Daniel Grota's page

The number of repetitive complaints about the ending is bordering on trolling at this point. We get it. Some people don't like the ending. You know what? It's an RPG you can change it. No one is going to come to your house in the middle of the night and change it back.

I imagine these people knocking on Tolkien's door in the 1960s demanding that Isildur destroy the ring because otherwise the whole story is stupid.

The number of repetitive dismissive remarks to just change the ending is bordering on trolling. We get it. You can change it if you don't like the ending. But it's an AP that many have legitimate complaints about and have every right to complain considering it's a product you buy. And to let others know how the AP is by default. I know I'm being snarky copying your post in such a way, but equating complaints as trolling ain't helping. I too feel the AP is badly written that others have explained already, better than I can. It should've been a novel, IMO.

As someone who went back to 3.5 after years of 5e and finding it too light on content (and other RPGs not scratching my D&D itch), I found the lack of new releases and continued support liberating. It was content complete. I didn't have to worry about players coming in with the new hotness plucking that one feat or rule to use for their characters. I don't have to anticipate the next book(s) releasing in the near future excited about the supposed new material while thinking the stuff that came before is old hat already. I never have to worry about things getting nerfed or new lists and lists of errata to contend with. And of course, my wallet is very happy. ;)

It's done; complete. I've barely used 1% of the material of a near complete 3.5 collection, always chasing the new releases without really enjoying what I had already. Or quickly abandoning it hopping over to other RPGs, or Pathfinder, or new editions D&D. But now I'm back and I can now sit down and relax and enjoy the mountain of material to my hearts content without outside interference. And I can see the same thing from PF 1e once the last book is released. ;)

oooh! The writing portion is on the left, :D Left handed friendly!

I struggle to read the book because it's so dry and lifeless. Nothing really inspires me or gets my creative juices flowing, as opposed to 5e which made me very excited to play every class. PF2, just reads like a college text book about programming and only programmers will find it worth the read. Me, my eyes will glaze over. Yossarian is doing a good job of adding some spark and life to the flavor text. I want to play an alchemist chucking smoke filled dirty bombs now. ;)

On a whole, I do like resonance. Gives CHA more weight and reduces wand of CLW spam. But I just do not like it for consumables. It feels too restrictive on fun, single use items that are better spent for healing instead.

I much prefer the 5e way of doing things. Coming from 5e to this, it feels like I ended up in the stone age.

My two cents: went Resonance was first introduced, it felt weird, but also that there might be something in there. When I learned more about how you got it and what it was for, I started liking it more.

Now instead of having a shirt that gives you an extra move action 1/day and a cloak that turns you into a crow 3/day, you can wear both and decide with your 4 resonance points if you run 4 times, or turn into a crow 4 times, or any mix in between, and didn't have to track remaining uses for neither, just a global Resonance Pool.

When I learned potions costed resonance, I was also up for it. This encourages you to drink that one big level-apropiate powerful potion instead of drinking 20 crappy ones in a row after a fight, same for wands (wich I asumed would cost resonance to activate and would have no charges neither, so if you have 10 resonance points to use on wands, you want to make those 10 heals be better, so you buy better wands).
Making potions cost a valuable resource (Resonance) was also the perfect excuse to make them more powerful (since you are limited to how many you can use in any given day) so you would track your 3 AWESOME POTIONS instead of 20 crappy situational ones; and things like drinking a Healing Potion in Combat wouldn't be so much of a waste of actions (if it did for once heal more than what ANY enemy in the battle field could damage with half their attacks).

I was so into resonance, that I started homebrewing it in my current campaign, giving players wands and items that all have abilities that cost resonance, so they decide what/how they use them. And I do like having a resource similar to "How many spells do I have left? Do I want to burn one for this?" for all clases.

Then the last 2 Blog Posts happened... What a mess... 3 or 4 new kinds of actions that have never been explained to us and that seem that could be easily replaced with "Somatic, Verbal and Material". If you want to have a "Amazing Opperator" Feat later that removes the Opperation Action from items, you can...

Exactly how I feel. I really like RP even if I was a bit iffy on needing it for consumables, but understood why it was there and its benefits. But seeing charges and x/day still in the game makes me scratch my head. Why have RP at all if it's not going to be global for all magic item usage? It should remove fiddly tracking of charges and x/day on multiple items and condense it into one global pool. Having both just ups the fiddlyness.

Pathfinder style-AP and modules for 5e a possibility now? Make it happen Paizo! ;)

That dude in the interview said "story" so much it kind of lost all meaning. >_> Sorry, two adventures a year is not enough. What a depressing interview.

-Healing spells under Conjuration (Necromancy would be a better fit).
-Crafting in general, poisons specifically.
-Conjuration stealing the spotlight of Evocation
-Spontaneous casters having to wait 1 additional level for the next spell level.
-Grapple rules
-Combat maneuvers provoking AoO
-AoO rules in general (my group uses 3 points of AoO, Spellcasting, Movement and Ranged attacks only provoke, everything else is fair game).
-Prestige Classes!
-Summoners, it's too fiddly.
-Boring magic items and the Christmas Tree effect in general (i.e. +x items)
-Eastern weapons. Why are these separate and require a separate feat? Why not take what is there and re-flavor the weapons to an Eastern equivalent?
-Rogues not up to snuff.
-Feats. There are waaaaaay too many and not enough feat slots.
-Feat taxes like Weapon Finesse.
-Natural spell (Banhammer here I come!)
-On the GM side, NPC creation. It can be a bit much at higher levels.

I wish the compatibility to 3.5 wasn't such a large selling point. At first I was excited to get a new core book that fixes things but is also compatible to my large 3.5 collection (I own nearly all the WotC 3.5 books and all the 3.0 books). But once I got the book in my hands, I wanted to run the game with a clean slate and get use to Pathfinder before I start including 3.5 material. Now that I've played a few sessions, I don't even want to use my 3.5 material at all, I'm very satisfied with the core book and APG. Looking back now, compatibility with 3.5 wasn't really needed IMO and it limited the changes Pathfinder could've made to make the game that much more.
my 2 copper.

I've been mulling over the apparent weakness of the Master Craftsman feat and decided to take a stab at it to make it more worthwhile. Tell me what you guys think.