paizo.com Recent Posts in "The Options Are Limited And Generic"paizo.com Recent Posts in "The Options Are Limited And Generic"2018-08-11T23:26:12Z2018-08-11T23:26:12ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Vic Ferrarihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1402018-08-12T09:09:35Z2018-08-12T09:09:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote> And Vic, if you just do it that way what does that change? Cloak of Res takes 1000 silver now? I mean the only thing that seems different is just how much coinage someone is carrying around. Okay I guess? </blockquote><p>I don't normally have magic items for sale but, yes, if it normally costs 1,000 gp, it would cost 100 gp.MerlinCross wrote:And Vic, if you just do it that way what does that change? Cloak of Res takes 1000 silver now? I mean the only thing that seems different is just how much coinage someone is carrying around. Okay I guess?
I don't normally have magic items for sale but, yes, if it normally costs 1,000 gp, it would cost 100 gp.Vic Ferrari2018-08-12T09:09:35ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"AndIMustMaskhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1392018-08-12T03:44:12Z2018-08-12T03:44:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">avr wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled? </blockquote>Depends how systematic the house rules are. PF1 + Spheres of Power/Might is a decent game. </blockquote><p>DSP's path of war was also loads of fun for elevating martials tooavr wrote:Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote: What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?
Depends how systematic the house rules are. PF1 + Spheres of Power/Might is a decent game. DSP's path of war was also loads of fun for elevating martials tooAndIMustMask2018-08-12T03:44:12ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"DFAntonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1382018-08-12T02:40:09Z2018-08-12T02:40:09Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">gustavo iglesias wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote>Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well. </blockquote>Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices? </blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Vic Ferrari wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Of course you change the price of things, that's the point, what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp. </blockquote><p>gustavo, that was more about the house rule vic said they did.
<p>And Vic, if you just do it that way what does that change? Cloak of Res takes 1000 silver now? I mean the only thing that seems different is just how much coinage someone is carrying around. Okay I guess?
<br />
</blockquote><p>What changes is that you now have 2 higher standard currency denominations (GP and PP) instead of just 1 (PP). It allows for much friendlier numbers on price tags when you can condense the price 100 times instead of just 10. So that 1000sp cloak can be bought with 100gp or 10pp, where before the lowest you could condense would be 100pp.MerlinCross wrote:gustavo iglesias wrote: MerlinCross wrote:Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well.
Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices? Vic Ferrari wrote:Of course you change the price of things, that's the point, what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp.
gustavo,...DFAnton2018-08-12T02:40:09ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"avrhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1372018-08-12T02:27:28Z2018-08-12T02:27:28Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled? </blockquote><p>Depends how systematic the house rules are. PF1 + Spheres of Power/Might is a decent game.Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?
Depends how systematic the house rules are. PF1 + Spheres of Power/Might is a decent game.avr2018-08-12T02:27:28ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"MerlinCrosshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1362018-08-11T23:01:32Z2018-08-11T23:01:32Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled? </blockquote><p>Usually because the core rules or chassis of the system is good enough for what people want.
<p>I've swapped a lot of things around but I still like the combat rules, level up, gear, etc. I don't have enough will power to take the extra steps to homebrew all that stuff to the point of basically making my own game system.</p>Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?
Usually because the core rules or chassis of the system is good enough for what people want. I've swapped a lot of things around but I still like the combat rules, level up, gear, etc. I don't have enough will power to take the extra steps to homebrew all that stuff to the point of basically making my own game system.MerlinCross2018-08-11T23:01:32ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"MerlinCrosshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1352018-08-11T22:58:50Z2018-08-11T22:58:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">gustavo iglesias wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote>Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well. </blockquote>Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices? </blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Vic Ferrari wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Of course you change the price of things, that's the point, what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp. </blockquote><p>gustavo, that was more about the house rule vic said they did.
<p>And Vic, if you just do it that way what does that change? Cloak of Res takes 1000 silver now? I mean the only thing that seems different is just how much coinage someone is carrying around. Okay I guess?</p>gustavo iglesias wrote:MerlinCross wrote:Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well.
Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices? Vic Ferrari wrote:Of course you change the price of things, that's the point, what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp.
gustavo, that was more about...MerlinCross2018-08-11T22:58:50ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Vic Ferrarihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1342018-08-11T22:20:51Z2018-08-11T22:20:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled? </blockquote><p>Yeah, I have already ripped out that +Level thing (for my home-games, not the Playtest, before anyone gets hysterical...).Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?
Yeah, I have already ripped out that +Level thing (for my home-games, not the Playtest, before anyone gets hysterical...).Vic Ferrari2018-08-11T22:20:15ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti (alias of JASON RODARTE)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1332018-08-12T03:43:17Z2018-08-11T22:06:02Z<p>What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?</p>What is the point of playing a system of everything is or has to be house ruled?Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti (alias of JASON RODARTE)2018-08-11T22:06:02ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"JDragon_ITTShttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1322018-08-11T23:04:24Z2018-08-08T22:24:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">graystone wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Angel Hunter D wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Danith wrote:</div><blockquote> You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative. </blockquote>Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system. </blockquote>Yep. Not everyone can alter the game at a whim. The basis of the game can't be reliant on refluffing of rule elements. </blockquote><p>Not only is not an option for PFS, it’s not something I want to do. I did that for 10+ years with 2nd ed. One of the things I like with 3.x is that I have had to have very few house rules. I’m not a game designer ,I’m and player/GM I want to be able to play.graystone wrote:Angel Hunter D wrote: Danith wrote: You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.
Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system. Yep. Not everyone can alter the game...JDragon_ITTS2018-08-08T22:24:39ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"gustavo iglesiashttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1312018-08-08T22:23:47Z2018-08-08T22:23:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote>Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well. </blockquote><p>Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices?MerlinCross wrote:Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well.
Why on hell would you change to a silver standard but not change the prices?gustavo iglesias2018-08-08T22:23:47ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Vic Ferrarihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1302018-08-08T22:03:19Z2018-08-08T22:03:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">MerlinCross wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Vic Ferrari wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ikos wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver? </blockquote>I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no. </blockquote>And it males gold and platinum that much rarer, as it should be; I house-ruled this (Silver Standard) into 3rd Ed/PF1 a while ago. </blockquote>Without changing the prices of things, </blockquote><p>Of course you change the price of things, that's the point, what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp.MerlinCross wrote:Vic Ferrari wrote: Ikos wrote: Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote: Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?
I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An...Vic Ferrari2018-08-08T22:03:19ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"MerlinCrosshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1292018-08-08T22:18:48Z2018-08-08T21:36:18Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vic Ferrari wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ikos wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver? </blockquote>I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no. </blockquote>And it males gold and platinum that much rarer, as it should be; I house-ruled this (Silver Standard) into 3rd Ed/PF1 a while ago. </blockquote><p>Without changing the prices of things, all paying in Silver does is just make everything 10x more expensive. Or breaks wealth by level the first time the team gets a hold of a good amount of gold if the prices aren't handled well.
<p>My own games haven't been "Loot everything", in the sense of picking through basically every container and then the container, but I wonder how this swap will effect looting practices. Heck, I'd like to see how Rogues behave in the coming weeks(Steal all the things + The nails too). So what if they sell for copper, the economy is Silver based. </p>
<p>I'm sorry, I hated this back when a certain MMO gave you copper and silver as quest rewards. Like I was being paid pocket change. Believable I suppose for paying some random guy that came up to you for a small job but it was a pain to juggle 3 currencies. And the feeling of getting a small amount of gold only to see all the things you STILL couldn't buy. </p>
<p>This is going to take some play-testing and some feedback. I really can't say how this change will end up but I know I dislike it. </p>
<p>Also I am biased. Basically every Video Game RPG has you carrying around truckloads of 1 type of coinage so I am just desensitized I guess.</p>Vic Ferrari wrote:Ikos wrote: Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote: Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?
I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason...MerlinCross2018-08-08T21:36:18ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Vic Ferrarihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1282018-08-11T23:03:53Z2018-08-08T20:41:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ikos wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver? </blockquote>I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no. </blockquote><p>And it males gold and platinum that much rarer, as it should be; I house-ruled this (Silver Standard) into 3rd Ed/PF1 a while ago.Ikos wrote:Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote: Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?
I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no. And...Vic Ferrari2018-08-08T20:41:31ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Ikoshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1272018-08-12T03:42:15Z2018-08-08T20:31:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:</div><blockquote> Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver? </blockquote><p>I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no.Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?
I suspect dropping a zero made it a little less riculous when carrying around wealth. To buy many items in the old system, you had to frequently carry around handtrucks worth of gold currency, which was a problem if you watched encumbrance. Most premodern economies ran on silver, at least on this plane of existence, to boot. An in-game reason provided though, no.Ikos2018-08-08T20:31:22ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti (alias of JASON RODARTE)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1262018-08-08T22:18:12Z2018-08-08T20:18:58Z<p>Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?</p>Is there an explanation any where as to why the shift from gold to silver?Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti (alias of JASON RODARTE)2018-08-08T20:18:58ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Warmagonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1252018-08-12T03:41:44Z2018-08-08T19:28:28Z<p>In a sense, the new edition of a game often has this problem. Just starting off, it's essentially competing with the best of whatever the previous version had. So it either has to limit its changes to maintain more compatibility and thus ease the transition (you can use your old splats with the new edition!) before the line expands. Or its changes need to offer enough interesting stuff on their own that people are willing to accept the initial loss of content as collateral damage.</p>
<p>However, it seems like PF 2 has often taken the route of not adding new things, but instead subdividing the old content out over more feats and levels. You need several ancestry feats to get the benefits of most races now instead of starting with them. Quickdraw is for rogues, not a general feat. Cleave is a level 6 Barbarian ability instead of something any fighter or any human can start with.</p>
<p>In some cases, that's not really unreasonable. Dwarves did get a lot of stuff before, they can afford to get a little less at the start. Spreading out some of the super hax 9th level spells over 9th and 10th level spells makes sense. But across the board, it does seem kind of unappealing IMO.</p>In a sense, the new edition of a game often has this problem. Just starting off, it's essentially competing with the best of whatever the previous version had. So it either has to limit its changes to maintain more compatibility and thus ease the transition (you can use your old splats with the new edition!) before the line expands. Or its changes need to offer enough interesting stuff on their own that people are willing to accept the initial loss of content as collateral damage.
However,...Warmagon2018-08-08T19:28:28ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Vic Ferrarihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1242018-08-12T14:40:11Z2018-08-08T19:14:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">LadyWurm wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Artificial 20 wrote:</div><blockquote><p> The playtest has one core rulebook.</p>
<p>This limits what can be included, no matter Paizo's plans for P2E. Instead of the entire first edition, the playtest rulebook can be compared to what P1E's core rulebook offered. Measured by this standard, some omissions and shortages can seem less critical.</p>
<p>Some examples from things I've seen:
<br />
<ul>
<br />
<li>The playtest has weak archetype support. In P1E's core rulebook, there was no such thing as an archetype. They came in a later book, and became one of P1E's most popular features despite this late start.
<br />
<li>Backgrounds are bland and pretty limited. In P1E's core rulebook, the counterpart of traits did not exist yet. These were also introduced later on, and became fundamental to character expression.
<br />
<li>The options are generic and unimaginative. The P1E core rulebook alone was also pretty stock in its options. 7 races, no alternate traits, every member of •race• was the same. 11 classes, no archetyping, very standard, boilerplate concepts like cleric or barbarian. No traits to mechanicalise your identity, class skills only came from class, so on and so forth etc.
<br />
</ul></p>
<p>Remembering P1E's humble beginning, as well as the grand scope it reached, can help in assessing P2E's beginning. </blockquote>Yet those classes were far more distinctive than these. Having a ton of options for a class doesn't add uniqueness if all those options feel the same and have been watered down heavily to make them "balanced". Instead, all these "options" just wind up feeling like tiresome bloat and very bland instead of making things better. </blockquote><p>Yes, sometimes obsession with balance can lead to homogenisation.LadyWurm wrote:Artificial 20 wrote:The playtest has one core rulebook.
This limits what can be included, no matter Paizo's plans for P2E. Instead of the entire first edition, the playtest rulebook can be compared to what P1E's core rulebook offered. Measured by this standard, some omissions and shortages can seem less critical.
Some examples from things I've seen:
The playtest has weak archetype support. In P1E's core rulebook, there was no such thing as an archetype. They came in a later...Vic Ferrari2018-08-08T19:14:56ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"LadyWurmhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1232018-08-12T14:40:06Z2018-08-08T19:09:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rameth wrote:</div><blockquote><p> They had to lower the math in order to make the Crit Success and Crit Fail option more fluid within the system. Cause before anybody getting - 10 or lower past a certain point was fairly impossible. Now because of static gain and small increases those small increases matter more. They also changed a lot of Failures to not exactly be detrimental. </p>
<p>Let's examine simply climbing a cliff. </p>
<p>Climb (Athletics)
<br />
Let's say that a lvl 3 Fighter (+8 Ath) Rogue (+5 Ath) and Wizard (+3) are trying to Climb a cliff side. In the book it says a cliff side is generally a DC 15 to Climb. Let's say the cliff is 30ft tall. They all have to succeed 6 climb checks to move up the cliff going 5 feet a round. Although on a crit success they move up half their speed, which could depend on the armor their wearing and all that but we're just going to assume they're unarmored. </p>
<p>The Fighter
<br />
The Fighter with their +8 (+3 lvl, +4 str and +1 expert) succeeds on a roll of 7 and can only crit fail on a Nat 1. He also can Crit Succeed on a roll of 20-17. So they has a 20% chance of going much faster and needing less checks and only a 5% chance of falling. If he fails he just doesn't move at all. </p>
<p>The Rogue
<br />
With a +5 (+3 lvl, +2 str) they succeed on a roll of 15 can only crit succeed on a 20 and can crit fail on a 1.</p>
<p>The Wizard with his +3 (+3 lvl) can succeed on a roll of 12 can only crit succeed on a 20 and is the only one who can actually crit fail more than once with a roll of 1 and 2. </p>
<p>Now that's for the base DC if it was any higher the Rogue and Wizard would be in even more danger because of their lower bonus while the Fighter would only start to be in more danger once the DC hit 19 or higher. The bonus is not that huge with the fighter having only 5 more than the wizard and only 3 more than the rogue. Also if either the rogue or wizard weren't trained in Athletics then that would be a further minus 2 which would make them even more likely to crit fail and thus fall to their deaths the higher they get. </p>
<p>At higher... </blockquote><p>The fact that you have to constantly consult a page of feats just to know if you're good at something or what you're rolls even mean is not a good thing. It's tedious, it's frustrating, and it slows down the game.Rameth wrote:They had to lower the math in order to make the Crit Success and Crit Fail option more fluid within the system. Cause before anybody getting - 10 or lower past a certain point was fairly impossible. Now because of static gain and small increases those small increases matter more. They also changed a lot of Failures to not exactly be detrimental.
Let's examine simply climbing a cliff.
Climb (Athletics)
Let's say that a lvl 3 Fighter (+8 Ath) Rogue (+5 Ath) and Wizard (+3) are...LadyWurm2018-08-08T19:09:23ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"LadyWurmhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1222018-08-12T14:39:52Z2018-08-08T19:02:43Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Artificial 20 wrote:</div><blockquote><p> The playtest has one core rulebook.</p>
<p>This limits what can be included, no matter Paizo's plans for P2E. Instead of the entire first edition, the playtest rulebook can be compared to what P1E's core rulebook offered. Measured by this standard, some omissions and shortages can seem less critical.</p>
<p>Some examples from things I've seen:
<br />
<ul>
<br />
<li>The playtest has weak archetype support. In P1E's core rulebook, there was no such thing as an archetype. They came in a later book, and became one of P1E's most popular features despite this late start.
<br />
<li>Backgrounds are bland and pretty limited. In P1E's core rulebook, the counterpart of traits did not exist yet. These were also introduced later on, and became fundamental to character expression.
<br />
<li>The options are generic and unimaginative. The P1E core rulebook alone was also pretty stock in its options. 7 races, no alternate traits, every member of •race• was the same. 11 classes, no archetyping, very standard, boilerplate concepts like cleric or barbarian. No traits to mechanicalise your identity, class skills only came from class, so on and so forth etc.
<br />
</ul></p>
<p>Remembering P1E's humble beginning, as well as the grand scope it reached, can help in assessing P2E's beginning. </blockquote><p>Yet those classes were far more distinctive than these. Having a ton of options for a class doesn't add uniqueness if all those options feel the same and have been watered down heavily to make them "balanced". Instead, all these "options" just wind up feeling like tiresome bloat and very bland instead of making things better.Artificial 20 wrote:The playtest has one core rulebook.
This limits what can be included, no matter Paizo's plans for P2E. Instead of the entire first edition, the playtest rulebook can be compared to what P1E's core rulebook offered. Measured by this standard, some omissions and shortages can seem less critical.
Some examples from things I've seen:
The playtest has weak archetype support. In P1E's core rulebook, there was no such thing as an archetype. They came in a later book, and...LadyWurm2018-08-08T19:02:43ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"thflamehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1212018-08-12T21:53:09Z2018-08-07T19:23:29Z<p>Homebrew should never be used as a counter argument when someone dislikes a mechanic, especially for a playtest. Homebrew should always be a last resort. </p>
<p>I could theoretically homebrew Chess into PF1, but I would be better off just playing PF1. </p>
<p>Also, could we please stop with the excuses that the playtest doesn't include all of the options for the final book? This is our last chance to change anything about the game. If we "wait until the game comes out to complain" then it's too late. </p>
<p>If there are more options than what the book gives us, then Paizo should have included them for playtesting. (Heck, they can still give the to us in a PDF at this point.)</p>
<p>The point is, nobody here knows what stuff Paizo left out of the playtest book, if anything, and even if stuff was left out, we don't know the nature of it. (There totally could be 5 times as many feats available in the final book, but they could easily all be broken trash.)</p>
<p>At this point, I am assuming that, given no real complaints, the playtest book is the final rules. Period. </p>
<p>If we don't complain, assuming stuff will change, and it doesn't, we're screwed. </p>
<p>If we do complain about stuff that is changing anyway, stuff still get's changed. </p>
<p>If Paizo wants us to stop complaining about stuff, then they should release updated rules via "patch notes" to assuage our fears and stop the complaints.</p>Homebrew should never be used as a counter argument when someone dislikes a mechanic, especially for a playtest. Homebrew should always be a last resort.
I could theoretically homebrew Chess into PF1, but I would be better off just playing PF1.
Also, could we please stop with the excuses that the playtest doesn't include all of the options for the final book? This is our last chance to change anything about the game. If we "wait until the game comes out to complain" then it's too late.
If...thflame2018-08-07T19:23:29ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Ahlmzhadhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1202018-08-12T14:39:23Z2018-08-07T18:27:40Z<p>Very disappointed in the heavy usage of feats. As a DM it removes a lot of character initiative, and really locks you into a lot of saying no to players, as most of the feats are pretty much standard sets of actions. </p>
<p>Also not looking forward to the constant book digging needed to play all these feats and class specific actions properly.</p>
<p>I do like the tiered skill system, although I think everyone will wind up getting trained in them all, with the +1 of expert being pretty meaningless after the first 4 or 5 levels.</p>
<p>We'll see how it plays, but I don't think I'll be running it very often if at all.</p>Very disappointed in the heavy usage of feats. As a DM it removes a lot of character initiative, and really locks you into a lot of saying no to players, as most of the feats are pretty much standard sets of actions.
Also not looking forward to the constant book digging needed to play all these feats and class specific actions properly.
I do like the tiered skill system, although I think everyone will wind up getting trained in them all, with the +1 of expert being pretty meaningless after...Ahlmzhad2018-08-07T18:27:40ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Secret Wizardhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1192018-08-12T14:39:17Z2018-08-07T18:05:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Danith wrote:</div><blockquote> You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative. </blockquote><p>You do know this is an artificial construct in which our feedback could be able to reshape some design choices?Danith wrote:You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.
You do know this is an artificial construct in which our feedback could be able to reshape some design choices?Secret Wizard2018-08-07T18:05:10ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"graystonehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1182018-08-12T14:39:11Z2018-08-07T18:02:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Angel Hunter D wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Danith wrote:</div><blockquote> You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative. </blockquote>Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system. </blockquote><p>Yep. Not everyone can alter the game at a whim. The basis of the game can't be reliant on refluffing of rule elements.Angel Hunter D wrote:Danith wrote: You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.
Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system. Yep. Not everyone can alter the game at a whim. The...graystone2018-08-07T18:02:21ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Angel Hunter Dhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1172018-08-08T22:17:52Z2018-08-07T17:37:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Danith wrote:</div><blockquote> You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative. </blockquote><p>Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system.Danith wrote:You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.
Not an option in Organized Play which is a huge draw for the system.Angel Hunter D2018-08-07T17:37:39ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: "The Options Are Limited And Generic"Danithhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va8x&page=3?The-Options-Are-Limited-And-Generic#1162018-08-07T17:30:54Z2018-08-07T17:30:54Z<p>You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.</p>You guys do know this is a ROLEPLAYING game. If you want to play a rogue who uses a spear, reskin a rapier. It’s pretty easy to do this stuff. When pathfinder 1 came out it had all the problems 3.5 had. 5e has its own problems and I’m sure pf2 will have its own problems. But for Christ’s sake. Use your imagination people. Be creative.Danith2018-08-07T17:30:54Z