wizzardman |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree. And having the mass combat rules out early would provide more time to incorporate, improve, and expand them.
I'd like to see mechanics for "players within a larger world" become a standard part of PF2 characters, as they provide a lot of extra room for player and GM creativity, and give the PCs something to do with all that treasure and magic they're working so hard to get.
Mass Combat fits neatly as one set of those mechanics.
Doktor Weasel |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
especially if you consider the role of magic right from the start. our magic user was able to wipe out groups of enemies with fireballs in combat, yet in mass combat he wasn't even a blip in the army. that just didnt make any sense.
...though, i guess, if you look at Gandalf...
Gandalf really isn't a Wizard in the PF/D&D sense. Otherwise the book would be a pamphlet. "Hey Frodo, still got that ring? When I say now toss it into the magma-pool." Greater teleport "Now!" ring is tossed, greater teleport again. "And we're back in time for second breakfast. You just defeated the Dark Lord and saved the world by the way."
Doktor Weasel |
Will mass combat rules be included? The rules on kingdom building and mass combat were always a little off & didn't work well in our campaigns.
Yeah, they didn't quite work out for us either. They were too simplified and didn't give powerful characters enough impact on things. A lot of the optional systems like that weren't satisfying to me. Ship Combat is another one. They mostly seem like throw-away systems written quickly without a whole lot of thought.
I remember an old 2nd ed module from Dungeon, The Siege of Kratys Freehold, that did small-unit combat fairly well from what I recall. It basically treated small squads as a character, casters, high level characters and PCs would be by themselves.