As long as the math of the system accounts for it, that's fine. Static bonuses like that are largely irrelevant to the "feel" of the game.
Finally! Carrying capacity is gone!!!!Now let's just hope Bulk doesn't have issues like Starfinder did. One person has reported their player's large character couldn't pick up an adult human because, by the rules, they couldn't willingly carry that much weight.
Now how does that make any sense?
Oh hey, that was me! Yeah, that's why I'm not too excited about bulk being in the game. I want to know how much weight my hulked out Alchemist can deadlift, and have it be a reasonable amount for someone with supernatural strength. Hopefully if they are intent on keeping the system, they can at least address these problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a good thing that you can lop off the heads of a horde of goblins pretty easily but will have an extremely hard time (or for it to even be impossible!) to 1-round the Antipaladin Big Bad with a lucky crit. Frankly it's pretty anticlimactic from both sides of the table for the big bad to go down before he gets to do any of his Cool Stuff just because the Greataxe-wielding Barbarian happened to roll a 20.I really like the idea of crits being "beat the DC by 10" rather than on a dice roll of 20.I'm terrible at math, but in just imagining a few numbers in my head, I'm thinking you're going to be rolling pretty darn high to beat most target's AC numbers by 10. In fact, in some situations you could roll a 20 and still not have beat the target's AC number by 10... which would be really terrible, from my point of view. For maxed out martial characters that might allow them to crit more often than normal, but for even a 3/4 martial class, that could actually shrink the number of times you crit. I think the keen, improved critical, and weapons that crit at a lower range was supposed to address some that mechanically.
Now if it's a situation where if you beat the DC by 10, OR if you roll a 20 you crit, I could get behind that.
Imagine how fun it will be when anything that has a chance of hitting the fighter in full place pretty much auto-crits anyone wearing light armor or no armor.
Even more fun - anything that can attack touch AC will be auto-critting everyone except the monk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds to me like a Feature, not a bug. I you run around wearing no armour and don't have your shield cantrip up, you get hurt. A lot.
And I do hope that attacking touch AC Gunslinger Style will be a Thing of the past. That System did not work. I could even imagine a Thing like touch attacks simply don't crit - they are targeting lower AC because it simply doesn't matter where and how hard they touch you. Originally, touch attacks were for Things like ghosts that drain your Soul or delivering spells. That doesn't translate into critical hits very well.
Yes!
Because wizards, with the lowest HP and Lowest armor can use 1 action to cast their shield cantrip + 1 action to actually use the spell (+1 AC) once cast + use their one reaction to reduce damage from the incoming crit by four points, while destroying the shield spell, once every 10 minutes.
What an awesome way to justify killing every light armor wearer (e.g. rogue) that dares engage in melee.
A question I have after listening to the podcast; do monsters also suffer a penalty on successive attack actions? My impression is that they do not.
Monsters have several separate attacks (typically claw/claw/bite) but only did one with each attack. But at one point, a skeleton did three claw attacks. That seems to imply they attack much as PCs do, and then it would make sense for successive attacks to take a penalty.
Other side of the coin; would a character with two weapons be able to attack with different weapons to avoid the repeated attack penalties?
That might be interesting. I like the idea how using a new weapon gets rid of the penalty. In cinematic, it makes sense that lashing out with two claws is quick and easy for a skeleton, while using the same claw twice means the skeleton has to reposition itself between the two attacks. It also makes two weapons style more interesting than in PF1 : I remember one of my player dropping the two weapons style and asking to remake their character because this was too feat-heavy for a martial, non-fighter class.
I think it's a good thing that you can lop off the heads of a horde of goblins pretty easily but will have an extremely hard time (or for it to even be impossible!) to 1-round the Antipaladin Big Bad with a lucky crit. Frankly it's pretty anticlimactic from both sides of the table for the big bad to go down before he gets to do any of his Cool Stuff just because the Greataxe-wielding Barbarian happened to roll a 20.I really like the idea of crits being "beat the DC by 10" rather than on a dice roll of 20.I'm terrible at math, but in just imagining a few numbers in my head, I'm thinking you're going to be rolling pretty darn high to beat most target's AC numbers by 10. In fact, in some situations you could roll a 20 and still not have beat the target's AC number by 10... which would be really terrible, from my point of view. For maxed out martial characters that might allow them to crit more often than normal, but for even a 3/4 martial class, that could actually shrink the number of times you crit. I think the keen, improved critical, and weapons that crit at a lower range was supposed to address some that mechanically.
Now if it's a situation where if you beat the DC by 10, OR if you roll a 20 you crit, I could get behind that.
Imagine how fun it will be when anything that has a chance of hitting the fighter in full place pretty much auto-crits anyone wearing light armor or no armor.
Even more fun - anything that can attack touch AC will be auto-critting everyone except the monk.
This is a great observation and want to see how it is addressed.
My only guess is that the number deflation will lead to less lopsided AC and to-hit values. Think how in 5e it's very rare to see 21+ AC even at high-ish levels where PF creatures would have 35+ because the slower scaling.If a lvl 15 Fighter is hitting for like +15 ( making assumptions like max 20 natural on stat and more than halved BAB) then it's not that rough...
Thanks for the doc, Kitsune ! =D
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I heard them rolling a 20 and the DM said that was a crit'.I really like the idea of crits being "beat the DC by 10" rather than on a dice roll of 20.I'm terrible at math, but in just imagining a few numbers in my head, I'm thinking you're going to be rolling pretty darn high to beat most target's AC numbers by 10. In fact, in some situations you could roll a 20 and still not have beat the target's AC number by 10... which would be really terrible, from my point of view. For maxed out martial characters that might allow them to crit more often than normal, but for even a 3/4 martial class, that could actually shrink the number of times you crit. I think the keen, improved critical, and weapons that crit at a lower range was supposed to address some that mechanically.
Now if it's a situation where if you beat the DC by 10, OR if you roll a 20 you crit, I could get behind that.
Was it because the 20 roll plus mods exceeded the target number by 10?
Man i'm going to miss crit ranges :(
Hopefully this new >10 system is based on less modifiers than in the past. My players are always adjusting their numbers. "I rolled a 7 so I got 16 to hit. Wait im flanking so its 18, but oh im sickened so its 16...."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And why do you think you can use a cantrip just once every 10 minutes?
Per the podcast: the Shield cantrip grants +1AC when used, has a hardness of 4 and can only be cast once every 10 minutes.
I would imagine the time between recast is to prevent the caster from effectively having an unlimited source of DR 4/- when anyone else permanently loses their shield if they use it too much.
Think how in 5e it's very rare to see 21+ AC even at high-ish levels where PF creatures would have 35+ because the slower scaling.
That's not close to rare in 5e if you're talking about a game that has access to magical armor and shields (not to mention the Shield spell). Tier 2 and up Adventurers League characters can pretty easily have an AC of 24 if they build for it (+1 Plate, +2 Shield, Defense Fighting Style).
Even more fun - anything that can attack touch AC will be auto-critting everyone except the monk.
That would be a fun house-rule for Pathfinder 1e.
"The cleric tries to touch you with a Harm spell. What's your touch AC?""14."
"Ooh, that'll be a crit then. You take 260 damage."
"I have 106 HP."
"You can save for half."
Thanks for the doc, Kitsune ! =D
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I heard them rolling a 20 and the DM said that was a crit'.I really like the idea of crits being "beat the DC by 10" rather than on a dice roll of 20.I'm terrible at math, but in just imagining a few numbers in my head, I'm thinking you're going to be rolling pretty darn high to beat most target's AC numbers by 10. In fact, in some situations you could roll a 20 and still not have beat the target's AC number by 10... which would be really terrible, from my point of view. For maxed out martial characters that might allow them to crit more often than normal, but for even a 3/4 martial class, that could actually shrink the number of times you crit. I think the keen, improved critical, and weapons that crit at a lower range was supposed to address some that mechanically.
Now if it's a situation where if you beat the DC by 10, OR if you roll a 20 you crit, I could get behind that.
Was it because the 20 roll plus mods exceeded the target number by 10?
Man i'm going to miss crit ranges :(
Hopefully this new >10 system is based on less modifiers than in the past. My players are always adjusting their numbers. "I rolled a 7 so I got 16 to hit. Wait im flanking so its 18, but oh im sickened so its 16...."
All we know right now is that the default for a crit and fumble is 10 above or below the DC. That number range could still be altered by Feats or Weapon Traits or Spells
What if there is a weapon trait of "Enhanced Crit: 1" that drops that 10 or more to a 9 or more. Or a "Clumsy:2" weapon trait that changes the fumble chance from 10 to 8
Developer
|
A dedicated martial should hit on a 10. Attacking is what they do, after all. Therefore, critting on a 20 makes sense. And we've already seen it'll be easier to up to hit, with legendary quality weapons giving +3 and probably being cheaper than even a +2 weapon. Plus what was bab looks like it'll be higher for multiclassing and you get multiple attacks per round starting at level 1.
I partially hope we get a rundown of AC.
It would seem that they really wanted to cut down on the number of different types of bonuses they could add in 1E, so we could see some serious down scaling to keep numbers reasonable. I know it's a serious problem in my games with players pumping AC to ridiculous levels.
Think how in 5e it's very rare to see 21+ AC even at high-ish levels where PF creatures would have 35+ because the slower scaling.That's not close to rare in 5e if you're talking about a game that has access to magical armor and shields (not to mention the Shield spell). Tier 2 and up Adventurers League characters can pretty easily have an AC of 24 if they build for it (+1 Plate, +2 Shield, Defense Fighting Style).
Oh, I meant monsters. sorry for not specifying. 24 AC is pretty high, yeah, but that AC becomes nothing in pathfinder at the same level.
I really like the idea of crits being "beat the DC by 10" rather than on a dice roll of 20.I'm terrible at math, but in just imagining a few numbers in my head, I'm thinking you're going to be rolling pretty darn high to beat most target's AC numbers by 10. In fact, in some situations you could roll a 20 and still not have beat the target's AC number by 10... which would be really terrible, from my point of view. For maxed out martial characters that might allow them to crit more often than normal, but for even a 3/4 martial class, that could actually shrink the number of times you crit. I think the keen, improved critical, and weapons that crit at a lower range was supposed to address some that mechanically.
Now if it's a situation where if you beat the DC by 10, OR if you roll a 20 you crit, I could get behind that.
What I'm getting from this is that they've stripped weapon profiles down to just the damage value and possible a special reaction.
No more crit range or crit multiplier.
Essentially, this is reading more and more like D&D 5.0
They dumbed everything down for the new player while removing the depth that keeps players around for the long haul.
From what I heard the weapons are likely dumbed down to damage, damage type, range, cost.
I would swear I read somewhere that they might focus more on the damage type aspect and make having different options matter more.
Thanks, Kitsune! It was a blast to play, and as the event unfolded I was almost certain someone would comb through it for all the little rules details before the end of the first day, and you are the winner!
Thanks for listening so attentively!
Yours,
Grellun the Green
You misspelled Brown. :)
Thanks for doing this, it has been really helpful. :)
As an additional note, Skill checks now have Critical Successes on a Natural 20, (podcast p.2, c.26:55-27:25); in the case of a Knowledge (Society) check this grants an additional piece of information.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even more fun - anything that can attack touch AC will be auto-critting everyone except the monk.That would be a fun house-rule for Pathfinder 1e.
"The cleric tries to touch you with a Harm spell. What's your touch AC?"
"14."
"Ooh, that'll be a crit then. You take 260 damage."
"I have 106 HP."
"You can save for half."
Extreme Tangent, but Harm always leaves you with 1 HP :3
Personally I think a natural 20 should always be a crit. If they want to spice things up just add additional effects based on the weapon used or at least the damage type of the weapon.
Thanks for doing this, it has been really helpful. :)
As an additional note, Skill checks now have Critical Successes on a Natural 20, (podcast p.2, c.26:55-27:25); in the case of a Knowledge (Society) check this grants an additional piece of information.
*Sigh* My comprehension is poor today, I thought that the Critical Success was because of the Natural 20 Roll, yet I have seen on the document and in other threads that it was due to a >10 score compared to the D.C. My bad.