| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to suggest that in some areas, that PF2 follows the KISS principle. For those who do not know, KISS is an acronym for Keep It Simple, Stupid. Basically, most systems work best if kept simple rather than being made complicated.
I see two main areas that could be improved, by KISS
Initiative. The Exploration mode and using different skills and confusion about surprise or not is just so confusing. Turn initiative back to the way it was (dex roll), or another simple version (i.e. a perception roll). Hell make it an INT check just to make intelligence worthwhile. Just make it always simple and always the same.
Death and Dying Rolls. Wow, this system is complicated. I see no reason why it can't be an unmodified roll instead of the current scaling DC determined by threat level. There is already precedent for unmodified checks (cover, persistent damage). Something easy to remember and consistent. Say DC 15 modified by CON, or even DC 10 like 5 edition.
I am sure there are others that people may think of. Simpler systems, do not always mean a less complex game. Any suggestions for simplifying PF2?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to suggest that in some areas, that PF2 follows the KISS principle. For those who do not know, KISS is an acronym for Keep It Simple, Stupid. Basically, most systems work best if kept simple rather than being made complicated.
I see two main areas that could be improved, by KISS
Initiative. The Exploration mode and using different skills and confusion about surprise or not is just so confusing. Turn initiative back to the way it was (dex roll), or another simple version (i.e. a perception roll). Hell make it an INT check just to make intelligence worthwhile. Just make it always simple and always the same.
Personally, I disagree with this. I think they're onto something, but one thing I would change: One should never be penalized. For example, if you're sneaking around, you should be able to use stealth OR perception, whichever is better.
Death and Dying Rolls. Wow, this system is complicated. I see no reason why it can't be an unmodified roll instead of the current scaling DC determined by threat level. There is already precedent for unmodified checks (cover, persistent damage). Something easy to remember and consistent. Say DC 15 modified by CON, or even DC 10 like 5 edition.
Partially agree. I think the scaling is necessary in the context of system with +1/level, but the current dying system is definitely overly complicated and needs to be reworked.
I am sure there are others that people may think of. Simpler systems, do not always mean a less complex game. Any suggestions for simplifying PF2?
The way TAC works. Armor should just not improve it. The current system of granting a different value for AC and TAC seems to exist solely to further differentiate different types of armor (rather than making sense, per se).
I would like to suggest that in some areas, that PF2 follows the KISS principle. For those who do not know, KISS is an acronym for Keep It Simple, Stupid. Basically, most systems work best if kept simple rather than being made complicated.
I see two main areas that could be improved, by KISS
Initiative. The Exploration mode and using different skills and confusion about surprise or not is just so confusing. Turn initiative back to the way it was (dex roll), or another simple version (i.e. a perception roll). Hell make it an INT check just to make intelligence worthwhile. Just make it always simple and always the same.
Personally, I disagree with this. I think they're onto something, but one thing I would change: One should never be penalized. For example, if you're sneaking around, you should be able to use stealth OR perception, whichever is better.
I guess we will disagree then. I can see what they were trying to do, but I do not think Exploration Mode (terrible name, very gamy) works that well. You can still get DEX to initiative by always stealthing. Social encounters are very odd. I think they should be role played and then if things go bad, roll iniative like in PF1, not using diplomacy or deception! Its your reactions to fight. It is just too complicated for a simple system (determine combat order).
A bit of a side shuffle, but the new system also causes a lot of confusion regarding surprise. Is surprise / ambushes gone? Ambushes should be a part of any combat game.
In regards to TAC, i agree but in a more severe manner. I think it should just be eliminated. They add little value to the game for adding a separate AC. But it wasn't a big beef of mine so I didn't include it in my list.
There are several things that I wish were laid out different or explained more clearly but... Dying and Resonance are the only major areas that I wish were simplified.
I've never found a good system for handling dying so...it's not an easy task but I definitely think something better could be adapted. I really dislike the numbered stages and would be happier if they were statuses (i.e. Staggered, Dying, Near Death) with their own criteria (Which would be more complicated!).
I like the concept of Resonance but think the implementation is too unwieldy and involves too much bookkeeping. I'd prefer it either only being used for equipped items or for it to completely replace charges/uses per day.
I don't think dying is that complicated, but I do think it could be reasonably simplified without going to a flat check. A high DC check of a given level, which is what monsters use for their dying DC, is approximately 1.5*level+12. Instead of flipping through the book to find the DCs page, they could just use 12+1.5*level, rounded down (or up, which is closer to the chart, but goes against most rounding in PF), or if they don't want to worry about multiplication, 15+level, which is different in that lower level monsters are more lethal to lower level pcs, and high level monsters are less lethal to high level pcs, but generally accomplishes the same idea.
Alternatively, they could just print the dying DC in the monster's stat block, which has the extra benefit of allowing them to veer off the High-DC of a given level chart, such that certain enemies are more lethal than their equally leveled peers (which I could see for undead which create spawns from creatures they kill).
But the actual rules themselves don't seem that complicated: when reduced to 0 you gain dying 1 (or dying 2 on a crit), each round you roll a fort save to recover, and on a success, you return to 1 HP, and on a failure increment the dying condition (twice on a crit fail), and if you reach dying 4 you die. Not much to have to remember there.