I don’t mean to sound dickish, but it sounds like @squiggit feels that being unable to optimise for STR & DEX with skills based on other stats simultaneously is a system flaw. I feel that it’s a system perk.
Is this a complicated way of saying regain one focus per action?
Manifestations are after casting; they’re properties of the spell, not verbal or somatic components of the Cast A Spell activity. I just thought it was important to note that, as I’ve seen people be confused about the distinction.
Goblins should be playable, but not a core ancestry. Because kobolds should be core.
I really don't understand what you're talking about here. Are you saying the GM takes away the player's agency by respecting the player's choice to ask a question that turns out to be a poor one?Agency doesn't mean all your choices will be good ones, just that you have real choices.The choice between getting a die roll that provides useful information if successful and getting a die roll that will not provide you useful information no matter how it goes is not a real choice. Yes. It’s double jeopardy; success on the check can be negated by “asking a poor question” in your setup. Why bother with the check then, if you use the player’s question to determine if they gain useful information?Success on a check *which used an action*, one of a character’s limited resources, provides useful information. A critical success provides more.
&
Why are you trying to rip off your players? Why are you devaluing their choices in building characters and choosing how to spend resources? THAT’S why it’s removing player agency.
How do you define agency? The base rules have agency only in deciding whether or not to Recall Knowledge. The GM tries to offer the player more agency by letting the player choose what kind of knowledge he might recall. The player exercised their agency by making a poor choice - but that's still agency. Agency doesn't mean all your choices will be good ones, just that you have real choices. The player could have also said "no I don't want to ask a specific question, just tell me what you think would be useful". The player chose not to do that, and that happened to be a poor choice. But it was a real choice. I don’t define player agency as “roll a success but get nothing because I didn’t guess what the GM thought was important to ask”. Do you?
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible. In your opinion. In my opinion the new look is excellent & is lore appropriate.
I’d just like to point out that kineticists are not psychic casters (unless using the overwhelming soul archetype) and are absolutely not psionics. Several of the concerns raised above appear to be based on the misapprehension that they are psionics. The psychic class is more or less equivalent to the psion of AD&D & 3e, however the class casts “psychic” spells in the same way as arcane and divine prepared casters; essentially the psychic is a prepared caster with “thought” and “emotion” components replacing verbal and somatic, drawing from their own spell list and with a different flavour. I thought it was a neat solution to the “psionics work differently to magic in ways that make them unbalanced” issue that accompanied traditional d&d psionics.I suspect that the same effect can be achieved in PF2 with an archetype for the wizard class and a different spell list.
I’d just like to point out that kineticists are not psychic casters (unless using the overwhelming soul archetype) and are absolutely not psionics. Several of the concerns raised above appear to be based on the misapprehension that they are psionics.
I was firmly in support of goblin ancestry as core and really didn’t get the kobold appeal.
Your post could be rephrased as: Since you’ve prepared everything for a GenCon release next week, why not just ditch all the preparation and release it now and spoil the release which is the big Paizo event at GenCon?Put like that, doesn’t it sound a bit impatient?
For what's it worth, I never cared for dinosaurs in Tolkienesque fantasy. Better idea: make more dragons. Only if you limit Tolkien’s books to The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. If you include all his works, there are plenty of dragons. The First Age dragons make Smaug look like an amateur.
IMHO Paizo isn't trying to make D&D anymoreAnd this is my biggest concern. I actually like playing D&D, and to the degree that PF2e is not D&D, I don't have much interest in it. No offence intended, but why are you here then?
I really liked the way Diablo 3 flavoured the monk but kept it essentially wuxia. The wuxia monk doesn’t have to be at odds with a Eurocentric fantasy milieu, even if Golarion was that.
BS. I never told anyone not to tell Paizo what they wanted. Try again Huh? Where did I say you did? Don’t try and strawman me. Also, you’ve ignored point 2, repeatedly. Try again.
1. Don’t be a hypocrite. Combat Mnster’s post was in response to yours saying exactly what you’ve accused him of. 2. Mark Seifter has already told you the exact house rule to achieve your desire, so you’re objectively incorrect in your statement above.
Yeah, I think upon rereading my post it ended up being more directly targeted at Malthruz than I intended. Only the first two sentences were a direct response to him, the rest was a much more general statement. Sorry, Malthruz.
In my opinion, the “+1 to everything problem” is not a problem. It’s a feature which is a component of a deliberate design direction, one that I wholeheartedly embrace. To be blunt, it’s becoming tiresome to constantly hear the same few posters saying “it’s too like 4e for my group” or “that’s not what pathfinder is supposed to be” or “I want to be bad at skills mechanically without roleplaying so everyone has to be bad at skills because if they aren’t they’re playing wrong” or “I can’t enjoy the game if paladins aren’t super-duper-special-lawful-best-only because any filthy casual who wants to play a non LG paladin is ruining it.”
Whereas to me that sounds *exactly* like the first action you took on your initiative count was to enter a stance.
Please DO NOT post comments in this thread! Because you want the thread to agree with your foregone conclusion? The poll is invalid without seeing the example iconography. Attempting to shut down comments to that effect is dishonest.As Mark already explained, prior to you deciding to post the poll anyway, these polls correlate only to the OPs opinion. Just make a thread that states your opinion and be done with it, it’s just as valid.
It appears that all your dislikes are based on assumptions that the system is the same as pathfinder 1. At least some of those assumptions we already know are false.HD are gone because HD don’t exist in PF2; creatures have levels. It seems reasonable to presume that abilities that would key off HD in PF1 would use levels if they exist in an equivalent form in PF2. Ability Damage is gone because Ability Damage doesn’t exist in PF2; things that would have been ability damage in PF1 are now conditions that affect the MOD, not the score. AC breakdown is gone because AC is based on level, proficiency & equipment in PF2; we don’t know conclusively if size modifies AC in PF2; flat-footed is a condition that applies a penalty to AC, so how much of the AC comes from DEX doesn’t matter; we don’t know if different typed AC bonuses exist in PF2, but it seems likely that they do not. BAB is gone because BAB doesn’t exist in PF2; to-hit is determined by level, proficiency & equipment. Mark just posted above you that there’s rules to handle changing weapons for monsters. Type is in the traits line of the stat block; indications are that many abilities will key off traits in PF2. Ultimately, PF2 is not PF1. Criticism of part of the new system on the assumption that it is the same as PF1 and thus must meet the expectations of PF1 is flawed.
Terrible art for the Hobgoblin.I also really really don't like WAR's style of drawing, and one of the reasons I don't like getting Paizo hardcovers is his art everywhere. That’s really unfortunate. I, on the other hand, really like WAR’s art style and one thing that I’m excited about is that he’s the sole artist for the PF2 CRB.
Mark has already addressed this. The Critical line will often reference the success/failure effect and read “as success and...”. It is considered clearer to thus list the normal outcome first. Additionally, all of the blocks are success then failure for consistency even when failure is the desirable outcome for the player.
we are stuck with them, more people know them as the names for things than people who know they are the wrong names. More confusion fixing things than just going with it. (as an aside Brigandine is NOT studded leather, it's steel plates between layers of leather, padding and cloth, it LOOKS like a studded shirt but really isn't, it's part of a type of plate armour..) Studded leather is fetish gear, not armour. “Studded Leather” armour is a misinterpretation of images of Brigandine in medieval art is the point being made. |
