I have seen a few similar comments before, to the effect that stat choices are going to be uniform. I view this in the same way that I see opposition to the universal +level mechanic: Both are issues stemming from over-estimating the importance of numbers in the context of diversity in character builds and play styles.
In fact, there is a lot more to a character than their stats and bonuses. Two fighters with the exact same stats can have a different feel, just based on their weapon choices: PF2 is making the weapons much more different from each other than they were in PF1. Using a shield is now a much more attractive, different fighting style. Even among two-weapon wielders, there are more diverse options. Using actions to attack, move, or defend is going to be very different from character to character; contrast with PF1, where 5-ft step and full attack is the optimal tactic 90% of the time.
Then we can talk about other classes: The 4 druid orders are pretty different. The sorcerer's bloodline changes the whole spell list. The cleric domains and deities are much more contrasted than in PF1. You can play a purely physical monk, or one with supernatural powers. Etc, etc. The design offer a much wider range of options for each class, and the stats play only a moderate role in this increased diversity.
Now, this is just analysis on paper, based on the blogs so far. I hope that the playtest will bear it out.
Ditto, I hope that also.
From what we've seen at least, and what I'm hopeful for, is that yeah, the stats aren't the end all and be all. Feats, weapon choices, "subclasses" etc. play in a lot. With the new standardisation, hopefully enough options are on par that the number of potential functional choices is as high as it seems.But even just counting numbers, I think there are likely to be optimal (for a large range of builds) arrangements, but e.g. if you're a blasty wizard specced for ray spells you probably want more dex than int.
Exactly, all fighters are the same, all rogues are the same, all wizards are the same, rogues are different from fighter that are different from wizards.
So a bow fighter is the same as a great weapon fighter and has the same stats? Really?
The warrior-cleric has the same stats as the caster/save or lose cleric?
You seem pretty convinced that 'sameness' is happening, but there are a lot of exceptions that are clear already.
Ok, wait and see. My bet would be in the 3rd character people will be ignoring stats and just picking abilities, since its DC will always be 15 (18 for +4 in main stat, +1 from level, all abilities with the same DC)
Ok, wait and see. My bet would be in the 3rd character people will be ignoring stats and just picking abilities, since its DC will always be 15 (18 for +4 in main stat, +1 from level, all abilities with the same DC)
What?
Alright, I think I've translated that. Not sure why the third character someone creates matters, but DC 15 certainly doesn't matter for a character that doesn't have many DC based abilities.Random examples off the top of my head: A weapon based caster, an attack spell based caster (needs dex, not primary casting ability) and it doesn't address at all a fighter that prefers bows to greatswords.
Why would any of these be the 'same' when it doesn't benefit them at all?
I meant that all your DCs are the same across the board, based on your class stat. You bash, trip, do damage, do a whirlwind attack... if is evokes a save... your DC is set.
Thats one of the problem i see in this single stat focus, and why i am saying that too much weight is being put on a single stat for everyclass.
Like all class DCs, for the premades are "15".
The sentence about the third character is that is from my personal experience the average time people will get to notice they are creating in essence, the same character with other names.
So, it's your contention that allowing the DC to be 14 or 16 is crucial for character individuality?
Is it more important than their...
alignment?
race?
class?
backstory?
actions within the game?
None of that will help characters feel unique and interesting, but allowing the DC to vary by 1-2 points will.
Irontruth,
what i am saying is not that. When i discuss a game system one of my main focus, that i put high above there with game balance, is if the system translate well all this points you made.
I put roleplaying ability and story as a very important thing, but that needs no system. Now when a player imagine his character, and write a cool backstory, as a smart fighter with lots of tricks that is not exclusive better than a dumb fighter, but approach fights a different way, i see if the system can translate that. Be it with moves, movement, abilities, or anything that this said smart fighter can do in a fighter better than the dumb fighter, since the dumb fighter will be better at damage.
Unless there is a very hidden feat not yeat revealed at the previews (wich is possible, but i doubt), the dumb strong fighter will always be better at combat.