| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One point I've seen brought up a few times is that changing the terms for rules bits and actions from one edition to another increases the "mental barrier" to learn and accept the game. I feel this has some merit, and I've seen it in action myself when trying to get my players to try out different rules systems. Changing terms works out sometimes, when done with purpose and to clear up confusion, but when done "just because" it often doesn't work. I'm wondering what you guys are thinking from some of the stuff they've talked about?
Some terminology changes are actually good. You see this when the previous term was unclear, especially when put up against other similar terms. Changing term can also be good when the previous version of a rule has been gutted or changed to such an extent that you don't want people to keep thinking of the previous version. So to me, I actually do want to see the following changes:
- 5 Foot Step: This has such a bad connotation in my group. The rules are half a page of exceptions and special cases for something that should be so simple. Since it's now changing to work completely differently, taking one of your actions, it should just be called Guarded Step or such like in Starfinder. That way, people coming from PF1 don't think of the old rules for it and get confused about how it works. Moreover, this would allow it to actually be a 10 foot step, or for feats to increase the distance you can move with it, without breaking the meaning of the name. However, please DO NOT call it something stupid like 4E's Slide. I mean, I like 4E more than some people on these boards, but it had some stupid action names.
- Spell Level: I've said this elsewhere, but I want spell levels changed to a more flavorful term, to break the trend of using the word Level to refer to things that don't scale like character and class levels. I personally use Circles, because it lets you say something like "I am Silius Incarnadine, Magister of the Third Circle," but even a more gamist term like Tier would work better than Spell Level. Just last week I had to remind a fairly experienced player that going up to a 2nd level spellcaster didn't give him 2nd level spells. Spell Level as a term breeds confusion.
- Race: I actually do agree with their plan to change this to Ancestry, specifically because of the example one of the devs gave: they're excited to use Ancestries to represent things like special noble bloodlines such as LotR's Dunedain. There's also a fairly sizable side benefit in detangling what should be a neutral game term from what is often a messy and emotionally charged word in the real world. Especially when you look at things like elves where one of the notable variants is usually evil...
Some terminology changes, on the other hand, are pretty confusing and create a barrier to entry. I'm already seeing some of this in the revealed rules bits so far. To me, the following changes would be bad:
- Stride: Really? Just call it Move. If the intent was to avoid confusion with a Move Action, well, that confusion will no longer exist due to the lack of there even being such a thing as a Move Action as a separate class from Standard Action. Stride tells me that I can walk; Move tells me I can walk, swim, climb, fly or do whatever else my character or monster allows. Changing the terminology to Stride is one of those things that will increase the mental barrier and switch cost for players coming from PF1.
- Class Feats: Can they just be called Talents? Please? If you can get them in other classes, all you have to do is add a single line of rules text to the effect of "You can take any class Talent as a General Feat" or "You can take any class Talent as a General Feat if your character level is 4 higher than the class level prerequisite of the Talent" or however they're doing it. Calling EVERYTHING a feat breeds some level of confusion, as we have already seen on the forums - and the people on the forums can be expected to be more invested and know the rules better than the average player! If it is causing problems on the forums, I can only imagine the time spent having to clarify for my players.
- Power Attack: Now, I actually like the Vital Strike version of Power Attack they've shown off. And I agree that the math works out to being more fun for this version overall compared to the old version. Buuuut since it really is just Vital Strike, it's going to present a "switch cost" mentally for people used to PF1. Maybe just call it Vital Strike, and save the name Power Attack for something else closer to the original - perhaps a stance that gives all of your attacks -2 to hit, but when you hit you roll damage twice and take the better result. This stance version would even work well in combo with the new Vital Strike, would make crits stronger despite getting them slightly less often, and would feel better to people who like old Power Attack for its consistency.
I'm sure there's a lot of other stuff I'm missing that people have seen. Thoughts?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A 5’ step in 4e is called a Shift, not a Slide (as in Shift up to half your speed). The forced movements were called Pull, Push, and Slide.
In addition, Stride is an action precisely because there are other movements (although they could call it Walk if they wanted to). Fly, Climb, Swim, Burrow, Jump, Crawl, Etc are all their own actions.
I’m fact, it looks like all the possible actions are named, i.e. Step, Stride, Strike, Seek, Reload, Draw Weapon, Raise Shield, even Vomit.
Does that mean a dragon takes a Vomit action to breathe lightning? hahaha...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe...
Could complement their Bite and Swallow actions. ; )