Layout - How I use the book

[The DM of]

Hi, I'm a fan. I want this to be the best version of D&D to date.

Feat layout

I liked the P1 layout of having all the feats together. If I'm building a character, I want all my feat options listed. I want all their explanations to follow. That's how I build a character. Having the feats in the class section makes me flip through too many pages. I'm a fighter taking the rogue dedication? Now I must flip through separate sections for fighter feats, rogue feats, general feats... It's too much. Group them in one place, please.

Spell results

I read spells from the perspective of the caster. When I'm a wizard, I want to read the spell and immediately see what's the best possible result. Everything should be from my perspective. If I'm a DM playing an npc, I should expect to follow that perspective. Now in that perspective I want to see best result, next best, etc. Let's give those a 1-4 where #1 is the best, and #4 is the worst. Again, this is from the perspective of the caster. Therefore the results section should be ordered as follows and explicitly called the Saving Throw Results section:

1 - Critical failure: The absolute best thing that can happen when I cast this spell!
2 - Failure: The next best thing that can happen when I cast this spell.
3 - Success: Uh oh, someone resisted. Do I get anything at all on them?
4 - Critical Success: Give it up, they resisted you, ok?

I'm sure this has come up in a bunch of threads, but I have to add my voice to the din. The p2 layout could be much more helpful. Remember in p1 where you looked up a major version of a spell and it doesn't even list the basic parameters like range or saves? It just said See the non major version of this spell? That wasn't helpful. It annoyed you every time you saw it and needed that info. P2 needs to improve on that. Good luck and keep up the good work!

[The DM of]

SSTS!

[theservantsllcleanitup]

I "[X] Strongly Agree" with the Degrees of success suggestion. They should always be in numerical order, I don't know why you would ever want to mix up the results into another order. Why would it be

(DC=11)
Result=11-20
Result=21+
Result=2-10
Result=1

It should be
Result=1
Result=2-10
Result=11-20
Result=21+

Or vice versa, as you said, depending on what outcome I am looking for. Best outcome first, worst outcome last.

edit: You just reminded me that many of the spells could benefit from being combined. Lesser, Normal, Greater etc can all be in one entry much of the time. Only print the info that changes

[sherlock1701]

I know why they wrote them this way ("as success, except..."), but I would much rather see something like this.

[AndIMustMask]

class feats aren't reeeally feats--they're like rage powers, arcanist exploits, etc. they're class powers that you pick from by level to build your own class with (or at leas that's the intent i think).

though i can see what you mean (@OP), since many previous feats are now class-locked as abilities.

[Ironwedge]

The real problem with Feats is that they are now calling everything a Feat. Something like Class Specialization and Ancestry Ability to rename class feats and ancestry feats will solve a lot of the confusion.

I really like your suggestion of spell saves being described from the perspective of the caster. I really don't think Greater type spells are even needed anymore with the new Heightening powers. Why make a new spell with a new name if you could just place a Heightened description at the bottom?