That is true enough. However, I could still see a monk being weirdly good at dodging even if he were actually a hunched-over old man (i.e. low dex).
|
Well, I sort of like weak/strong saves to a certain extent (it is a piece of flavor for certain classes and major draw of a lot of classes *cough monk cough*), but I think they could stand to scale more closely and have DCs themselves have fewer avenues of increasing. I think a lot of people dislike bounded accuracy because it is game-y but it may be the solution. If it can be implemented without the world burning down then I would be in favor.
Most high level monsters are just designed with a high fort and will as goal as it stands, I think. Either that or they just have immunity to everything.
BAB isnt game-y? I think the most opposition that BA receives is from the perceived progress point of view. The biggest myths about BA are that you don’t progress and that you can only fight Orcs from level 1-20.
That is true enough. However, I could still see a monk being weirdly good at dodging even if he were actually a hunched-over old man (i.e. low dex).Could be handled through class abilities. A Monk being able to replace his saves (all of them) with WIS would be pretty awesome.
This is quite true.
BAB isnt game-y? I think the most opposition that BA receives is from the perceived progress point of view. The biggest myths about BA are that you don’t progress and that you can only fight Orcs from level 1-20.
I am not sure if I think it is game-y. I want to say it isn't. It is just a very simple mechanical representation of a character's expanding martial abilities.
Going towards my earlier comments to you (which apparently merited no response), I would prefer that attack progression give more qualitative bonuses (such as additional combat feats) and give flat bonuses less often. I think a full BAB character should end up about +2 ahead of a 3/4 character and +3 ahead a 1/2 character, but they also have a bunch more qualitative abilities (can make like 3 attacks at full BAB as a full attack; has extra bonus feats; maybe even has different amounts of additional special maneuvers such as the ability to trip and grapple larger size categories of creatures).
Let me tip my hand a little here: I have actually been writing down ideas for a kind of pathfinder 2e for like a year now. It would not please everyone though.
|
|
That is true enough. However, I could still see a monk being weirdly good at dodging even if he were actually a hunched-over old man (i.e. low dex).Could be handled through class abilities. A Monk being able to replace his saves (all of them) with WIS would be pretty awesome.This is quite true.
BAB isnt game-y? I think the most opposition that BA receives is from the perceived progress point of view. The biggest myths about BA are that you don’t progress and that you can only fight Orcs from level 1-20.I am not sure if I think it is game-y. I want to say it isn't. It is just a very simple mechanical representation of a character's expanding martial abilities.
Going towards my earlier comments to you (which apparently merited no response), I would prefer that attack progression give more qualitative bonuses (such as additional combat feats) and give flat bonuses less often. I think a full BAB character should end up about +2 ahead of a 3/4 character and +3 ahead a 1/2 character, but they also have a bunch more qualitative abilities (can make like 3 attacks at full BAB as a full attack; has extra bonus feats; maybe even has different amounts of additional special maneuvers such as the ability to trip and grapple larger size categories of creatures).
Let me tip my hand a little here: I have actually been writing down ideas for a kind of pathfinder 2e for like a year now. It would not please everyone though.
My apologies I am having a little trouble visualizing your concept. Frankly I didnt respond because I would like BAB to disapear personally.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.
|
|
I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.
That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
Thanks. I know a lot of people won't like that increase in complexity, but I rather like the idea and I think it makes things more fun.
I enjoy the game the way it is now.
I don't want a new edition.
Why do you have to insult me for liking Pathfinder?
At this point you have said that...Many many many times in this thread. We get it...your opinion is known. Repeating your opinion over and over isn't going to convince the designers one way or another, nor is it going to convince anyone who disagrees with you
|
|
Thanks. I know a lot of people won't like that increase in complexity, but I rather like the idea and I think it makes things more fun.I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
So would the feats be hard wired into BAB or would you give the player a choice pool like ranger fighting style?
So would the feats be hard wired into BAB or would you give the player a choice pool like ranger fighting style?Thanks. I know a lot of people won't like that increase in complexity, but I rather like the idea and I think it makes things more fun.I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
I was thinking that it would be more like a ranger's fighting style. But you would choose two and alternate between which lists you are drawing feats from.
I have another version that is simpler and has lots of feats, but they are all hard-wired and not really focused on any one build so much as they are evenly distributed amongst a lot of the common martial builds.
So would the feats be hard wired into BAB or would you give the player a choice pool like ranger fighting style?Thanks. I know a lot of people won't like that increase in complexity, but I rather like the idea and I think it makes things more fun.I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
why not both? why must it be an either/or design?
why not both? why must it be an either/or design?So would the feats be hard wired into BAB or would you give the player a choice pool like ranger fighting style?Thanks. I know a lot of people won't like that increase in complexity, but I rather like the idea and I think it makes things more fun.I mean that BAB would essentially be an attack bonus that gives you advantages based on a simple chart. Certain levels of this attack bonus grant bonus feats or extra attacks in a full attack while other levels increase a static bonus to all attack rolls.That does sound like a way to make martials a lot more interesting.
That is a good point too. It is not something I have tried, however.
Sounds kinda like the initiator level TBH.
Elaborate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder 2.0/2nd Edition/Revised Wishlist
All Classes have a minimum of 4 skill points per level. I have felt that skills are important to EVERYONE. I enjoy skills for flavor as much as I enjoy them for crunch. Its never fun, however, to play a class with only 2 skill points and be forced to pick ONLY two skills.
Feats are more streamlined and grow in power. While Power Attack, Combat Expertise, Deadly Aim, and Toughness scale in level, I feel other Feats could benefit from a similar treatment. Vital Strike, Two-Weapon Fighting, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, Weapon Focus, and Weapon Specialization are all good examples. It will reduce those Feat-starved builds and make each choice feel important and less of a boring requirement.
Revision of the Fighter/Monk/Rogue classes. Why play a Rogue when you can play a Cryptbreaker Alchemist, Vivisectionist Alchemist, Archaeologist Bard, Ninja, Ranger, Samurai, Pugilist Barbarian? My point is that it feels like the core classes do not shine when all their unique toys are given to someone else. As a whole, all the other classes feel balanced but the three mentioned have not aged well since their introduction or designers have refused to address key issues.
Scaling AC. As a character grows, all of his defenses should do so as well, including the aforementioned ability to dodge a melee attack. Common sense, really.
Support for Dexterity based combatants. Its a classic fantasy trope however it feels like a player has to jump through hoops to make it effective. Weapon Finesse is all fine and dandy. However, there are no Core options save a Mythic Feat to access the coveted "DEX to Damage." The Agile weapon enchantment, Dervish Dance, and the Aldori Swordlord PrC (all non-Core options) can address this, but only in limited ways. There really is no reason NOT to address this.
Less MAD class design. Some classes require 3-4 ability scores to function, some only require one. As a whole, the game would benefit from it. I would take a page from 4E DnD in how saving throws and attacks could trigger off of two different ability scores. Overall, it would be a good mood.
Make options available, not tedious. I say that because there are some options within the game that feel barred by extensive requirements, notably some feats in order to make certain fighting styles viable. I discovered recently how utterly inferior the crossbow is compared to the bow. Harsk, the Iconic Ranger with a crossbow, is really an example of false advertising. This piece and can go back to previous points. Don't restrict fun!
Off the top of my head, this is all I have. Thanks!
Sounds kinda like the initiator level TBH.Elaborate.It's what tome of battle/book of 9 swords used to determine which maneuvers you can learn. If your class didn't get you maneuvers, you could take feats based on your BAB to get them.
That is very little like what I am describing which was the source of my confusion. I am not even talking about qualification (which is something that is tied to BAB anyways). Rather, I am talking about giving feats and other bonuses in place of flat accuracy bonuses. Initiator level was just like "caster level" but some amount of BAB could add to it.
Pathfinder 2.0/2nd Edition/Revised Wishlist
All Classes have a minimum of 4 skill points per level. I have felt that skills are important to EVERYONE. I enjoy skills for flavor as much as I enjoy them for crunch. Its never fun, however, to play a class with only 2 skill points and be forced to pick ONLY two skills.
Feats are more streamlined and grow in power. While Power Attack, Combat Expertise, Deadly Aim, and Toughness scale in level, I feel other Feats could benefit from a similar treatment. Vital Strike, Two-Weapon Fighting, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, Weapon Focus, and Weapon Specialization are all good examples. It will reduce those Feat-starved builds and make each choice feel important and less of a boring requirement.
Revision of the Fighter/Monk/Rogue classes. Why play a Rogue when you can play a Cryptbreaker Alchemist, Vivisectionist Alchemist, Archaeologist Bard, Ninja, Ranger, Samurai, Pugilist Barbarian? My point is that it feels like the core classes do not shine when all their unique toys are given to someone else. As a whole, all the other classes feel balanced but the three mentioned have not aged well since their introduction or designers have refused to address key issues.
Scaling AC. As a character grows, all of his defenses should do so as well, including the aforementioned ability to dodge a melee attack. Common sense, really.
Support for Dexterity based combatants. Its a classic fantasy trope however it feels like a player has to jump through hoops to make it effective. Weapon Finesse is all fine and dandy. However, there are no Core options save a Mythic Feat to access the coveted "DEX to Damage." The Agile weapon enchantment, Dervish Dance, and the Aldori Swordlord PrC (all non-Core options) can address this, but only in limited ways. There really is no reason NOT to address this.
Less MAD class design. Some classes require 3-4 ability scores to function, some only require one. As a whole, the game would benefit from it. I would take a page from...
The problem with "dex to damage" is that it makes strength a garbage stat. Dex would then apply to accuracy and damage and armor class and saves. I want to call dex just short of a god stat with the agile enhancement already. You trade one damage and one accuracy (a +1 enhancement modifier) to drink strength's milkshake.
"But excaliburproxy! What about carrying capacity!?"
Strength focused characters need to carry around armor to defend themselves, making that way less useful.
"But excaliburproxy! What about strength checks!?"
Spells completely replace swim and climb and both kinds of checks can be avoided with the proper tools. This IS still something that strength has (as you will not always be able to set up those tools or happen to have spells), but that is definitely not enough to make strength a good stat, especially when dex is keyed to like a trillion skills.
edit: letting fort saves key to con or strength helps this problem a little bit. This is exactly why 4e switched to a "2-attributes-per-save" system. They did move more stuff around besides dex to damage too (int stopped giving bonus skills for instance).
|
|
Scaling AC. As a character grows, all of his defenses should do so as well, including the aforementioned ability to dodge a melee attack. Common sense, really.
No thank you. God no thank you I am so tired of soaring AC and attack numbers. Bind them please!
Less MAD class design. Some classes require 3-4 ability scores to function, some only require one. As a whole, the game would benefit from it. I would take a page from 4E DnD in how saving throws and attacks could trigger off of two different ability scores. Overall, it would be a good mood.
whelp, not me I want everyone MAD.
Make options available, not tedious. I say that because there are some options within the game that feel barred by extensive requirements, notably some feats in order to make certain fighting styles viable. I discovered recently how utterly inferior the crossbow is compared to the bow. Harsk, the Iconic Ranger with a crossbow, is really an example of false advertising. This piece and can go back to previous points. Don't restrict fun!
As long as there remains a difference in weapons I could be ok with this. I just dont want a situation where everything is the same mechanically but with different fluff.
Seems like I am here, and you are ------------------->overhere on PF2.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?
As far as the "scaling AC" goes, I'd like the game to be rid of this idea that players have to be keeping up with their gear, so that their stats scale up right along with enemy stats. The whole exercise becomes pointless, or worse: "I can't buy fun things or equip them in the Shoulder slot, because I have to save up for my next level of Cloak of Resistance."
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?
Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?
Six reasons:
1) Because some people are chumps
2) Strength is still neato-keen and people want to be the mighty Conan!
3) An additional +1 to accuracy may be worth it (5% additional chance at success is not something to sneeze at)?
4) One big hit builds (like charge builds) still favor using 1.5 strength versus 2 weapon fighting (I am pretty sure agile does not multiply 1.5 in two hands).
5) Weirdly, ranged fighters--the best fighters--need strength still for damage.
6) feat tax
|
|
As far as the "scaling AC" goes, I'd like the game to be rid of this idea that players have to be keeping up with their gear, so that their stats scale up right along with enemy stats. The whole exercise becomes pointless, or worse: "I can't buy fun things or equip them in the Shoulder slot, because I have to save up for my next level of Cloak of Resistance."
This guy gets it!
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
I wouldn't exactly call them "taxes". You pay a feat and get less MAD, that's certainly a better use of a feat than +2 to attack rolls against guys named Ricky.
People don't go Dex very often because they still do less damage than their Strength equivalents. Sure they get a bonus on Reflex (the least important save) but the AC from Light Armor + High Dex doesn't surpass that of Heavy Armor + Medium Dex until high gear levels. At that point, AC is almost irrelevant unless you can push it to 50+.
The increased Touch AC is nice, at least.
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
I wouldn't exactly call them "taxes". You pay a feat and get less MAD, that's certainly a better use of a feat than +2 to attack rolls against guys named Ricky.
People don't go Dex very often because they still do less damage than their Strength equivalents. Sure they get a bonus on Reflex (the least important save) but the AC from Light Armor + High Dex doesn't surpass that of Heavy Armor + Medium Dex until high gear levels. At that point, AC is almost irrelevant unless you can push it to 50+.
The increased Touch AC is nice, at least.
Mythril armor, homie. It does not take that long to get. Do you think that is expensive? Try affording full plate early game. Also: dex AC comes at no movement speed cost or skill check penalty when you are cruising around in your mythril chain shirt. Your dex get too high for mythril? Bulette Armor or darkleaf clothe.
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
I wouldn't exactly call them "taxes". You pay a feat and get less MAD, that's certainly a better use of a feat than +2 to attack rolls against guys named Ricky.
People don't go Dex very often because they still do less damage than their Strength equivalents. Sure they get a bonus on Reflex (the least important save) but the AC from Light Armor + High Dex doesn't surpass that of Heavy Armor + Medium Dex until high gear levels. At that point, AC is almost irrelevant unless you can push it to 50+.
The increased Touch AC is nice, at least.
Yeah, I almost always go dex build. It's pretty solid. It also has the benefit of indirectly making you more proficient at ranged combat, which is really nice.
There also isn't the ability to get a 1 1/2 modifier to your damage on melee attacks with dex damage as far as I'm aware, and there can be some issues with carrying capacity until you get dimensional storage, but I'm just pointing out the reasons that people don't always go dex early on.
Strength based characters should always out damage Dexterity based characters (barring ranged attackers, given ranged attackers are king). There really is no point in punishing Dexterity based characters any more.
Mythril armor, homie. It does not take that long to get. Do you think that is expensive? Try affording full plate early game. Also: dex AC comes at no movement speed cost or skill check penalty when you are cruising around in your mythril chain shirt. Your dex get too high for mythril? Bulette Armor or darkleaf clothe.With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
I wouldn't exactly call them "taxes". You pay a feat and get less MAD, that's certainly a better use of a feat than +2 to attack rolls against guys named Ricky.
People don't go Dex very often because they still do less damage than their Strength equivalents. Sure they get a bonus on Reflex (the least important save) but the AC from Light Armor + High Dex doesn't surpass that of Heavy Armor + Medium Dex until high gear levels. At that point, AC is almost irrelevant unless you can push it to 50+.
The increased Touch AC is nice, at least.
Mithril works on Heavy Armor too. Armor values and Max Dex Bonus is calculated to ensure High Dex doesn't significantly surpass Heavy Armor. Even counting Bulette and Darkleaf - They still increase Max Dex by the same amount as Mithril (+2).
In the early game, you might have:
18 Dex + Chain Shirt = +8 AC
20 Dex + Studded Leather = +8 AC
14 Dex + Chainmail = +8 AC
12 Dex + Banded Mail = +8 AC
Then later on, you might have:
22 Dex + Mithril Chain Shirt = +10 AC
24 Dex + Bullette Studded Leather = +10 AC
12 Dex + Full Plate = +10 AC
30 Dex + Darkleaf Padded = +11 AC
16 Dex + Mithril Full Plate = +12 AC
Late game you might see:
26 Dex + Celestial Armor = +14 AC (not counting enhancement bonus)
36 Dex + Haramaki = +14 AC
22 Dex + Celestial Plate Armor = +15 AC (not counting enhancement bonus)
Of course, it's highly unlikely that anyone who isn't using Dex as their primary stat would push it up to 22-26. 36 Dex is the highest amount most classes can get, with 18 Starting +2 Racial +5 Inherent +5 Levels +6 Enhancement. So in the end, 36 Dex + Haramaki has 2 more AC than 16 Dex + Mithril Full Plate.
|
With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?
Opportunity costs.
My Holy Vindicator spent mithrals 9000 gold cost on other enhancements to his full plate.
My Bard, Rogue, and Oracle had to spend some resources on Str boosts to avoid taking encumbrance penalties. Meanwhile my Paladin only bought a mithral breastplate to not take penalties to his fly speed.
Mythril armor, homie. It does not take that long to get. Do you think that is expensive? Try affording full plate early game. Also: dex AC comes at no movement speed cost or skill check penalty when you are cruising around in your mythril chain shirt. Your dex get too high for mythril? Bulette Armor or darkleaf clothe.With Dex to Damage already in the game, having relegated Strength to the trash can (God stat that it is), why don't we see every Fighter going Aldori Swordlord? Why is every Barbarian not an Urban Barbarian pushing Dex with an Agile Elven Curve Blade? Why is every Bard and Magus not a Dervish Dancer?Feat Taxes. Strength builds require far less resources and are much more damaging at very early levels than dexterity builds. Most Dex builds also require a set of feats from sources that aren't on the Pathfinder PRD
I wouldn't exactly call them "taxes". You pay a feat and get less MAD, that's certainly a better use of a feat than +2 to attack rolls against guys named Ricky.
People don't go Dex very often because they still do less damage than their Strength equivalents. Sure they get a bonus on Reflex (the least important save) but the AC from Light Armor + High Dex doesn't surpass that of Heavy Armor + Medium Dex until high gear levels. At that point, AC is almost irrelevant unless you can push it to 50+.
The increased Touch AC is nice, at least.
Mithril works on Heavy Armor too. Armor values and Max Dex Bonus is calculated to ensure High Dex doesn't significantly surpass Heavy Armor. Even counting Bulette and Darkleaf - They still increase Max Dex by the same amount as Mithril (+2).
In the early game, you might have:
18 Dex + Chain Shirt = +8 AC
20 Dex + Studded Leather = +8 AC
14 Dex + Chainmail = +8 AC
12 Dex + Banded Mail = +8 ACThen later on, you might have:
22 Dex + Mithril Chain Shirt = +10 AC
24 Dex + Bullette Studded Leather = +10
...
Mythril full plate? Now THAT is expensive. Also: who can afford to have 16 dex when you need strength and con too?
A focused strength build will probably have 12 or 14 dex tops.
Still movement speed and skill check problems.
Mithril Full Plate of Speed isn't all that expensive, for what it does.
I didn't day there were no benefits, just that the AC benefit was overstated. You should have some benefit for the feats and damage you give up. And going with a Dex focus, martials aren't (quite as) screwed on their Fly checks.
I would like to see an actual active defense system for combat.
Mithril Full Plate of Speed isn't all that expensive, for what it does.
I didn't day there were no benefits, just that the AC benefit was overstated. You should have some benefit for the feats and damage you give up. And going with a Dex focus, martials aren't (quite as) screwed on their Fly checks.
You mean the one that costs 26k gp? I dunno about that.
I think I am still making a really strong case for dex is already pretty bonkers and adding easy access to dex to damage would exacerbate the problem by a lot. Moreover, they need to errata dervish dancer (or whatever).
I would like to see an actual active defense system for combat.
Like a defensive roll? I dunno man. That doubles the amount of die rolled for every attack. Do you think that is worth it?
Or do you mean like some kind of stance system? (like you can take a penalty to AC for bonuses to certain saves or vice-versa)
Mithril Full Plate of Speed isn't all that expensive, for what it does.
I didn't day there were no benefits, just that the AC benefit was overstated. You should have some benefit for the feats and damage you give up. And going with a Dex focus, martials aren't (quite as) screwed on their Fly checks.
You mean the one that costs 26k gp? I dunno about that.
I think I am still making a really strong case for dex is already pretty bonkers and adding easy access to dex to damage would exacerbate the problem by a lot. Moreover, they need to errata dervish dancer (or whatever).
I would like to see an actual active defense system for combat.
Like a defensive roll? I dunno man. That doubles the amount of die rolled for every attack. Do you think that is worth it?
Or do you mean like some kind of stance system? (like you can take a penalty to AC for bonuses to certain saves or vice-versa)
sigh... an opposed roll does not make it an active defense.
Defensive options does.
Mithril Full Plate of Speed isn't all that expensive, for what it does.
I didn't day there were no benefits, just that the AC benefit was overstated. You should have some benefit for the feats and damage you give up. And going with a Dex focus, martials aren't (quite as) screwed on their Fly checks.
You mean the one that costs 26k gp? I dunno about that.
I think I am still making a really strong case for dex is already pretty bonkers and adding easy access to dex to damage would exacerbate the problem by a lot. Moreover, they need to errata dervish dancer (or whatever).
I would like to see an actual active defense system for combat.
Like a defensive roll? I dunno man. That doubles the amount of die rolled for every attack. Do you think that is worth it?
Or do you mean like some kind of stance system? (like you can take a penalty to AC for bonuses to certain saves or vice-versa)
sigh... an opposed roll does not make it an active defense.
Defensive options does.
So like the stance system that I just said? My support of your proposal is entirely contingent on its implementation. I am unconvinced that such a system can meaningfully improve the game. I mean: you can already take a full defense, use combat expertise, or fight defensively. THAT is a defensive system already so you gotta say what you mean. The existing one is just never used because attack accuracy is the one true Buddha.
26k being expensive depends entirely on what level we're talking about. Free Action Haste is worth 12k on boots, so add 1000 for +1, 1500 for Full Plate, and 9000 for Mithril. That's a 2500g difference, which is basically the fee for Free Action Haste not taking up an equipment slot on its own. It's a great investment at higher levels - Obviously don't blow 80% of your WBL on it at level 8.
Same with 16 Dex on a character that started with 12-14. It's not all that expensive in the long run to tack +2 Dex onto a +Str/Con belt using the formula given. Though that is technically a custom item - The party Wizard did take Craft Wondrous Item, right?
Dexterity hasn't taken over the world. When it out-damages Strength it might, but that's never going to happen.
As for a defensive roll system, it could work if the number of attack rolls in a turn is reduced.
Or make it so that every attack hits unless you pass your "defensive throw" versus the attack DC, similar to making DCs against spells.
26k being expensive depends entirely on what level we're talking about. Free Action Haste is worth 12k on boots, so add 1000 for +1, 1500 for Full Plate, and 9000 for Mithril. That's a 2500g difference, which is basically the fee for Free Action Haste not taking up an equipment slot on its own. It's a great investment at higher levels - Obviously don't blow 80% of your WBL on it at level 8.
Same with 16 Dex on a character that started with 12-14. It's not all that expensive in the long run to tack +2 Dex onto a +Str/Con belt using the formula given. Though that is technically a custom item - The party Wizard did take Craft Wondrous Item, right?
Dexterity hasn't taken over the world. When it out-damages Strength it might, but that's never going to happen.
As for a defensive roll system, it could work if the number of attack rolls in a turn is reduced.
Or make it so that every attack hits unless you pass your "defensive throw" versus the attack DC, similar to making DCs against spells.
Nope! Because dex still has the benefit of going against touch AC and they still have more money because they don't need full plate (and I will also note that in your assumptions, the str build is effectively forced to buy these "boots" even if he does not want them and the dex build is not forced to do so; this matters). And the strength build STILL NEEDS DEX TO DEFEND AND ATTACK AT RANGE (notice that we are assuming that the strength fighter is not dropping dex all together). Whereas the dex build can focus on just dex and con. When you don't need strength for damage then the dex build can drop it to 8 so the dex build is ultimately harder to hit and has more hp or whatever else they want to put hit points in. Also save and also ranged attacks and also more skills and also they don't take penalty to those physical skills that strength is good for. The dex build is light years ahead of strength builds if getting dex to damage is easy (and it is probably op already if you don't outlaw dervish dance or w/e).
So to the point:
2e should not--at baseline--add dex to damage unless they also add significant boosts to the usefulness of the strength statistic. Moreover, 2e should have some kind of boost to the effectiveness of the strength attribute if there still does exist a way to get dex to damage with a penalty. Perhaps there should even be an even smaller boost to the effectiveness of strength if dex to damage is removed from the game entirely.
26k being expensive depends entirely on what level we're talking about. Free Action Haste is worth 12k on boots, so add 1000 for +1, 1500 for Full Plate, and 9000 for Mithril. That's a 2500g difference, which is basically the fee for Free Action Haste not taking up an equipment slot on its own. It's a great investment at higher levels - Obviously don't blow 80% of your WBL on it at level 8.
Same with 16 Dex on a character that started with 12-14. It's not all that expensive in the long run to tack +2 Dex onto a +Str/Con belt using the formula given. Though that is technically a custom item - The party Wizard did take Craft Wondrous Item, right?
Dexterity hasn't taken over the world. When it out-damages Strength it might, but that's never going to happen.
As for a defensive roll system, it could work if the number of attack rolls in a turn is reduced.
Or make it so that every attack hits unless you pass your "defensive throw" versus the attack DC, similar to making DCs against spells.
I was thinking more along the line of dropping the ac to just the flat foot version and then having bonuses added to dependent upon the type of defense you choose to use.
Types might include: dodge, parry, disarm, entangle, etc...each type would come with advantages and disadvantages.
Give the player some say in how he defends. Not just a static this is your defense score (AC).
Also not every option will work in every situation.
On the whole, "martials can't nice things" tip, I would like increased relevance of the mundane or "non-magical". If they can't be magic, at least they can be super-human.
Obviously, some skills remain useful at high level, while others becomes situational or moot. I would like new skill uses that kick in at a certain number of skill ranks, such as 5, 10, 15 and 20, or 6, 11, 16. A dozen people could spend a year brainstorming these things, so I won't bother right now.
In folklore we hear stories of the mightiest warriors defeating hordes of enemies, or dragons and demons. In the spirit of "martials get magic at level 4", such as paladin and rangers spell use, or the monk and ninja ki pool, I suggest that all martials get something at 4th level. It could spells, or a pool of points, but it could also be a selection of auras, or feats of superhuman physical activity, or miscellaneous immunities.
These add ons don't need to put a warrior on par with some one who casts 7th - 9th level spells, but I would like to see more abilities in paragraph form, rather than stacked up piles of +1s and +2s.
Oh, and what Scavion said. PF did a fine job improving combat maneuvers, but they need another boost to keep them relevant at high level. You get an unlucky roll, and a wizard can ruin your life with a single standard action. Why shouldn't a fighter?
I agree. The most important thing for Pathfinder 2.0 would be more martial power at higher levels. Getting past 10th level is already pretty darn super human, so there is no reason why a legendary fighter can't be something more than "guy who thumps with club."
Besides a more balanced playing field for Martials, I wanna see Pathfinder 2.0 be backwards compatible. Old Archetypes still working. Old feats. Spells from Pathfinder Companions. Magic items.
A lot of the stuff that needs fixing could just be applied as "patches." For instance, a Rogue re-balancing can keep all old rogue class features (buffing a few) and add new class features. This would allow backwards compatibility with old archetypes with ease.
Boots of Speed are great for any martial class, Dex or Strength. Freeing up the carter's first standard action is worth a good chunk of change. The Dex Fighter doesn't need the full plate, but at higher levels the that Agile enhancement starts to really ramp up the cost of further upgrades to his weapon.
I mentioned the effect of Touch AC, which is more beneficial more often than Flat Footed AC. Pay feats, sacrifice damage, have better defenses. None of that makes Dervish Dance broken, especially considering that if he dumped Strength at character creation, what's he doing until level 3?
The Dex build can dump Strength, so he has a better chance to hit with ranged attacks, but far less damage. Almost negligible, unless he sacrifices some of that accuracy via Deadly Aim. The Strength character can rely on his BAB and class features (Weapon Training, Smite, Favored Enemy, etc) for his attack rolls and simply pick up Adaptive for the damage.
Gunslingers have Dex To Damage from level 5, they hit Touch AC within the first range increment, and can fight effectively in melee once they get Deft Shootist. So add them to the list of characters that have not taken over the game. Even for Magi, for whom the Scimitar was already the best weapon, the choice between Dex and Strength is not clear-cut.
|
I'm just wondering how many books they can possibly manage to squeeze out of the RPG line after Ultimate Bloat...er....Advanced Class Guide.My guess would be three per year (including Bestiaries and NPC Codices). You and I may not like lots of rules, but it's proving a popular model.
Well, they're already at Ultimate Multiclassing Redux. I just wonder where they go from there. Although that is a horse they can beat for a while before it's dead...there's 22 base classes (admittedly, some are "alternate" classes/hyped archetypes) and 5 NPC classes, that gives a total of 325 combinations. I guess I solved Paizo's "what splat to do next" problems for a few years. :P
Although some won't really work...Paladin/Antipaladin comes to mind.
^A master of balancing good and evil.
Why is balance something to be desired? Remove Evil from the premises.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Any spell with a save or suck effect needs to include a save modifier in the defenders favor so that the base chance of success is only 25% for a character of appropriate level instead of 50%.
2. Hit points need to not grow as fast so that hp damage remains relevant.
3. An adjustment to the skill system so that higher skill gives more consistent results instead of just being able to meet higher DCs. (Maybe letting anybody with 4 or more skill ranks take 10 before rolling?
Races:
Core rulebook support for a no adjustment werewolf and revenant/vampire 4. pc.
5. Every race should do SOMETHING that is not just a bunch of stat modifers.
Classes:
6. Your class should modify your ability scores, perhaps even removing racial modifiers.
7. More "baked-in" hybrids, any class with casting to level 4 gets casting to level 6.
8. Barbarians, rogues, fighers, and anybody else without spellcasting gets something like grit/deeds.
9. All "memorizing" casters function like the arcanist with a selection of spells per day but a fixed limit on the number of spells of spells memorized.
These changes are the ones I would make if I just wanted a pathfinder second edition. If we were trying to make the best pathfinder/d20 game possible and so were not worried about backwards compatibility you could make more meaningful changes like:
1: The default spell system should be made the "words of power" spell systems from ultimate magic. There should only be a very small number of iconic D&D "spells" that remain most magic is done through words of power.
2: The function of armor needs to be changed to damage reduction. It is not fun to play an armored guy and then fight a monster like a dragon or a troll where, if faced at level appropriate points, even the best armor might as well be tissue paper.
3: The skill system needs a total overhaul so that it promotes consistency of getting results over a single big roll. Single big rolls should be based on the stat system.