Norlore's page

10 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


This is heavily discussed in my group as well. In general people don't like the +level to everything. The size of the bonuses eclipse alot of stats and proficiencies. I want progression but in my group most people seem to want a +1/4th level or +1/2 level to find a suitable balance between storytelling, range of NPCs and monsters which are viable encounters at any given level.

It is a gamist mechanic but it also reflects experience and the goal should be to provide a good gaming experience.

AC generally scaled with other things in PF1 (magic items and similar) at a higher rate than +to-hit did so I think that is why people didn't think about it as much. Also, the pf1 level 10 wizard did scale with half their level meaning that the difference wasn't as big as it is in PF2.

I quite liked the alternative earlier posted regarding other ways of giving dex to damage like reduction of the crit modifier by half your dex modifier (So an 18 dex would crit on AC+8 instead).

If such an option was open to everyone it would open up the possibilities of having lightly armored two-handed users as well who would trade AC for more damage potential (hopefully the game would not encourage rocket-tag enough for this to be the dominant build). I would however like to see it as an option.

The other easier fix in my opinion would be something that requires provides half your dex modifier + your strength modifier to damage.

It would not replace strength and thus not encourage totally ignoring the stat but at the same time it would encourage dex-focused characters.

In total though, I think I would far prefer no dex-to-damage ability at all and instead give static buffs to the rogue for example to do viable damage. (And equally other niches people like, I want to keep both a strength magus and a dex magus viable but slightly different choices for example with the dex magus being more agile, better at those tasks and having better defense while the strength magus could hit harder in combat.)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Brock Landers wrote:

Intelligence mod should add to Languages (as it did at one point in the playtest, but dropped, lame) and/or Tool Proficiencies known.

Charisma mod should add to how many magic items you can attune (again, as it was in the playtest at one point...).

I totally agree, I wish they wouldn't make all spells and similar abilities scale off one attribute for a specific caster. In my opinion the spells themselves should dictate if they would use wisdom, intelligence or charisma (buffs = wisdom, nukes/conjuration = int, charisma = certain inspirational buffs/charms/illusions). This would also create diversity between two wizards of the same level even if they both went with cookie-cutter spells.

But that is a different subject.

When I did some houserules I tried out an ability which read "If you use dex to hit and strength to deal damage you may add half your dex modifier to the damage roll."

It worked decently but do have some drawbacks so it is not a perfect solution by any means.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

This is something which has been extensively discussed in my group as well.

Certain systems award different stats differently. Dex-to-damage opens up a classic theme for characters although by design it eliminates strength as earlier pointed out in this thread.

I completely agree that the ideal solution would be that both dex and strength could contribute meaningfully to all characters. In fact, I am a firm believer that ALL stats should provide some kind of benefit to a character for all classes. I want to see charisma based effects for fighters, the "normal fighters" of 1st ed wouldn't have to use them but if someone wanted to make the archetypical leader-fighter seen in many books and movies it would be possible to create that.

Having stats replace eachother is a cheap way of cheating the system to make a class viable, but in the end it does create systemic problems and occasionally break the merger between the system we are playing in and the fantasy story we are trying to emulate.

I would try to tie dexterity into the crit mechanic (thus emulating that rogues are generally good at striking sensitive areas with giving them a boost to critical hits under circumstances where they could land a sneak attack).

Strength would be the main damage bonus and if you truly wanted to maximize damage you would probably need both strength and dex at a high level (although due to class mechanics the ideal relation between the two would vary on case by case) and obviously make sacrifices in other areas.

I would also like to see strength reduce some of the penalties of armor as suggested earlier in this thread. I often find that the combined extra cost of heavy armor, the ACP and the movement restrictions outweigh the benefits in first ed and if nothing else puts a cap on how much dex you want on a character which isn't desirable.

To sum it up: Having more stats matter is good for the system and for diversity. Replacing, capping or ignoring stats should be avoided at all costs.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In the light of a new edition I would like to bring up a discussion regarding combat maneuvers.
For me they are characterized by the following:

They are viable if you specialize in them (especially trip, disarm, sunder and feint do have alot of potential) and if you don't specialize in them you will extremely rarely use them. A well built character who has fully specialized into trip or disarm can trivialize quite a few encounters depending on the setup of the opponents. There are of course counters to this in locked gauntlets or for example creatures basically immune to trip.

This dynamic generally makes encounters with a specialized character in them very all or nothing, giving it a feeling similar to SoS spells.

Then we have some combat maneuver that in my group sees very little play which would be bullrush, overrun and similar. (Although they can contain interesting tactical positioning with the right terrain, the cost-for-investment of those feats aren't quite there.)

The current system works adequately but I believe there is room for improvement. Ideally I would like to see a system where my main attack against this type of foe won't be that I will attempt to trip them until I succeed but rather more dynamic tripping attempts throughout combat. Rather make it possible to always attempt to trip an opponent for example but make it very hard even with specialization if he is on his guard and then add conditions where you may get a free trip attempt on them with their defenses clearly lowered.

Considering the new critical fumble system I believe that opens up an opportunity for revising the system.

- What if everyone? (or all martials?) had the ability to use trip, disarm, etc without provoking AoO as a reaction but they could only do it if the opponent critically missed them in combat.
- Specific classes or abilities with other triggers, get a free bullrush if you critically hit someone? A free overrun on a successful charge attack?
- Feinting to open someone up for a combat maneuver?

This would of course require a rebalance of these abilities and what DCs you are required to hit but I believe it would be a more interesting system. What are your thoughts on the matter?

I find it interesting that quite a few people believe that the current healing works fine. I wonder in what way we play our games differently. We run with buffed healing in our games to be able to have prolonged dungeon crawls (I always find it strange when the party takes a nap in the middle of a dungeon to reset their spells). Usually an adventuring day for us in a dungeon would contain 3-5 easier encounters, 3-5 harder encounters which will all expend some resources and maybe a boss on top of that.

High damage instant kill moves are generally shunned by the party since they feel they destroy the tension and cinematic feeling of the heroic party's journey throughout the dungeon. (This means no wizard with a pure focus on an unbeatable save and SoS/SoD spells, we tried it and no one had a good time.)

Our healers are always very strained by the damage they receive, but they feel that they contribute a great deal. Of course, since the campaign I'm thinking of ran with double healers and one very tanky character it meant that our damage output was lower than some other parties.

I've always seen charisma as both a positive and negative trait. A low charisma means you are forgettable and don't leave much of an impression.

I intensely dislike every mechanic which lets you replace one stat with another since that encourages dumping stats (Not that dumping in itself is bad, just dumping a stat with no consequences because you will never roll it, if you want to play a character with a low stat that should be viable, just that it should affect the character in some way).

For martial based classes I would love to see skills tied into charisma for feinting/intimidating and have charisma as the main stat for that. Possibly use it for some combat maneuvers such as trip, feint and disarm? Using a little bit of guile and the way you look at your opponent to throw them off-guard for that?

For casters I would like a change to the spell system. For physical combat 3 stats are the prime requisites. Str, Dex and Con, they affect all characters although differently much depending on your build and what you want to do.

Why not give spells different stats for their save DCs? Make damage spells such as fireball depend on intelligence, make buff spells depend on wisdom and charm/compulsion and illusion spells run off charisma. It would add an incentive for casters to have multiple caster stats solving the SAD mechanic which casters have as well.

This would all require quite abit of balancing obviously.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

After thinking about this for some additional time and reading Kerrilyn's earlier post on the matter as well as having a lengthy discussion with 2 people who tend to play healers in our group I came to a few conclusions. The current system for healing focused characters feel static both in the diversity of actions during combat as well as the build/diversity. Healing is safe, there is little variation in it and it is a resource which gradually gets drained throughout the adventuring day. This has some positive aspects as it gives a sense of tension when they are running low on resources and at the same time every encounter becomes important in trying to reduce the resources spent.

Unfortunately, the straight up mechanics of most healing effects make them dull and both healers did express that they sometimes just felt like walking medkits for the rest of the party.

1. A general review of the cure spells for the divine spell casters. They are definitely on the low-end powerwise until you reach the Heal spell. If you can use your action and not even negate the damage a fighter takes from an opposing fighter in 1 round despite using your highest level spell slot is a problem in itself.

2. Diversify the different ways of healing. Heals which linger for several rounds at a lower pace, quick 1-2 action heals which can be used in an emergency. A feat which adds a temporary hp-buffer to yourself if you cast a cure spell on someone else?

3. Shamelessly stolen from Kerrilyn's post on the matter but healing spells which add other effects for a short time after the heal. Maybe even a heal which has an extra effect if the receiving target took damage during the last round? Heals which affect everything in a line (including enemies?). An additional effect if someone was recently crit? There are alot of possibilities and it would reward using the right heal at the right time and location.

4. If there are warlord type classes or archetypes then add ways for them to give people temporary hp as their ways of healing. Fits the theme of "inspirational leader" and still doesn't give some unexplained healing effect lore-wise to the world.

5. One point I've seen raised is the balance factor where a party with a healer would be more effective than one without. I can't see a major problem with this in itself, after all a party with an arcane caster is usually more powerful than a party without one. The problem which we should put effort into should rather be to turn the healing role into a more active and diversified role where people can choose to create their characters in different ways and which hopefully would increase player satisfaction during the game.

5. Naturally healers must be able to do other things except heal but just a quick look at clerics and oracles does this pretty well in the current iteration in my opinion.

6. Add bandages and enable the heal skill to be a valuable skill for fighters or other non-healing classes for downtime healing. Potions could cover the need for in-combat healing. (Though that healing probably needs to be stronger as well, see my first point regarding the cure spells.)

I believe this would add more depth and enjoyment to that aspect of the game.

I really like the idea of different levels of failure for SoD/SoS spells. They are definitely the worst part of the game in my opinion. (And I even dislike SoS even more than SoD because the fight is over in reality but then the martials still have to bash the opposing team down over 3 rounds or whatever completely removing any challenge or excitement from the situation.)

The hold person effect was a brilliant solution, it's still a powerful effect but won't be a complete SoS effect anymore, the player will still feel as if they have more control over the situation.

I generally only read these forums but as a long time RPer and GM I feel I have to point out my own observations regarding healing in our campaigns.

First off, in combat healing is generally seen as bad because it's better to stop the opponent who did the damage than to heal said damage.

This is partly due to how healing is an attrition resource, there is no risk or reward in general in casting the cure spell. The cleric/oracle/whatever can often turn into a walking medkit which the others go to when they need patching up but it's not very involving for the person who does it.

From this standpoint the whole mechanic could use some improving.

One way is simply to remove healing and say that everyone heals this much upon a short rest etc. This removes the problem by removing the mechanic but it also removes one "role" from the game which some people like.

The other way of adjusting it would be to make healing itself more fun so that it isn't seen as a tedium which has to be done but rather something that could be fun and engaging gameplay.

Can we make healing spells crit? (Add a to-hit roll for healing where, if necessary you can just remove the natural 1 aspect of it) If you roll an uneven number on that to-hit roll, add some other effect to the healing etc? Alot could be done if we are redesigning the system.

Anything to make healing more fun would be my choice. Give the heal skill some love as a means to have the scarred soldier patch his wounds up, remove the wands, keep potions and scrolls and add more interesting healing options for the person who plays the healer to avoid the walking medkit situation.