croc64's page

Just an ideia: the AC bonus should always be passive, since shields already are a bad option in PF1.

If they have the passive AC bonus AND with an action you can receive some DR, it seems a good option to me.

This has been clarified to be the case, I believe earlier in this thread (not that I blame you for not reading through it all).

croc64 wrote:

Hythlodeus wrote:

wait, the 'reaction' is class based and not, say, roleplay based? I can't really decide WHAT my reaction is but have to select from a list of reactions available for the class I play? Do I understand that correctly? (might be the language barrier, who knows?)

I'm sorry, but if that's the case, that is extremely limiting, I don't see much fun in that

Language barrier, in this instance, reaction is not referring to common English. It is a term used to define actions you can take outside of your turn in combat, think attacks of opportunity. It doesn’t mean “dude calls you green, what do you do”, it means “rogue, you invested in a class feat for this, your enemy tries to drink a potion, so you want to use your reaction to attempt to steal it out of his hands?” Hope that helps clarify.

Oh THAT I got. And I stand by my first reaction that this reaction system is limiting. So let's say I play that rogue, I see that enemy drink that potion and all I can do as reaction is a steal attempt? Where are the choices? Maybe I want to shoot at the bottle, maybe I want to take advantage of the fact the enemy is occupied to retreat or attack. If I'm limited to only one possible reaction or a short list of possible reactions that is the same for every other rogue, what makes my rogue stand out? Limiting the roleplay aspect of a roleplaying game is never a good idea, even more so if I seemingly still have unlimited choices of ACTIONS I can take. "My three actions: retreat, taunt, juggle... no wait, attack, move, write a poem...no wait, paint a portait of my enemy, crush it, and hear the lamentation of his woman..."

It's not limiting roleplay though? Currently, your options to respond to an enemy chugging a potion in front of you is to attack, and that's assuming you haven't used your AoO for the round. None of this limits roleplay, and if you think it does, then this isn't a new problem for you. Combat has to have rules, and Pathfinder has *always* been a crunchier, rules focused system. Reactions are not actions, they occur (typically) outside of your turn, they themselves break the standard rules. Each round is 6 seconds, and everyone's turns go off simultaneously, and surprisingly, when you can take three actions and a reaction, there has to be rules on it. You're right, you'll need to pick feats/talents to expand your reaction options, but the new system doesn't restrict roleplay anymore than the old ones do, and they also don't limit roleplay? You can't just break the fundamental rules in the Pathfinder style of combat in the name of roleplay. I don't just get to cast shocking grasp for my turn, and then do it again on their turn as a reaction to them attacking me. If you wan't a game like that, you need to look to other systems, where that is the goal.

wait, the 'reaction' is class based and not, say, roleplay based? I can't really decide WHAT my reaction is but have to select from a list of reactions available for the class I play? Do I understand that correctly? (might be the language barrier, who knows?)

I'm sorry, but if that's the case, that is extremely limiting, I don't see much fun in that

Language barrier, in this instance, reaction is not referring to common English. It is a term used to define actions you can take outside of your turn in combat, think attacks of opportunity. It doesn’t mean “dude calls you green, what do you do”, it means “rogue, you invested in a class feat for this, your enemy tries to drink a potion, so you want to use your reaction to attempt to steal it out of his hands?” Hope that helps clarify.