great I can use my Resonance and get the best of it! Sometimes that'd even be worth not using my Strength Sapping. I've gained choices!
You don't have as many as you can. You have as many as you are willing to save for.
In your example, yes you can wear all 3 rings. Now the moment comes and your Ring of Grasping Grave would be great! Only you did save a point for it, just in case right? You didn't spend it on Drinking that potion of Long Arm to hit the monster fight? You didn't waste it on your Ring of Ferocious Action to be able to do this right? Oh dear, you have. That's a pity.
You know you COULD have spent 1 Resonance point on THIS and gotten a better result. Why didn't you? *Resonance pokes you in the back of your head*. Hey you spent a point on your Armlet that let you do better in combat before this point, why are you mad about your options? *Pokes again*.
Would be, Could be, might be...,
Resonance enforces Will be. Community picks Will be. Devs see Will be. And we're back here again when the lucky 5 items get deemed Must have.
I mean I don't think anyone looked at the magic items of PF1 and said that Cloak of Resistance is going to be the Must have. I didn't play DnD 3.0 so I'm unsure as to what was required there and maybe ported over. So maybe it was required in 3.0 and just ported over in the same state. But if not, it didn't start as the must have. It became the must have thanks to both community and devs.
I see little reason, even with this magical variable that is Resonance, of that not happening again. Even more so since all usage is tied to it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, I find it weird that it's suppose to fix the problem of using a lot of small items to replace a big item. But the only example is Barrel of CLW.
It's far from the only example. In PF1 every character I've seen buys up all the +1 items with different bonus types that they can get their hands on, since two +1 items are almost always cheaper than a single +2. It's "suboptimal" to buy a +2 until you've filled up every slot you can possibly squeeze a +1 out of. There's no point in picking up the mass version of a buff spell that measures its duration in increments of 10 minutes or more when you can just take 6 rounds to cast the lesser version six times and still have almost a hundred or more rounds of combat left with the buff in effect. So on and so forth. CLW is just the most common example.
Your Halfling example is odd. It's okay to get level appropriate gear but... not to use the wands? What? I don't see a difference in the halfling buying Leather Armor+1 and Wand+1. Why would you keep having your Halfling use a worse option? Besides for money reasons.
Because it's cheaper and the halfling bard has resonance to spare. For him, there's still some benefit to spamming the low level item, because he's chosen resonance as a priority. Someone else who decided they'd rather have better Will saves and higher Perception instead of more resonance is going to want to stick with the more expensive items.
You're adding a third metric. To everything. And tying them together back to said metric. As an example, if I have Magic Item that does X/3 times a day in PF1, I'm only really weighing that against items that take that slot or do the same effect. And if I make a bad call at using it's daily power, eh, unless it's a major screw up not that much of a loss.Now, in PF2, the system itself is asking me to weigh it against EVERY Possible item I have on my person or could easily get a hold of. AND if I use said item on a bad call or get a bad result, I am down usage of EVERY item.
Not every item, as we've already seen. But yes, you have a finite number of magical activations available to you. So instead of flying by finding the cheapest possible wand, which likely has much shorter durations, you're going to want to find the best possible way of flying, which could be a figurine of wondrous power, boots of flying, or a magic broom. Resonance also means that people aren't rewarded for finding ways to game the system, like how people used to buy stacks of quickrunner's shirts so they could change into a new one every encounter. Resonance ensures that you can't use an easily trivialized resource like wealth to bypass an intended limitation.
But it seems I'm playing the game wrong if I do or don't do anything. I stack some small items but not barrels of the stuff. I like getting big items but that makes no sense to do.PF2 solves this. It wants you to use the biggest numbers and will ask you to go for the biggest bang for your buck.
It encourages you to use the most efficient method for your character. If you have a lot of extra resonance, then cheaper applications of weaker effects are good. If you have a more limited pool, then more powerful and generally applicable items are better. You get choice and character variance based on your build. I've noticed that you frequently state that in a week someone will have the optimal build and then that's all anyone will play; resonance is why that isn't true. There isn't one true path, because you can't simply burn through tons of cheap consumables to enable a single power build. You either need a balanced, level-appropriate loadout, or you need to be burning through lots of resonance to use your low cost items effectively. It's not that you're playing the game "wrong" no matter what you do, it's that instead of having right and wrong answers like you almost always do in the current system, the new system provides depth and variance of character choice and makes multiple options equally viable, depending on your character.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even speaking as someone who only rarely went beyond the big items in PF1e, has a group that hates CLW wand spam, and tossed basically every flavorful item on the sell pile to buy the next +1... basically the exact opposite of Merlin's position... I can absolutely see Merlin's position and frankly think y'all are being too hard on him. The cornerstone of Merlin's point as I can understand it is that, put simply, Resonance's attempt to fix a few issues is, as a side effect, ramping the opportunity cost of every item into the stratosphere. Let me break it down:
Say in PF1e you find a relatively cheap, fun-but-not-too-powerful set of bracers. Now bracers normally aren't a hot-ticket slot (unless you're unarmored and don't have mage armor, but that's rare enough) so you might consider it. It's got a neat use after all, you don't have any other bracers competing for it (the only other items that might interfere with you using the bracers after all), and your party's satisfied with where they are on other gear right now rather than being sell-happy like, say, a PFS group would be. So cool, you keep the bracers because they're neat.
Now let's look at PF2e, that same set of bracers. Sure you don't have any other bracers it's competing with... but let's say it's an investment item. So now you have to heavily weigh that fun but not particularly powerful use against: every other potentially fun item you might find. Every potentially powerful item you might find. Every consumable you might need to buff, to heal, to get past the Mighty Door of Plot that can only be opened with the Key of Plotting. Every use of your Activated Magic Items you are already carrying. In other words, that opportunity cost goes from the relatively small "other bracers and a bit of gold" to "literally every magic item." And that's if it's only cost is Investment. If it were an item that requires Activation, well, now every possible activation of it has that same opportunity cost, which means the opportunity cost of keeping the item is now multiplied by every time you think you might want to use that item. And Gods forbid it's like the Cloak of Elven Kind or Staves where it's both Invested and Activated, now you're just getting the worst of both worlds in Opportunity Cost, for a "fun-but-not-too-powerful" ability. I can see how that level of Opportunity Cost for a sub-par item might well be uncomfortable. You may wind up with a lot of Resonance in the end, but it is still not unlimited.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the sheer amount of "potentially" shows the flaw in this arguement. You don't have to think about every potentially, because in reality you are going to have a much smaller set of options to pick from at any time.
Shy of being handed a list of every item you'll be getting as loot in the adventure, to pick and choose from at the beginning, or waiting until the end of the adventure to decide what to use and what to toss, "potentially" is always going to be a concern. Outside of those two situations you'll never know if there's a better, or more interesting, or even plot-required item just around the next corner. As such, the fact that you're giving up even just one point that could be used on those items by investing these bracers is a valid part of the opportunity cost.
And frankly, even if it wasn't... that's two marks off of the six categories, and given how large the costs of healing and "every activated magic item you own" can get (especially depending on the build) I'd argue they're not even among the top half of the categories (with the third biggest category IMO being a magic item key that lets you advance the plot, it's a rare device yes but if and when it does come up, if you can't use it that would bring the entire game to a halt.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes you do. Because, potentially, one point of Resonance is all that stands between you and death.Magical healing is not the only option. Use Medicine, not resonance.
so everyone needs to be trained in medicine now? Does it become the new perception?
As an aside, do we know if medicine can be used untrained yet?
Yes you do. Because, potentially, one point of Resonance is all that stands between you and death.Magical healing is not the only option. Use Medicine, not resonance.so everyone needs to be trained in medicine now? Does it become the new perception?
As an aside, do we know if medicine can be used untrained yet?
Whether you are trained in Medicine or not, you can Administer First Aid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The devs could easily address concerns that keep coming up in the forums by simply doing extra blogs to address stuff like healing, or outright FAQ posts, etc. There's no real reason we are locked into a rigid Monday/Friday blog schedule, they could do it at any time, or have two blogs on a single day. But apparently it's somehow better PR to leave everyone frustrated and confused and upset?
|
so everyone needs to be trained in medicine now? Does it become the new perception?Yes you do. Because, potentially, one point of Resonance is all that stands between you and death.Magical healing is not the only option. Use Medicine, not resonance.
Why would everyone? Anyone can administer first aid. And not everyone has to use the same method. If you don't want to spend the skill ranks, use resonance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How effective is administering first aid? There is no way to say it removes the need for magical healing.
How effective is administering first aid? There is no way to say it removes the need for magical healing.
Anecdotally there is a playtest group with a sufficiently effective primary healer who is a Barbarian- a class that has no spells, and likely does not have an especially high charisma.
Now it may be that this character has put 100% of applicable resources into "being good at healing" but it's likely that these aren't all one's resources, and most other classes can do this better (like a rogue has twice as many skill feats.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And the fact that it adds more work to an already overloaded schedule.
I’m sure you don’t enjoy your boss adding more tasks to what you already have. How would you feel about some guy walking in off the street and doing it?
Apart from the fact that "guy walking in off the street" is a client/customer, and Paizo are trying to sell them on a new edition of their key product, your analogy is spot on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am actually holding the same opinion as the OP here, i feel like the forums is holding a extremly negative attitude for something that is just being read about and not even tested yet. I can understand the negativity for something that is new, but we have yet to see the whole picture on how it plays through and all of the preconceptions so far is based on PF1 mindset.
Its okay be be skeptical and maybe negative, but some of the reactions i have seen is way too extreme to be a more disagreement.
For the design of PF2 itself, i am rather optimistic, and i really look forward to it. However i have a few bugbears here and there, but i wait and see until the playtest to see if it makes more sense in context.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, if you're going to use beverages as an analogy for RPGs then right now PF2 looks more and more like New Coke...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've actually been largely positive on most things myself. There's a ton of stuff I would tweak or shift a bit, like making the proficiency steps +2 instead of +1 for instance, but I like the base superstructure overall. But man, the few things I outright dislike, such as this actual implementation of Resonance (something I was actually hopeful for in concept before this week), I really dislike. XD
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with Fuzzypaws on this: some things I REALLY like (the >10< system, and degrees of success and failure for saves, action economy, rebuilt monster rules, heighten spells as standard, there's loads to like). Some things I'm not so keen on, because they're another bit of paperwork to track, but I can see the need for them in generally balancing the math (skill and weapon proficiency levels).
It's the things that I dislike and which I think are both poorly implemented AND unnecessary that are bugging me so much.
The tagline for PF2 is "join the evolution" - and I would LOVE to do that. But don't introduce new mechanics that fundamentally change the game and tell me it's an evolution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't have to wait until the end of the adventure. You have to wait until the end of the DAY.
Few points here, coming at this from very different angles because I have seen many very different angles in my time on these boards, and there is not one true way to play:
1) In some groups "end of the adventure" and "end of the day" can be dang near the same thing, for those groups that will push on until either they finish the dungeon or they literally cannot go any further without high likelihood of dying in one blow or so.
2) Each day you have and consider using it, you again have to weigh the cost of that (again, neat-but-not-necessarily-powerful) item against every other magic item that could be using that point instead. As compared to the old system where you just had to compare the pros and cons against the (generally much more limited) other items that might use that same slot.
3) Even in groups that don't push on to the dropping point, end of the day can be quite a bit, and if you find yourself using that item in the next room, to just immediately afterwards find something that really wants/needs the point more, it'll feel quite bad.
Which is at worst as bad as most things in PF1 where you have to wear it for 24hrs to work.
Not quite an equivalent comparison, because it again comes back to my point of "weighing the pros and cons of an item that will tie up 1 slot" vs "weighing the pros and cons of literally every other magic item that might want that point".
So yeah I might keep behind a Resonance or two in the hopes of finding an awesome thing (or for consumables) but so long as the action cost isn't too harsh I can decide that "oh actually that ring I'm wearing is really useful now so I'll spend the RP." Unless it takes a long time (more than a round) to attune an item I'd honestly consider it foolish to invest RP in any non combat item until you actually needed it.
This one, yes, it comes down to the action economy of investing. Personally though, I'm not expecting Investing an item to be a quick 1-action or even 1-round thing you can do in combat. It strikes me more like something along the lines of preparing at the start of the day... or at least filling an empty slot, something that'll generally take at least a full minute if not longer.
As for needing it for healing that is countered by a couple of points. Firstly like has been mentioned skill healing is a thing.
Stating for the record, well aware that skill healing is a thing. Heck, it's one of the best things I've seen in PF2e, because I enjoy playing healers quite frequently and especially enjoy finding weird ways to do it. That said, like a great many people, I would not enjoy forcing someone to spend their resources becoming the healer who doesn't want to. That's not fun for them, and makes me a jerk.
You also seem to heal more naturally.
This is actually news to me, but dear GODS will it be great if that's true. Natural healing in PF1e was (quite literally in my group) a joke.
You also get buckets loads of Resonance, I don't know how many magic items people normally USE (not just have equipped but actually use) in a single day in PF1 but it is probably less than your level.
From one person in my group who plays PFS, 80 charges from a CLW wand (going off the scaling this is the equivalent of a good 7 True Healing Potions in PF2e, the highest tier of healing potion, which is something like 1/3 of your Resonance at level 18) in a single PFS Scenario. Another person in the group who enjoys playing Wizards and Sorcerers tends to go through a ton of scrolls because even in PF1e sometimes your spell slots (and spells known for that matter) come at a premium.
Finally if I'm holding onto Resonance because I'm worried about damage instead of utilizing it to avoid that damage I'm being a bit of a fool.
Given how tight the math is... and intentionally cut down the "win button" options are... if you're facing something remotely close to APL... I doubt your items are going to avoid that much damage. Maybe a few points here and there, but between the tighter math and factoring in the stated goals of longer fights you're still looking to take a fair bit of damage unless you're just the tankiest tank to ever tank. Valid sources of healing is important.
It's far from the only example. In PF1 every character I've seen buys up all the +1 items with different bonus types that they can get their hands on, since two +1 items are almost always cheaper than a single +2. It's "suboptimal" to buy a +2 until you've filled up every slot you can possibly squeeze a +1 out of. There's no point in picking up the mass version of a buff spell that measures its duration in increments of 10 minutes or more when you can just take 6 rounds to cast the lesser version six times and still have almost a hundred or more rounds of combat left with the buff in effect. So on and so forth. CLW is just the most common example.
Why is it not worth it? Becasue the math says so?
You see 'suboptimal'. I see "Cool this power spiked the thing I actually BUILT my character to do!".
I quite willingly like to spend my cash on items that improve my role in the group, not to cover all my bases.
Because it's cheaper and the halfling bard has resonance to spare. For him, there's still some benefit to spamming the low level item, because he's chosen resonance as a priority. Someone else who decided they'd rather have better Will saves and higher Perception instead of more resonance is going to want to stick with the more expensive items.
Big item Costs 1 Resonance. Small item costs 1 resonance. You aren't doing yourself favors.
That or you do believe that enough spells can still make someone stupid good in PF2 which is the same problem we had in PF1 right? Isn't that right? If your Resonance is high enough, you can replace a party member that way, right?
Quote:
Not every item, as we've already seen. But yes, you have a finite number of magical activations available to you. So instead of flying by finding the cheapest possible wand, which likely has much shorter durations, you're going to want to find the best possible way of flying, which could be a figurine of wondrous power, boots of flying, or a magic broom. Resonance also means that people aren't rewarded for finding ways to game the system, like how people used to buy stacks of quickrunner's shirts so they could change into a new one every encounter. Resonance ensures that you can't use an easily trivialized resource like wealth to bypass an intended limitation.
What item are you thinking of that was shown that doesn't cut into your ability to use magic items? Besides the mundane.
Also, odd. Your halfing with Resonance to burn can easily use that wand to fly it seems. He didn't and doesn't need to trade up does he? Weird.
I also have little faith and people not being able to game the system if they find it. That's the part of the issue here. They'll game, I'm stuck with a system I don't like.
It encourages you to use the most efficient method for your character. If you have a lot of extra resonance, then cheaper applications of weaker effects are good. If you have a more limited pool, then more powerful and generally applicable items are better. You get choice and character variance based on your build. I've noticed that you frequently state that in a week someone will have the optimal build and then that's all anyone will play; resonance is why that isn't true. There isn't one true path, because you can't simply burn through tons of cheap consumables to enable a single power build. You either need a balanced, level-appropriate loadout, or you need to be burning through lots of resonance to use your low cost items effectively. It's not that you're playing the game "wrong" no matter what you do, it's that instead of having right and wrong answers like you almost always do in the current system, the new system provides depth and variance of character choice and makes multiple options equally viable, depending on your character.
You seem to be arguing with yourself. If those low effects are far better than the powerful ones, like we have now, why not do them? Because Resonance says to get the better items now. But it seems like you still suggest that spamming the lower effect items can still be a viable build. Which makes means Resonance solved what now? Besides the devs SAID they don't want people To DO what you are suggestion with the many low magic items.
I also say it's going to be a couple months. More or less depending on how much changes from playtest to print. People will find the best items(New Big 6 or whatever) And those will get spammed. Because they are the right amount of Numbers to cost. Like we have now. To me all this does is just put extra time into the wait for it.
But what do I know. I play the game wrong, my character isn't viable, and I shouldn't be playing this system it seems.
I honestly don't know how you can enjoy any game that allows any sort of optimisation with that mindset. It must be so tiring constantly berating yourself for not being 100 percent optimal whilst simultaneously hating the idea of it. Especially berating yourself with hindsight.
And even after all that the ring situation comes out better. If I've (made the choice to) burn my resources on other things, I've still got a 55 percent chance of using the situational ring! That's 55 percent higher than the 0 chance from pf1!
Because the game isn't poking me in the back of my head to optimize? I will admit it's annoying to go online and basically be told "You are playing the game wrong", even though playing it right also results and people complaining.
I don't find it fun to be at 100% HP all the time. I don't find it fun to build to the point I can play every role on the team. I don't find it fun to pick up all the 1s I can before I'm allowed to go for 2s or dare I say, a 3? I mean for Brigh's sake, I have a character that makes constructs. I have made one, and it is a golem. I'm out of my depth it seems.
Finally, then just take one of the two rings off and use another one? I could have sworn that the only rings that take 24 hours to actually turn one are the rings that give you outright stat buffs or nullifies body functions(Say eat and sleep). Or at least that's how my group plays. I'll concede, I don't know some of the base rules because we've tossed out those that don't feel fun or are interesting to work around.
That or wear a Meridian Belt. NO WAIT that takes up your NEEDED Belt slot, oooooooooh nooooooooooooooo....
I have another post just to stop this from being so bloody long. Don't worry, it's different.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bigger picture debates would be little more than wild speculation at this point, I'll give it a stab.
With the info we have, there are some things that need to be compared directly to one another, such as those things involving resonance or actions. The only option other than that direct comparison, is if that comparison is made completely unimportant by some other facet of the game, or the compared items are made redundant by some other facet of the game, at which point the discussion would become "why do we need X if we have Y".
Right now we have spell healing(1/2 or 1/3 of highest level healing), resonance healing(lvl+stat), channel healing(3+stat), and skill based healing. Spell healing as a proportion of daily resources is very expensive. Resonance healing as a proportion of daily resources is cheaper. Spell point healing as a proportion of daily resources is cheapest. We do not have enough information on skill based healing. We do know that skill based healing takes a permanent resource(skill improvements, possibly feats), and that resonance healing takes a permanent resource(gold). Since we're told that gold cost and gain increases quadraticly, we can assume that gold spent on items two levels below yours will be a negligible cost. Looking at the potion list, we see that our averages for a potion are about 1/2 healing for a small percent of the cost if we go down two tiers.
All of these abilities are in competition with effects that will end or reduce the enemy's actions over the course of the day. However, resonance puts that healing in competition with items that produce effects that will last through the entire encounter day. So the more encounters had during the day, the less advantageous it is to spend resonance on temporary boons like healing rather than a permanent effect like an increase to to hit, damage, initiative and so on and so forth. If something like a haste potion is ever introduced, healing potions suddenly lose their competitive value entirely.
In order to avoid that situation, health pools would need to be dramatically increased, and damage dramatically decreased to a point where fights consist primarily of people conserving resources and wailing on each other. This could be balanced with really tight control of player ability, which would make specific ability unimportant since the actual end result would be tightly controlled. You'd have eight different colors of damage that all did the same thing.
Without the systems being introduced, you could instead give people recovery points to spend when receiving item based recovery. With the system in place, we're giving people what amounts to a complicated trap option.
Since the OP wanted this to NOT become another Resonance topic, let me be the one to TRY and get this back on track with this post.
Things I'd like to see examined more that aren't magic items or want to see the whole of it;
- Alchemy. I want to see how that works out more now that we a general idea of how magic items work. I'm a sucker for some of the Alchemic items. I always have 2 bags of Alchemical Cement on most my characters. Hope to see if the devs buff the items or lower how long it takes to make/use them. This leads into..
- Mundane items. So if Magic is getting a nerf or limited(Bare with me on this), and Mundane seem to be getting buffed..., where's this leave Mundane compared to Alchemic? Do players see them as being the same? Does Paizo? Will we instead of a fully stocked magic shop(WHY) in town, will we instead see a fully stocked Alchemy shop everywhere? Because those items are in demand? I'm interested and seeing how these two items compete with each other and player/GM use of them
- Prestige Classes. Um..., no idea. None of the Prestige Classes ever made me go "Oh wow I want that". Not even for the numbers, none of them seem like they could easily slot into the character I've made/built. And a lot of them to me look like I could get more if I just made a cross class build. The only one is Technomancer and that's an if. PF2 looks to change up how Prestige Classes work which leads me to question balance(The only class I tend to hear about is Dragon Disciple and usually not for good, mileage may vary), but if it works out maybe we can get more varied classes to pick from. I shouldn't be locked into just Master Chymist as an Alchemist. But at the very least hopefully this makes some people happy.
- Combat(Weapons too). With the new 3 action system, I wonder how the weapon picks are going to be. Especially with the new weakness system. Do Duel Wield builds actually have a place now? How does it work with ranged? How does it work with Crossbows(Can I shoot, reload, and shoot?). And, while this is a bit on magic items, I wonder how desirable some items might be in this 3 action system(Ways of getting an extra action/reaction seem like they could be just as strong in PF2, maybe more)
- AoO. Yeah yeah, bare with me, last one so let me get another controversy one out the way. We know they are limited now(Fighter gets one, no idea on how many monsters will have it), so I wonder how this might change some classes in combat. Will the Wizard cast in melee? Will the Cleric rush forward to apply healing now that they don't need to check for AoO?
Can I build for it? *GASPS*
Yes yes, it seems weird to ask but I just got done drawing up a Reach Cleric build for a game. Probably put on the back burner but I wonder if you can build for Attack of Opportunity in PF2. Or just reactions in general.
I have a few other worries I'd like to see talked about. Gunslinger's place, Hybrid Classes, applying Classes to Monsters, will Mythic be attempted again later...
Outside of the Classes to monsters though, I'm gonna be waiting to see on those other subjects.
EDIT: OH and yeah this is Magic item talk but;
- Unique Items. The ones you usually see in APs? Some of those items that might not be great but good enough for maybe a level or two(Depending on the item, again, mileage may vary). Those seem to be hit and miss now, and some can be out preformed with the right picks which results and them being sold off to fund a better item.
With Resonance being a thing, along with Item levels and maybe more customization when it comes to weapons/armor..., how well will these see the transition? Are they worth it or once again be dumped in the "To Sell" folder. Oh, better question, can I take the Rune of a Unique armor OFF and apply it to armor I'm actually using?
I'm at least interested in seeing how those are handled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One extra thought is that the core concept of RP vastly favors consumables in the hands of Enemy NPCs. Unlike players, who have to scrimp and save and budget their RP or die, an NPC isn't expected to conserve anything. They never have to worry about the next fight because their "job" is to die and award xp/gp. Which makes the mechanic largely irrelevent to npcs; and its hinderances less obvious to GMs that get fresh pools of RP with every encounter.
One extra thought is that the core concept of RP vastly favors consumables in the hands of Enemy NPCs. Unlike players, who have to scrimp and save and budget their RP or die, an NPC isn't expected to conserve anything. They never have to worry about the next fight because their "job" is to die and award xp/gp. Which makes the mechanic largely irrelevent to npcs; and its hinderances less obvious to GMs that get fresh pools of RP with every encounter.
I......
Actually hadn't thought about that. But at the same time I don't go full nova with enemies. I'm a softy when it comes to combat.
But yeah, I do wonder how this works in the hands of other GMs. Good catch.
I am usually using the monster as a means to distribute the item (healing potions for a party without a healer for example); so they generally only draw or use the item so that players will know they have it and can loot them if they kill the monster fast enough. The RP rules will discourage that use since the potions aren't actually going to be covetous anymore as they compete for resources you already have in hand.
On other, happier topics I hope.
I really like they way Proficiencies, Quality, and Enchantment seem to interact, but I want more details. I'm a little concerned about the viability of shields, but we have a playtester who's said it works, and that on other characters they missed the feature... which is a compelling review to me.
The way every character is built out of small, modular packages in the form of ancestry, background, class(es?), and feats will make the system much easier to expand without the inevitable power-creep being unevenly applied. The fact that the proficiency system is more consistantly applied will make setting benchmarks for comparison easier.
My harsh commentary aside, I really am looking forward to studying and playtesting the system for myself.
Bringing it to the picture as a whole, without resonance this time as its such a hot topic and where some people spell the next doomsday.
I like how classes have become, its kinda like rogues in the main system where you get talents every now and then that makes your class more *your* style, even if the paths would be limited i personally would make do even with a single alternative path a class can go.
This ofcourse reduce the relevancy of archtypes as you can just pick whatever you feel fits best for your character and opens up easier ways to implement features down the line.
I like the Weapon types, the features and crit focuses these can offer, maybe even replacing some of the feats of PF1 to just become weapon qualities in its entirety like Axes being the "cleave" weapon. And shields being able to readied up to give DR depending on their hardness is already a thing we used in a homebrewed pathfinder alternative, which surprised me of being PF2 core.
Theres been a few points that i have been skeptical to, like goblin as a core race, which honestly i think never will be a issue on my home table, and honestly i rarely cared for monsters in the group as i like it to be a cooperative game and if it gets too dumb i might aswell leave. Still i must say i really hate entire races that have as a "trait" to be annoying little t@%#s that is disruptive to the rest of the party for the sake of "Role-play"... See Kenders for reference. If Goblins have the little line that says: "Oh they tend to hate words, and destroy X" or something like that i can garantee you that this race WILL be banned for any table i do not trust.
Anathema is interesting, its a collective term for basically what Druids and Clerics had before, and now other classes can have it too as a part of their features and you will know exactly what it entails regardless of class. (Like PF1 druids basically had Anathema for not using metal armor or teaching others their language)
I think the class design is closer to kineticists or vigilante than rogue. You're alternating between utility feat access and combat feat access, and your feats have strict class level requirements. Kineticist is probably a good prototype for what to expect, it's a bit rigid and predictable for my taste, so I hope I'm wrong there.
Anathema is pretty cool though. Untieing it from classes means it could pop up as part of feats or archetypes down the way.
|
|
What are the "fun things" ...StuffThis is probably the best argument I've seen for resonance, but still see a big problem. While it differentiates what is THE best option for a certain race, class or build, resonance pretty much punishes non-optimal choices, as it uses the same pool for the strong/optimal AND for the fun things.
First I agree with you about the resonance and slots. Love the idea of it limiting/opening your slots up for magic items.
About the fun things resonance takes away I can say that even though I never really looked for a vorpal weapon in PF1 (it was fun when you got and used one) as of what I have seen and heard of the math for saves right now I will never use a vorpal rune in the PF2. Nat 20 I am fine with but having to use a resonance and a Fort DC kills the fun for me. The save very easily means I will waste a resonance.
|
|
Resonance seems to be sweeping up the topic. Makes sense since its most radically new thing in 2e compared to 1e but still ._.
Anyway, saying that resonance forces you to ALWAYS use the most powerful big item you have comes with several problems:
1) We don't have full list of magic items in core rulebook so we won't know if there are obvious "Everyone has to have this" items there like resistance cloaks, ac buffs and stat belts/headbands were in 1e. So far all items have been type of items you pick if you really want them. Like, sure rogue would probably have higher bonus with cloak of elvenkind in the blog, but no reason why barbarian couldn't use it as well, especially if there are no items that clearly benefit only single class in 2e. (like how 1e had several items that give bonus only if you have right class)
(note that this also applies to monster design. Like sure at early levels that cloak of elvenkind was nice, but at higher levels you really want that cloak of resistance because without it you are most likely going to fail a save and high level monsters all had rather horrible effects on failed saves. So depending no how monsters are designed and how high dcs are, it would change how must have resistance items are. Heck even class features or feats could affect this if they give you more ways to counter failed saves)
2) Item levels seem to be replacement for Caster Levels for items, but because we haven't seen full context of them yet, we don't know if higher level items are straight up better than lower ones(with exclusion of "This is greater version of lesser magic items" in which case bigger is obviously better). Like, if these is level 10 item that gives you ability to make holes in walls, is it automatically worse than level 20 item that lets make you classic!superman jumps. Or will it be more of apples vs oranges thing(that said, at level 20 you could have 20+ magic items potentially if you want to invest them all) In 1e CL were kind of random item quality wise, so it might be similar in 2e where items themselves aren't "more powerful" but it is more like "You won't get availability to items that let you fly before level 7"
3) We don't know all the alternatives to healing and how effective they are, so its questionable whether you should always save one resonance for healing items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
StuffThis is probably the best argument I've seen for resonance, but still see a big problem. While it differentiates what is THE best option for a certain race, class or build, resonance pretty much punishes non-optimal choices, as it uses the same pool for the strong/optimal AND for the fun things.What are the "fun things" that seem like they're getting pushed out? Since all the magic items aren't in front of us, it's kind of hard to tell what fun little widgets might look like or how much resonance (if any) they're actually going to cost. We know from the preview that the cloak of elvenkind gives you the ability to cast ghost sound without consuming any resonance beyond the initial attunement, so we know that options for gaining abilities that don't consume resonance on use exist. If, for example, attuning an ebon fly allows you to attune it and then use it without additional resonance costs, it would be a fun and also optimal choice for gaining flight on a character with low resonance, while grabbing a (presumably) more versatile wand of fly might be more attractive to a character with resonance to spare. Without seeing the full spread of magic items, we really don't know whether or not it's true that resonance could be pushing out the fun things, we're just afraid of that possibility.
Anecdotally, one thing I like about resonance replacing limited slots is that it actually opens up the door for way more fun things. I absolutely love magic rings, but I almost never get to use any of the fun ones in the current system because it's too important that I have a ring of protection. If I'm playing an arcane spellcaster, a ring of wizardry is just too good to pass up. Since I can lean on resonance in the new system instead of being limited to just two rings as the method of maintaining balance, I'm going to be way more likely to actually pick up something like a ring of x-ray vision or a...
Resonance replacing item slots I like - just not most of its other functions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think there's a flaw in the OP premise. As a rule people talk about things they care about, and things they think are wrong. If people like a system you're likely to get a single sentence, or if you're lucky a paragraph, and then they move on. If they don't care at all you won't get any feedback at all.
The feedback they are getting is telling them where they've got work to do. Whether that's finding a better way to sell/explain it or rework it is a matter for them. They could easily follow up with a blog assuaging at least some of the fears if they wanted, so I can only assume they want us hashing it out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well you can't really discuss it holistically without all the information, like the assertion that medicine will pick up the slack from the restrictions from resonance - we just don't know! Be awful quiet if we didn't discuss the info we do have though.