PineTowers's page

Agree with most of posters here, specially houser2112. If something is making readability worse, you must work on something, because that means something is not quite right.

It is a bad way to design otherwise.

It's a good sign that I've already seen threads about how the rogue is both too powerful and not powerful enough. Hopefully that means the rogue is well balanced.

That's... not how it works. At all. That means someone is wrong. Someone just need to math out who's who.

PF2 must be quite different from PF1, or it would be called PF1.5 or Advanced Path & Finder instead.

But I too would love to see the creative process behind every decision.

PF2 Fighter's Certain Strike (LV10) class feat is just a pathfinderized version of the the 4e Fighter's Reaping Strike (LV1) at-will power.

So am I supposed to think that the power level in Pathfinder is lower, more akin to 5e? But then why make a +1/level? To think the power level is greater than Bounded Accuracy 5e, mor akin to 4e?

Unfortunately what I can see is that Paizo didn't knew what to aim and shoot at every corner/concept.

Disagree with GameDesignerDM.

Chalkboard game design is a fundamental part of game design. What Colette is pointing is that some feats are extremely situational, and that is easy to see without the need for table time.

Off course table time is important because some issues might appear only when at the table, but as for now there are issues that don't even need table time to be saw.

When I first read about this kind of tiers (Trained, Expert, etc) I thought it would be great and each tier would mean much.

Right now I see it as a lengthy/wordy way to write +1, +2, +3 in the character sheet, the rulebook and as a prerequisite in feats.

Doesn't seem so bad, and each attempt takes 10 minutes.

And that's nothing most of the time. It makes a Wizard even more versatile than ever. With the party can't spare 10 minutes for a quick spell switch, there's something wrong.

Worse, when comparing to other feats of the same level, it shows as the single best.

Worse(r), aside the time, no other drawback. I would make that the switched spell must be at least one level lower than the original one, and each subsequent attempt increases the restriction by one (so the second time you Quick Prepare, it must be a spell 2 levels lower) until you rest.

Magic is still really strong (Full caster > Everything else), you can't actually fix that and be in genre.

You can.

We have plenty of examples of western martial mythos doing legendary things. In a cooperative game, it is heavily important that everyone feels equivalent overall, excelling in one way or another against other class.

This idea that magic should trump everything is bad. And if we have a chance to make things on par, that chance is now. A level 5 character should be as powerful as another level 5 character, else the whole thing of levels being comparative is just useless.

Paizo must attain to a view of how strong if the magic of the world, and scale everyone accordingly. We can't have anymore a Fighter that came from a historical point-of-view and a Wizard that is even stronger than most of the mythological spellcaster of legends of old.