Concordia's page

DISCLAIMER: read the playtest, but didn't play it. That being said, this is exactly what I feel when reading the manual: every character seems to be the same.

It's like that in Starfinder (everybody shoots the same guns, does the same things, and can pilot as good or even better as the Ace pilot...). It was also the thing with D&D 4.0, which lead us to PF in the first place.

It seems oversimplified. I don't want a game that is simple. I'll wait for the actual rules to come out. But so far, this seems dull and I'm sticking to my first opinion: this is simply for the share owners' shares to get a boost.

I don't even see any creativity in this. Seems only to be change for a change.

Sorry. To each his own, but this is not for me.

Edit: I *again* quoted the wrong post. So removed the quote. But point is the same.

Sorry about that.

What if I like that 2nd Ed?

No: complaining about the money-milking scheme that this is.

Concordia wrote:

I am not excited at all by this. I know I'll get thrashed by saying so, but I think the game is perfect as it is now.

This is purely and simply a consumering scam to get more of our money. I bought almost all of the hardcovers for "PF1", do you think I'll do it again? Sure as hell not!

I won't jump on that bandwagon.

Luckily your hardcovers won't turn to dust upon 2e's release and can still enjoy them.

Right, but won't be supported anymore (as of 2019, if I read correctly). What if I like that 2nd Ed? No way I'm buying a new Core Rulebook (70 Canadian $), another Campaign and GM guide, and 5 or 6 Monster manuals...

Skill system probably won't be the same, feats won't be the same, combat is already determined to not work the same way.

I am not excited at all by this. I know I'll get thrashed by saying so, but I think the game is perfect as it is now.

This is purely and simply a consumering scam to get more of our money. I bought almost all of the hardcovers for "PF1", do you think I'll do it again? Sure as hell not!

I won't jump on that bandwagon.

The pit spells being discussed are 4th and 5th level spells. Lets look at other spells at 4th level. I'll let the reader mentally compare power levels. As long as these other spells are in the game I have to conclude that Pits are not broken.

4th level Core Book Spells
Black Tentacles (no save)
Confusion (area save or suck)
Enervation (no save)
Resilient Sphere (also a reflex save and no chance to climb out)

This is a bit rough for a comparison.

Black Tentacles, you get to oppose your CMD to a grapple check every round. Many a fighter would prefer that to a REF save;

Confusion, you get a save and if you fail it, you still have a 1 in 4 chance per round to act normally;

Enervation is a ray. The caster still have to succeed a range touch attack. Did he select Point blank shot and precise shot in order not to have a load of maluses in a melee? If so, great feats/spells choices. That's a well planned wizard you got.

Resilient Sphere does trap you, but it also protects you against the opposition. Agreed, your buddies might be dead when you get out and face the opposition, but at least, you'll have a chance to flee. You could even heal/protect/buff yourself while inside the sphere.

So sorry Skorn, these spells aren't merely as brutal as the pits.

Fred

A couple of things:

We are also thinking of banning them, because:

a) I don't know which quests you guys are playing, but in Serpent skull book 3, there's absolutely nobody that can easily* avoid a DC 19 or 20 REF save, even the bosses. So imagine the other minions.

* (What we feel as an easy save situation is a modifier that gives you chances of succes of 50% or higher, which means in this cas, against that wizard, that you would need REF 10 or more. We don't see that a lot in this book.)

b) Once they're in the pit, nobody that doesn't fly IN THE WHOLE ADVENTURE can succeed Climb DCs of 30 and 35 on top of that. This requires four rolls of pure 20 in successive rounds. I'm not an odds maker, but isn't that a 1 in 160,000 chance to succeed?

c) Correct me if I'm wrong, but a large creature could fall in a 10X10 pit if a medium one can fall into a 5X5 trap, no? So it now takes a Huge or bigger creature to avoid this.

Finally, where's the rule regarding the impossibility of using dimension door or teleport in an extradimensional space? And, as I don't have the wording in front of me, does it say in the spell description that it is such a space that is created?

Many thanks for your inputs. It is, as always, enlightening.

Fred

Berselius wrote:

Wait, your asking US to invest in this IDEA of yours? Isn't that a bit pretentious? I mean, asking the consumer to invest in an idea that they'll ultimately have to purchase anyways in order to play? It's like saying we want you to fund the production of OUR PRODUCT so that you can eventually spend even MORE MONEY to BUY the product we're having you FUND. Am I wrong on this? I sure as hell hope I am.

I think you misunderstood the post. The call for investors isn't a "hey, give us money so we can build this," or even a Kickstarter-style "donate and when it's done we'll give you something neat." This is a straight-up investment, like buying stock in any company. No altruism required.

If it was a single player game, à la Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale, as others stated, I'd be pinching in right away.

For a MMO, no thank you.

Fred