| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And a well tuned caster isn't going to have monsters making saves, whats your point?
|
Because that would make the third attack unusable even without my rules. So you are saying they are going to give you the attack matrix of a 11th level fighter at first level and make it pointless to execute those 2nd & 3rd attacks by bumping up every monsters armor class by +2? I hardly think so and I would like to see your assumptions for this.I am saying that characters and monsters will have bounded accuracy and AC respectively and it will be rare that an on-CR-monster will ever guarantee you a hit even when your fighters are well optimized. So yeah: I am trying to tell you that I expect a fighter to hit around 70/75% of their time with their first attack against on-CR monsters.
F&@& around with the Starfinder monster creator for a minute and see what kind of KACs that you generate by CR (https://www.sfrpgtools.com/monster-builder).
Starfinder, a newer Paizo product, takes a very different approach to monster balance that comes closer to following a bounded formula. I think that will give you a better understanding of how PF2E monsters will progress. Keep in mind that Starfinder--to my knowledge--has very few accuracy buffs beyond BAB and your base stats.
Here is a CR 10 Mon Mon Stat Block:
CREATURE NAME
CR 10
XP 9,600
CN Medium animal (earth)
Init +0; Senses low-light vision, blindsight (vibration) 30 ft.; Perception +19DEFENSE
HP 140
EAC 22; KAC 23
Fort +11; Ref +11; Will +13OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft., burrow 30 ft.STATISTICS
Str +8; Dex +0; Con +5; Int -5; Wis +0; Cha +3
Skills Athletics +24, Engineering +24, Intimidate +19
That monster is easily hit by a fighter at level 10! Fighter would have +10 BAB, + 5 for strength (unless purposely built otherwise), +1 or greater for proficiency & +1 for crafted superior/magical weapons. That's not even counting situational bonuses for flanking, spells like Bless/Prayer, etc. So the fighter starts at +16/+11/+6 vs AC22. If he uses agile weapons he goes to +16/+13/+10 and that's not even knowing what feats she has and with the most stingy of magical/masterwork items. So my first attack crits on 6 plus and my second on a 19-20 if I use agile weapons. Not seeing the problem here at all.
|
|
And a well tuned caster isn't going to have monsters making saves, whats your point?
That remains to be seen. I have no idea how monsters saving throw matrix work. If it similar to PF1 then they will have very good fort saves, good reflex saves and poor will saves for the most part. Some monsters will obviously be variants on this theme.
That monster is easily hit by a fighter at level 10! Fighter would have +10 BAB, + 5 for strength (unless purposely built otherwise), +1 or greater for proficiency & +1 for crafted superior/magical weapons. That's not even counting situational bonuses for flanking, spells like Bless/Prayer, etc. So the fighter starts at +16/+11/+6 vs AC22. If he uses agile weapons he goes to +16/+13/+10 and that's not even knowing what feats she has and with the most stingy of magical/masterwork items. So my first attack crits on 6 plus and my second on a 19-20 if I use agile weapons. Not seeing the problem here at all.Because that would make the third attack unusable even without my rules. So you are saying they are going to give you the attack matrix of a 11th level fighter at first level and make it pointless to execute those 2nd & 3rd attacks by bumping up every monsters armor class by +2? I hardly think so and I would like to see your assumptions for this.I am saying that characters and monsters will have bounded accuracy and AC respectively and it will be rare that an on-CR-monster will ever guarantee you a hit even when your fighters are well optimized. So yeah: I am trying to tell you that I expect a fighter to hit around 70/75% of their time with their first attack against on-CR monsters.
F&@& around with the Starfinder monster creator for a minute and see what kind of KACs that you generate by CR (https://www.sfrpgtools.com/monster-builder).
Starfinder, a newer Paizo product, takes a very different approach to monster balance that comes closer to following a bounded formula. I think that will give you a better understanding of how PF2E monsters will progress. Keep in mind that Starfinder--to my knowledge--has very few accuracy buffs beyond BAB and your base stats.
Here is a CR 10 Mon Mon Stat Block:
CREATURE NAME
CR 10
XP 9,600
CN Medium animal (earth)
Init +0; Senses low-light vision, blindsight (vibration) 30 ft.; Perception +19DEFENSE
HP 140
EAC 22; KAC 23
Fort +11; Ref +11; Will +13OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft., burrow 30 ft.STATISTICS
Str +8; Dex +0; Con +5; Int -5; Wis +0; Cha +3
Skills Athletics +24, Engineering +24, Intimidate +19
I assume you mean that it crits on a 16+? And yes: What you described falls exactly within my prediction of a fighter hitting roughly 75% of the time on their first attack.
I am glad you realized that you should not add the prof. or magic weapon modifiers to the attack (given that those are not factors in Starfinder). I really wasn't clear on that point in my argument at all but you picked it up.
I am saying that the final third attack will only hit on a 16+ (1 in 4) in this scenario. It will be rare--or build-specific--that the fighter will want to use this 3rd attack action when success is so unlikely, but he will still choose to make this last attack sometimes. If "crit failing" has a truly detrimental effect, a fighter will almost never want to make their third attack since their chance off success is roughly equal to their chance of critical failure. The third attack might become a trap option even when the fighter would hit 75% of the time on the first attack.
For clerics or rouges who might be +3 or more behind the fighter, you will suddenly be in a situation where their third iterative attacks (and maybe even second iterative attacks!) are essentially a non-option across the board even for builds that specialize heavily in melee combat.
|
|
...That monster is easily hit by a fighter at level 10! Fighter would have +10 BAB, + 5 for strength (unless purposely built otherwise), +1 or greater for proficiency & +1 for crafted superior/magical weapons. That's not even counting situational bonuses for flanking, spells like Bless/Prayer, etc. So the fighter starts at +16/+11/+6 vs AC22. If he usesBecause that would make the third attack unusable even without my rules. So you are saying they are going to give you the attack matrix of a 11th level fighter at first level and make it pointless to execute those 2nd & 3rd attacks by bumping up every monsters armor class by +2? I hardly think so and I would like to see your assumptions for this.I am saying that characters and monsters will have bounded accuracy and AC respectively and it will be rare that an on-CR-monster will ever guarantee you a hit even when your fighters are well optimized. So yeah: I am trying to tell you that I expect a fighter to hit around 70/75% of their time with their first attack against on-CR monsters.
F&@& around with the Starfinder monster creator for a minute and see what kind of KACs that you generate by CR (https://www.sfrpgtools.com/monster-builder).
Starfinder, a newer Paizo product, takes a very different approach to monster balance that comes closer to following a bounded formula. I think that will give you a better understanding of how PF2E monsters will progress. Keep in mind that Starfinder--to my knowledge--has very few accuracy buffs beyond BAB and your base stats.
Here is a CR 10 Mon Mon Stat Block:
CREATURE NAME
CR 10
XP 9,600
CN Medium animal (earth)
Init +0; Senses low-light vision, blindsight (vibration) 30 ft.; Perception +19DEFENSE
HP 140
EAC 22; KAC 23
Fort +11; Ref +11; Will +13OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft., burrow 30 ft.STATISTICS
Str +8; Dex +0; Con +5; Int -5; Wis +0; Cha +3
Skills Athletics +24, Engineering +24, Intimidate +19
I am quite happy that the third attack is a bad option for non optimized characters and it create an opportunity for a critical fumble in those circumstances. Wildly attacking as fast as you can in a reckless manner should be a huge gamble. Making a third attack should be the province of seasoned warriors or really optimized non warriors. It should not be a trivial feat that anyone can pull off
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to put in my vote for "nay."
I'll level with you. I play casters (and at that, arcane casters) almost exclusively unless a martial character idea really piques my interest (an Aldori Swordlord for example) or I have a group where it's better to take turns playing different roles (in some groups we tend to stick to our old play styles and in others people like to play musical combat contribution every other campaign.)
With that said, I don't feel like a fumble system provides any realism in a game on a practical level as it might *be* real- leaving aside the issue of whether or not this is actually the case- but it doesn't *feel* real. We tend to imagine a master Aldori Swordland who has slain a hundred giants and brought the bandit king to justice doesn't suddenly lose her two extra swings because she missed ("fumbles") the first one. Missing already increases the dramatic tension enough and her peril, the chaos of combat for her, is better represented by her opponent's skill rather than her potentially arbitrary failures.
My second argument is a totally selfish one. I already find myself frustrated by spell resistance or targeting the wrong save on a fairly regular basis (even though those are completely reasonable mechanics!) and would wince watching my friends lose a host of actions or miss out on a round of combat due to bad luck with something as simple as swinging a scythe. Worse, nerfing martials is going to encourage people here to advocate for nerfing casters even more- something that I just wouldn't appreciate. I would rather martials be given more tools in and out of combat, simplified and streamlined, etc. than risk widening the gap between casters/martials and see the pendulum swing back the direction of really the only classes I enjoy playing on a regular basis. I'm fretting enough over what they're going to do to wizards/sorcerers as is and would hate to see martials get nerfed again in the name of "realism" on top of it, as I have players and friends who only enjoy pure fighters/rogues/etc. and they live a hard enough life.