| Flames of Chaos |
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, this might be because I'm using a screenreader, so I will understand if I'm in the minority here. That being said, this needs to be said:
1. Pagination, people, pagination! The PDF is structured so loosely Adobe refuses outright to shift pages when I engage the "go to page" command.
2. Why on earth do I need to search random semi-related sections to find related information? I am trying for the fourth day now to put together a level 1 character and I keep having to flip back and forth between the "Skills" chapter vs. the "introduction" chapter to find very basic information.
Example? The skills have been replaced with a "proficiency" modifier based on what "category" of skill you have. Yet after searching page after page in the skill section, I had to revert to a full PDF search to find that in page freaking 8 the modifier was simply character level plus category - meaning Trained is level +1, Master is +2, so on and so forth. I don't understand why it couldn't have been included RIGHT at the beginning of the skills chapter under the explanation of the categories of skill mastery.
3. Why is Perception not listed as a skill under the skills section? I understand - if barely - why this is the new initiative stat, but it's only addressed under the combat section. This seems quite confusing, especially since the "Character construction" schema goes out of its way to mention Perception and its importance, but not how to calculate it.
4. Why on Golarion does Armor check penalty apply to Con checks? It *NEVER* did in PF 1.0. I don't even understand from a lore/flavor perspective why this decision; armor would be tiring to wear all the time until you bulked up and got used to wearing it, so if you are trying for "fatigue due to unfamiliarity" as a flavor approach, can't there be a better approach? I'm not sure what as each idea I've been thinking of sound awful - fatigue the first few rounds of combat equal to penalty or half con mod or something... *sigh*. It just seems unnecessary as you're already penalizing strength and dex for this armor "drag".
5. This last point is more of a general question due to coming slightly late to PF 1.0 - I started playing it in 2007, so much of the expansions were out for years: why do the core races consist of less races than PF 1.0? I'm particularly confused as to why no half-orcs or half-elves. Were they additions to the core in a later expansion of some sort, and that's why they aren't included in this?
These are just my initial thoughts; hopefully these glitches will be addressed or work themselves out somehow.
| Flames of Chaos |
4. Admittedly I hadn't fully noticed that the armor check penalty applied to con checks... but at the same time there are no con based skills and I'm struggling to think of any other con checks you are likely to come across, though my knowledge is far from encyclopedic
If that's the case, then why bother to include that penalty? It adds confusion as the first check to come to mind is "death saving throws". Admittedly I haven't looked at that yet, but it's the one check more than any other that I know of that usually involves constitution.
I know in PF 1.0 you had to make con checks for holding your breath or for your fort saves vs. poison. Would this penalty apply to fort saves? Also what about fatigue for forced marches or similar "endurance" checks?
| Flames of Chaos |
Posting here as per the suggested rules for Paizo staff noticing:
Okay, now that I've gotten used to the book a little more, I can definitely say this structure needs overhauling; specifically if you are going to reference something that is *INTEGRAL* to building core tenants of the character, *YOU* need to put a reference to the CORRECT page, not "check this page for more info" and find out it only obliquely references said item in passing as part of something else. Specifically the rule for spell DC. On page 78 in the entry for Druid, under the "Spells" side-bar, it says "clook on page 290 for more about spell DCs". AAaaand when I go to page 290, the only thing I find is a passing reference to spell DCs when talking about touch AC vs. regular AC. I had to search the whole PDF yet again, and lo and behold the information I needed was much further down on page 364, under the appendecies.... And even then I had to look under "Spell rolls" as the entry only says literally "See spell rolls".... #SMH violently! I should not have to take a full week to build a character from scratch because I have to keep bouncing back and forth to understand properties of various basic class features. I also should not have to figure out something by asking *REPEATEDLY* on the forums, the Facebook group, and random folks on Youtube to get the information! I had to ask five different people on three different sites to properly understand the stat blocks for each animal companion are the *MODIFIERS*, not the scores! It's very badly worded. Could you not instead list the scores like the old version? It might not be relevant any more from a "here's what you need" perspective due to the whole "proficiency system" bit, but it's WAAAYY too easy to misunderstand, and it's going to put other folks off wanting to use them.
*deep breath* Thank you Paizo staff for taking the time to read my collective ranting here, but it is infinitely frustrating as someone who's played pathfinder, D&D 4th/5th editions as well as other systems altogether to not be able to whip together a character in a day or two.... Good night and good luck.