@Paizo, Suggestion: Up is Good, Down is Bad... But Not Always


Prerelease Discussion


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In 3.x/PF, there is what I think of as a convention: rolls that are higher are better and rolls that are lower are worse.

The spell Contact Other Plane contains a chart that makes lower rolls better and higher rolls worse.

Can the chart for Contact Other Plane please be rearranged to make higher rolls better and lower rolls worse?


Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I thought this thread was going to be about which way round the alignment grid is displayed.

Yes, eliminating the last few inconsistencies would be good. There are other, perfectly good games where roll-under is a thing; they aren't this game.


Teleport is another one. Mishap should be if you roll 01, not if you roll 100.


Old AD&D 1E deliberately had a mix. I remember being told it was as a protection versus biased dice.... :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I'd rather not see percentile charts for things that don't need 100 different possible outcomes. If something should happen less than 5% of the time, I would rather see a D20 roll with a possible save of follow up check to control the outcome.
For example, Critically failing the casting of a teleport spell could result in a mishap, a will save could then determine if the misfire is something more or less terrible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I dont mind the inconsistencies on things that dont matter like this.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, I'd really like to see magical navigation require a skill check for success. Teleportation is a little too easy a means of transportation in the current edition of pathfinder. Why wouldn't you need to make a knowledge geography, local, or planes, to teleport?


Unicore wrote:
Also, I'd really like to see magical navigation require a skill check for success. Teleportation is a little too easy a means of transportation in the current edition of pathfinder. Why wouldn't you need to make a knowledge geography, local, or planes, to teleport?

That wouldn't slow wizards much, given they have all knowledge skills as class skills and a load of skill points thanks to their maxed INT. Other casters might have more trouble, but Knowledge (planes) is pretty useful for identifying outsiders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Unicore wrote:

Personally, I'd rather not see percentile charts for things that don't need 100 different possible outcomes. If something should happen less than 5% of the time, I would rather see a D20 roll with a possible save of follow up check to control the outcome.

For example, Critically failing the casting of a teleport spell could result in a mishap, a will save could then determine if the misfire is something more or less terrible.

A d20 roll has lots of ways to manipulate it. There are at least a dozen general reroll mechanics for it. Percentile dice are a convenient way to handle anything that shouldn’t be broadly easy to influence.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Fuzzypaws wrote:
Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.

I just let the person who cast confusion roll the percentile check—that way they want the results at the bottom of the table, and rolling high is good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lots of People Over Time wrote:


That wouldn't slow wizards much, given they have all knowledge skills as class skills and a load of skill points thanks to their maxed INT.

This line of thinking is erroneous in my opinion. Wizards and other INT-based classes have "skills needs too" (Disguise, Perception, Spellcraft and Stealth among others for 'typical' Wizardly types), yet an awful lot of people expect them to take all or almost all of the Knowledge skills. Functionally, a Wizard only needs one of them. The other 9 (or however many there will be in PF2e) are purely optional.

One would hope that the other characters pick up some of the slack - especially in their own class' Knowledge skills that are on their class skill list. At least one of 'em. Maximized INT does not have to result in this expectation. If they had 4 or 6 base skill ranks per level, this could be different.

Liberty's Edge

Agreed. Rolling the 20 should always be good.

Going up and down really is more intuitive.

Scarab Sages

Fuzzypaws wrote:
Universal consistency in this would be good. The "Confusion" spell is another example where the subject really wants to roll low every turn. Abilities that modify rolls can work better if high is always good.

Additionally, codifying how to roll a 20% or 50% miss chance (at least indicating that high is good (hit), low is bad (miss)) also would allow you to create abilities that could add modifiers to these rolls as well.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / @Paizo, Suggestion: Up is Good, Down is Bad... But Not Always All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion