I fully agree with you Solicitor. I'm just teasing
I didn't get into d&d until mid 4th edition (didn't stay long, went to pathfinder), but I hated carrying capacity. And as much as I like the idea of an archer running out of arrows and having to figure something out, it's just not worth the trouble.
I nowadays only play with a group of close friends and we really play it loose: rules are there to support our game, but the story is what facilitates the game. I get it that game designers want to make a 'complete' game, but you'd figure that games from the 90s like GURP and Middle Earth Roleplaying (MERP) taught us that overly complicated and math- and stat-padded games simply aren't fun.
Oh yeah, MERP had pages upon pages of tables to see where you had been hit, critted and what the effect was.
While we wait for Caraid, I've put together some thoughts on house rules for removing Resonance from the game.
I would welcome any comments and suggestions for improvement.
I think that you in one way or another will always hit a wall with the text 'but what stops a player from simply obtaining more consumables?'. Resonance seems like a hard-coded answer to that problem and, if a party behaves and doesn't abuse the game, you could simply play without.
But Paizo as a game designer seems intent on having a rule in place instead of going 5th edition about it with a 'do as you please' handwave.
I suppose - although very, very few of my players have ever been inclined to spend significant resources on consumables. I think part of this is a reluctance to "throw away" money on a 1-shot item, as well as the action economy working against it: time spent drawing and consuming a potion is time not spent bashing the BBEG with your magic weapon (or casting a spell to defeat the BBEG).
I don't see that changing in PF2. Could be wrong, of course!
Eager to jump back into action!
Same! Do we wait for Caraid, or go ahead without him?
Typing up will come in an hour or so - so do start, I'll be with you.
Yay! OK, moving us along :)
Ok - mostly done, but everything that is done is in the alias.
Quick post now!
Quick post again, and this time go attack the bug! :)
Badia - well done on getting free in 1 round (curses!) Forgot to add that once you're free of the quicksand, you're prone. 1 Action to stand up.
Okay, I'll have to stand up next round I suppose.
Just realized that Caraid critically failed the save (natural 1)! Double damage!
Doh! Welcome to the game--here's 24 acid damage to the face. :(
Doh! Welcome to the game--here's 24 acid damage to the face. :(
That would make such a great marketing slogan for PF2
*Splat* Make another PC...
NOOOOOOO! Not after how long it took the last one!
Caraid, are you still planning on using the +1 falchion? If not, can I have it back? :)
You'll be able to take it from his cold, dead hands very soon...
You or an ally can spend actions to help you recover
from persistent damage, such as casting healing spells or
using Medicine to Administer First Aid against bleeding,
dousing a flame, or washing off acid; successfully doing
so reduces the DC of that condition’s flat check to 15
and usually lets you immediately attempt an extra flat
check to end that persistent damage. The reduction to
the DC lasts until you remove the persistent damage or
gain another persistent damage condition with the same
damage type.
Eh, so, like, what sort of check would help against this persistent damage? *blinks*
edit: I free-formed it since the cost for lowering the DC ought to be only an action :)
@Solicitor - creative use of the spell, I'm inclined to allow it; but is it really only 1 Action to cast?
No, I simply went by the action cost for administering aid as per the medicine skill. The persistent damage rules are on paige 322 of the pdf or 323 if you got a printed version.
Ok, thanks, I'll take a look.
Just waiting for Caraid (stop me if you've heard that one before...) and Naadhira.
Sorry for the wait. I'm here ^^
Naadhira - I loathe myself, Paizo and the universe at large for asking this, but... do you have enough Resonance left to use the staff?
Caraid, unfortunately Assurance doesn't work like that. When you use it, you get 15 as your TOTAL RESULT, regardless of your skill modifier. It doesn't replace a die roll. :(
Caraid, unfortunately Assurance doesn't work like that. When you use it, you get 15 as your TOTAL RESULT, regardless of your skill modifier. It doesn't replace a die roll. :(
...
My first thought was that that can't possibly be right.
But I've gone away and reread the rulebook and is correct.
Um. Wow. What an amazing feat.
Caraid, if you want to pick a different feat and/or redo your actions for that turn that's fine with me.
This is infuriating - there's so much of this game that I like, and it makes the periodic whiplash of 'huh, WTF?' all the more jarring.
When we say amazing, we mean amazingly terrible right? Using a feat to 'take 15' seemed like a perfectly reasonable idea to me... *facepalm*
I'll stick with actions as is.
EDIT: Lol... at least the RNG has a sense of humour!
I do not have any resonance. I rolled the flat check to make the staff work anyways.
That 15 really depends on what the check is for. I wanted Assurance survival so I could keep us safe during travel, but it was a waste.
The way I read Assurance I thought it was a nice way of guarenteeing FF opponents for sneak attack... apparently not. Legendary Assurance might be worthwhile, but everything up to it seems to be terrible now.
@Naadhira - sorry, my bad. I completely missed your flat check roll.
@Caraid - by the time you get Legendary skills, wouldn't you most likely be able to hit the Assurance number in any event?
Feel free to take a different feat in place of Assurance, anyone.
On a completely unrelated note - has anyone tried out D&D 5E?
I've run and played 5e a couple times. Not nearly as much customization as pathfinder, but infinitely more streamlined and beginner friendly.
I'll stick with assurance because it's part of my background.
Assurance is nice for those skills where you don't want to risk a low-roll: stealth, thievery, perhaps even athletics. It's also pretty okay for skills you got a low ability mod for.
In general, I feel like Assurance is rather 'meh' but hey, it has its use :) that's more than what can be said for over half of the feats for PF1 :p
Yeah, just don't count on it for any critical checks over the course of the adventure.
I think we can all agree that PF1 has a bad case of splat-book "bloat" - there are waaaaaay too many feats and magic items to sift through now.
@Naadhira - thanks for the input. I'll have to take a look at 5E at some point.
Unfortunately the only way for an RPG to keep making money is to make splat books - bloat is unavoidable if you want profit...
@Caraid - true, sadly.
@Badia - flanking doesn't give a +2 to hit any more, I think. It makes the target flat footed which reduces their AC by 2 (against everyone).
Just trying to avoid double-counting.
Also, is there a penalty for shooting into melee? I can't find it.
EDIT: Keep forgetting to put the AC in: it's 19 (TAC 15)
Right, I won't add the +2 on my rolls any more.
The only penalty for shooting into melee is if the enemy is screened, which means another creature is in the way. That gives the target +1 AC against the ranged attack.
Oh, that's right, forgot about "screened"
Thanks
We'll make the game easier, they said.
*grins* :3
They lied precious, they lied!
... actually, they kind of didn't: I honestly can't tell you how much easier it is to run combat in this system. Monster stats are clearly set out, the actions they can take are listed and explained, and there's fewer reactions/AoOs to disrupt things.
The few reactions that there are, work really thematically e.g. goblin scuttle; I had great fun setting up all those flank attacks in the sewer!
There's also more in the way of tactics, rather than just 'I take a 5 ft step and full attack'
Like I said above, the good stuff in PF2 is excellent, which makes the sucky bits all the more jarring.
There are some bits that need fixing - admittedly some of them fairly major - but this could be a really good game.
I was going to post something like 'but!', but ended up butting myself. If such a thing is possible.
It seems easy to react to the 'but more tactics' with typical Negative Nancy-ness, but (ugh, that word, but) I think you're at least somewhat right. Assist costs only one action and seems to be a better option when facing a tough opponent than going for a second or even tertiary attack. The same goes for Aid, where you might have to spend an action to increase the likelihood of an ally succeeding in a skill check mid-combat. However, it seems that no matter how much you invest into AC, you'll get hit, repeatedly, even by goons, so will that -2 to hit that you force upon your enemy really matter? Typing this out, I did find a newfound appreciation for the fighter's lvl 2 'Assisting Shot' feat.
The same goes for something like Ray of Enfeeblement, where I *need* to hit the enemy and then pray he screws up his Fort save, a save that any beefy foe will definitely have a solid bonus on. Wouldn't I be better off just blasting the thing? I don't know, I need to play more for that, but the stat balance feels precarious.
A game where enemies will most likely always hit will force one or more players into the dedicated healer role and *that's* something 5th Edition managed to cure, but the playtest only seems to have made worse. Or, is it perhaps us players who are failing to adapt?
Okay, it's time for me to go cook and end this rambling ;)
I think I'd get more out of it if I'd had more time to read the playtest. I'm largely learning it as I go, so all of these 'interesting 3rd actions' are things I just don't know about, so I end up doing the same boring thing I did before - but worse because at level 1 I roll three times and (if I miss the first one) am almost guarenteed to miss the rest...
I know its better from a GM's perspective, I've run part 1 and it was lovely. Not sold as a player yet though :)
I'm not entirely sure what to think so far. I'm going to need more time to reflect.
@Solicitor - I've rolled more attacks than I can remember right now and I will bet - without looking - that much less than half have landed and that I've rolled fewer than five crits.
I think your premise that enemies will most likely hit isn't supported by the evidence.
Badia misses. So does the Ankhrav.
EDIT - the prosecution rests, m'lud.
Caraid - how are you getting +9 to hit with the falchion? It doesn't have the Finesse trait.
Well crud.
Hey Badia, want a falchion? :)
It doesn't have to be a falchion: the playbook says to give the group a +1 melee weapon and I thought with 2 half-orcs in the group that a falchion was a decent bet.
But if you want something else (like a Finesse weapon) then we can retcon it.
I like clubs, maces and finesse weapons personally. I don't mind Badia having it though, Caraid gets SA. :)