| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like myself and several other posters are probably correct on shields, and they can't multi dent.
If this is true then it is not a particularly good design. If it is assumed characters will have to take something at "high level" then why aren't those classes just given that as a class feature later on?Q: Does it really take an hour to identify healing potions ?
A: Yes. When you are high level you are supposed to take Quick Identification.
Not necessarily. Consider that repairing a dent also takes an hour. The shield spell takes 10 minutes to respawn. We also have Natural Healing, which let's you heal sans magic in 10 minutes, but it is a hard check you'll probably have to attempt more than once to beat at low levels. (We should have more healing options like this, IMO.)
The base assumption seems to be most of the party probably has something to do over a "short rest," so stuff like ID'ing items taking an hour works out pretty well. It also stretches out the adventuring day in a meaningful way. (I'm thinking I might keep a clock displayed to show what time it is in game.)
If you and yours don't want to take as long between fights, the feats exist to let you speed it up. That seems fairly appropriate for a skill feat. But honestly, it is rare that taking 10 minutes instead of an hour will make a big difference, so I wouldn't say you really have to snag the Quick feats until you are inundated with items and you have access to the higher proficiency stuff anyway-- once you can ID something in rounds it is gold.
At that point, a single skill feat out of like 8 or whatever seems rather affordable.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like myself and several other posters are probably correct on shields, and they can't multi dent.
If this is true then it is not a particularly good design. If it is assumed characters will have to take something at "high level" then why aren't those classes just given that as a class feature later on?Q: Does it really take an hour to identify healing potions ?
A: Yes. When you are high level you are supposed to take Quick Identification.Not necessarily. Consider that repairing a dent also takes an hour. The shield spell takes 10 minutes to respawn. We also have Natural Healing, which let's you heal sans magic in 10 minutes, but it is a hard check you'll probably have to attempt more than once to beat at low levels. (We should have more healing options like this, IMO.)
The base assumption seems to be most of the party probably has something to do over a "short rest," so stuff like ID'ing items taking an hour works out pretty well. It also stretches out the adventuring day in a meaningful way. (I'm thinking I might keep a clock displayed to show what time it is in game.)
If you and yours don't want to take as long between fights, the feats exist to let you speed it up. That seems fairly appropriate for a skill feat. But honestly, it is rare that taking 10 minutes instead of an hour will make a big difference, so I wouldn't say you really have to snag the Quick feats until you are inundated with items and you have access to the higher proficiency stuff anyway-- once you can ID something in rounds it is gold.
At that point, a single skill feat out of like 8 or whatever seems rather affordable.
No. Thanks for making excuses for the poor design, but you missed my point. IF it is ASSUMED that pretty much EVERY party takes this, then it is bad design to force them to spend a resource on it rather than baking it into whatever base ability gets modified by the spent resource from the start. If that is not the base assumption, and Quick Identification is not seen as a "must-have" or baseline assumption at X level, then it's no big deal.
This is the kind of thing that affects scenario/module/adventure path design assumptions for pacing and whatnot going forward, and is the type of detail that can often be overlooked, causing issues down the road, as well as being something that can be most easily remedied at this stage. There's no reason not to be decisive about this now. Is it a luxury, or a default assumption at X level?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My take-aways are:
1. I really wish they had actually killed Vancian magic: I hate that system, and don't really want to play any class that uses it. This would have been a massive positive for me. I cannot overstate how much I dislike playing a vancian caster.
2. I think they have a different picture of what healing should be like than I do. I'd like to see a lot more flexability in the 'who' and 'how' healing, especially out of combat, than they seem to.
3. I don't think an item boosting resonance sounds good to me. I could be wrong, but it seems just as artificial feeling and I am still unsure it is addressing the right issue. Resonance as an item slot replacement is nice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shout out to Joe M for actually giving us the context of what Jason said on shields. (Sorry Almarane, there is a significant difference between your paraphrasing and what Jason was saying.)
Seriously folks, before you type up a big post bemoaning what gets said in the stream, go and actually listen to the stream. I know they aren't the most fun way to get information. I have had big frustrations with this one in particular because twitch keeps crashing on me and I don't think it has been uploaded to youtube yet. But good lordy, it is worth just putting it on in the background while you do dishes or play video games or whatever. Especially if you are feeling strong emotions about an issue specifically or PF2 in general.
Also, to reiterate a major point Jason made: these streams aren't the best medium for in depth rules questions because he isn't going to pause it to pull out a rulebook to give a definitive answer.
No. Thanks for making excuses for the poor design, but you missed my point. IF it is ASSUMED that pretty much EVERY party takes this, then it is bad design to force them to spend a resource on it rather than baking it into whatever base ability gets modified by the spent resource from the start. If that is...Sounds like myself and several other posters are probably correct on shields, and they can't multi dent.
If this is true then it is not a particularly good design. If it is assumed characters will have to take something at "high level" then why aren't those classes just given that as a class feature later on?Q: Does it really take an hour to identify healing potions ?
A: Yes. When you are high level you are supposed to take Quick Identification.Not necessarily. Consider that repairing a dent also takes an hour. The shield spell takes 10 minutes to respawn. We also have Natural Healing, which let's you heal sans magic in 10 minutes, but it is a hard check you'll probably have to attempt more than once to beat at low levels. (We should have more healing options like this, IMO.)
The base assumption seems to be most of the party probably has something to do over a "short rest," so stuff like ID'ing items taking an hour works out pretty well. It also stretches out the adventuring day in a meaningful way. (I'm thinking I might keep a clock displayed to show what time it is in game.)
If you and yours don't want to take as long between fights, the feats exist to let you speed it up. That seems fairly appropriate for a skill feat. But honestly, it is rare that taking 10 minutes instead of an hour will make a big difference, so I wouldn't say you really have to snag the Quick feats until you are inundated with items and you have access to the higher proficiency stuff anyway-- once you can ID something in rounds it is gold.
At that point, a single skill feat out of like 8 or whatever seems rather affordable.
And here we have a good example of it in action. Having listened to the stream? Jason never paints it as an assumption. He says it is a choice you can make to customize your character.
He specifically says "If you want to be the guy that identifies things quick, you can be that guy. If you want to be the guy who knows a little bit of everything about nature, whenever he sees something without spending an action, you can be that character. If you want to be the guy that intimidates people with just a glare, you can be that character. The skill feats are there to customize your skill use."
So we can say definitively that Quick Identification is not going to be an assumption.
Also, I'm amused that Jason also hit on what I mentioned about this extending the length of the adventuring day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If resonance stayed the same for permanent magic items (investing to activate), but consumables only worked partially unless investing in, would that work for most folks?
That is, a potion of healing, when invested, does 2d8 healing. Not invested, does half that - so what the dice roll, divided by half, round down.
If the consumable doesn't heal damage, or such effect, its duration is halved.
I strongly encourage you (and everyone else) to look at my analysis of healing consumables (and some other proposed solutions) in this thread:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And here we have a good example of it in action. Having listened to the stream? Jason never paints it as an assumption. He says it is a choice you can make to customize your character.
He specifically says "If you want to be the guy that identifies things quick, you can be that guy. If you want to be the guy who knows a little bit of everything about nature, whenever he sees something without spending an action, you can be that character. If you want to be the guy that intimidates people with just a glare, you can be that character. The skill feats are there to customize your skill use."
So we can say definitively that Quick Identification is not going to be an assumption.
Perfect. So the assumption is that Quick Identification is going to be a luxury. Thanks for giving us the more specific rundown. I gather most of my information while in situations where noise is not really an option, and hate watching videos when reading is so much faster and more accurate. Also captioning on most formats blows.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.
It rarely is. The only times it's been fun, in my experience, is when the players use a magic item before they know what it is. Otherwise...it's just delayed gratification for no real purpose.
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
2. I think they have a different picture of what healing should be like than I do.
My biggest head/desk moment was when Jason said something like "I think there may be a healing problem but we need more data to be sure". The one thing that is screamingly obvious if you listen to just about ANY feedback is that YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem. The fact that Jason doesn't recognize this is more than a little alarming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that they are ignoring the complaints about vancian casting still being in the game as well as resonance and other things shows that they really are not informed about what their base wants in a new edition....My biggest head/desk moment was when Jason said something like "I think there may be a healing problem but we need more data to be sure". The one thing that is screamingly obvious if you listen to just about ANY feedback is that YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem. The fact that Jason doesn't recognize this is more than a little alarming.
2. I think they have a different picture of what healing should be like than I do.
Those of us who hang around the forums do not represent most of their customers. Paizo gets feedback from multiple sources, and I suspect that not all of it is in agreement as to what the problem is.
|
|
The fact that they are ignoring the complaints about vancian casting still being in the game as well as resonance and other things shows that they really are not informed about what their base wants in a new edition....
Jason did say that they considered something similar to the Arcanist for casters. But decided against it.
I have no idea of the relative numbers but lots of people love Vancian casting, lots hate it, and lots don't care as long as there are alternatives.
I suspect Paizo actually HAS numbers and, from their choice, presumably there are more people who want it as an option than want to see it removed from the game
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the devs have as much admitted there are problems with Resonance and Healing. They just haven't decided how to solve it yet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.
Yeah, I've always handwaved it unless the item was rare or odd somehow, so long as someone could look at it with detect magic, because it's a waste of time to give the players cool stuff and not let them figure out what it is.
Honestly, I'd imagine most home games would wind up doing this anyway if the rule sticks through to final.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that they are ignoring the complaints about vancian casting still being in the game as well as resonance and other things shows that they really are not informed about what their base wants in a new edition....My biggest head/desk moment was when Jason said something like "I think there may be a healing problem but we need more data to be sure". The one thing that is screamingly obvious if you listen to just about ANY feedback is that YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem. The fact that Jason doesn't recognize this is more than a little alarming.
2. I think they have a different picture of what healing should be like than I do.To be fair, the only complaints against Vancian casting have been very subjective: there's the "I don't like it" (by definition subjective), and the "It's unrealistic" (which is a very nebulous concept when dealing with something as unrealistic as Magic).
More to the point, the two obvious things to replace it with seem worse that Vancian casting:
- Spell Points or Mana has issues where it feels video gamey, and causes all the "psychic nova" that was so prevalent with 3.5e psionics.
- "Daily spells" makes magic even more limited, and is so reminiscent of 4e that it'd alienate a larger proportion of the playerbase.
This is why I prefer Arcanist-style spellcasting over all other options that have been presented thus far.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Those of us who hang around the forums do not represent most of their customers. Paizo gets feedback from multiple sources, and I suspect that not all of it is in agreement as to what the problem is.
Exactly - for instance, I and the ~12 people I game with range from “perfectly fine with Vancian style casting” to “not the favorite system” but no one actively hates it enough to replace it with a completely non-slot based system. Plus, “Vancian” has different definitions to different people.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the devs have as much admitted there are problems with Resonance and Healing. They just haven't decided how to solve it yet.
They know there are issues with Resonance. Jason said that very definitely Resonance will be changed in the final game (possibly even removed). They don't know HOW it will be changed but it WILL change.
But (taking him at his word) he isn't yet convinced that there is a healing problem. He admits that there MAY be but is unsure.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, the only complaints against Vancian casting have been very subjective: there's the "I don't like it" (by definition subjective), and the "It's unrealistic" (which is a very nebulous concept when dealing with something as unrealistic as Magic).
Those are the only complaints about Vancian casting? How about the fact that it encourages weird behavior like the 15 Minute Adventuring Day? Didn't prepare the right spell for the situation? Forget trying to figure it out with the resources on hand, just come back tomorrow. All out of useful prepared spells? See you tomorrow. And if there isn't an option to go rest for eight hours then the Vancian caster is effectively dead weight (or was, until they got more class abilities to compensate).
I'd be fine with Vancian spells getting a major nerf in exchange for Vancian casters being able to prepare them after a short rest rather than waiting for eight hours.
More to the point, the two obvious things to replace it with seem worse that Vancian casting:
- Spell Points or Mana has issues where it feels video gamey, and causes all the "psychic nova" that was so prevalent with 3.5e psionics.
I'm not sure that "feels video gamey" is a sufficient reason to write off a mechanic that's been used effectively in TTRPG systems for decades. But, personally, I don't want all casters to use the same central mechanic so I'm fine with this being psionic's thing.
Alternatively: mana/spell points have the advantage of being easily set to recover over time/over a rest. As for the "psychic nova", limit the total pool but increase the recovery rate.
- "Daily spells" makes magic even more limited, and is so reminiscent of 4e that it'd alienate a larger proportion of the playerbase.
Fourth Edition may be everyone's favorite punching bag but it did have some good mechanics. The problem with "encounter/daily spells" was that Fourth Edition made every class mechanically identical - eventually the roles stopped feeling distinct because, at the core, they were all the same.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.Yeah, I've always handwaved it unless the item was rare or odd somehow, so long as someone could look at it with detect magic, because it's a waste of time to give the players cool stuff and not let them figure out what it is.
Honestly, I'd imagine most home games would wind up doing this anyway if the rule sticks through to final.
The new nerfed detect magic and time sink identify are wildly unpopular with my group. Like, they don't even bother with found magic items during the playtest adventures - they throw everything in a bag and just announce they will get it identified and sold when the adventure is done.
This is another of those "what problem, exactly, are these changes meant to address?" moments.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.It rarely is. The only times it's been fun, in my experience, is when the players use a magic item before they know what it is. Otherwise...it's just delayed gratification for no real purpose.
Didn't Jason Buhlman (I think) say in the Know Direction podcast that he hated magic item identification? Why is it a lot slower than in PF1, then?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My biggest head/desk moment was when Jason said something like "I think there may be a healing problem but we need more data to be sure". The one thing that is screamingly obvious if you listen to just about ANY feedback is that YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem. The fact that Jason doesn't recognize this is more than a little alarming.
2. I think they have a different picture of what healing should be like than I do.
It could be a damage output or damage avoidance problem instead, couldn't it?
Regarding all the vancian/arcanist stuff. Considering how many vancian casters end up leaving empty slots to fill as needed later, it's obvious that even when used, vancian casting isn't doing what it's designed to do. I think it works fine for classes like the witch or the shaman who have some extra at will things sitting around to support their casting, but it's really not great on its own.
There's no need to junk sorcerers or wizards. Pick one to get arcanist casting and one to get better at will powers and work from there.
Didn't Jason Buhlman (I think) say in the Know Direction podcast that he hated magic item identification? Why is it a lot slower than in PF1, then?
Probably he doesn't have total control. There are other people working on the design after all.
Magic Item identification right now is annoying and seriously limitig Adventure design. There is no more putting the Dragon slaying sword in the dungeon where you are surprised by the Dragon, because you cannot assume the Party to regularly rest an succesfully identify the item.
There is also no interesting Outcome to misidentifying/not identifying. It is a pure time cost.
And as mentioned, the difference between one hour and 10 minutes is mostly meaningless - either you are on a Counter, then you don't want to waste time, or you aren't. If quick ID does not lower the timer to Actions instead of Minutes, it is not interesting to me.The whole item ID process could go the way of the dodo or for heavens sake, make it a simple Recall Knowledge.
I have no issue with the idea that recall knowledge might be a way around having to magically identify the properties of an item who's story might be known, but I think the new system still leaves plenty of opportunity for having the dragon slaying sword located in the dungeon with the dragon.
I think it could be rather fun to have a treasure item that is a sword with clear indicators that it could be a dragon slaying sword, either from visual clues on the weapon itself or hints in the room the treasure is found in. This gives the players the excitement of having a clue what the weapon does without certainty and makes it more fun and rewarding to try it out and learn in combat how effective it is. If all identification defaulted to 1 round, then this kind of "what is it?" uncertainty would pretty much be removed from the game. Also as a GM, just deciding to make identifying items automatic and take no time is one of the easiest rules to add and as long as the things that make it quicker stay skill feats and not class features, then you have no classes where that house rule is stepping harshly on any characters toes.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tried my best to summarize the stream in the more condensed way, so that people know what the devs are working on. But please, don't tell people to "go watch the stream" when you think the message was not delivered correctly. Instead, quote what was said in the stream directly. I felt this summary was necessary because I saw many people say they don't want/have time to go watch the stream every week (it actually is the first stream I watched because I managed to have a bit of time to do so).
For the topic on "identifying magic items", I'm on the side of "identifying is not fun". It felt weird that the Pathfinder Hopeful was unable to recognize a Wayfinder. Plus, finding magic items is useless if you don't know what they do, in my opinion. Unless it has a scenaristic impact.
For the comment about "but identifying magic items for 1 hour lengthen the day of adventuring, so it conteracts the 15 minutes adventuring day" (this is paraphrased) : I cringed SO hard when Jason said that. No, taking 1 hour to identify a potion is not interesting. In Lost Star, if I did not play the adventure RAW, I would have sent goblins attack the party after 20 minutes of identification. One hour of identifying is one hour when 1) you do nothing, and 2) someone might attack you. Saying "my character spends one hour to identify a potion" feels anti-heroic and a waste of time. I'd prefer continuing my adventure and explore new, uncharted territories.
My other problem with taking one hour to identify something is that it's something you could do in less than one action in PF1. So to go back to PF1's baseline, you have to take feats and multiple skill ranks/proficiencies, against a cantrip. I like the fact that you can identify items without Detect Magic now, but I would have made it take 10 minutes, not one hour. And having the Detect Magic cantrip should allow you to identify it instantly, so that you are rewarded for your choice of taking this cantrip instead of something else. And Read Aura should be merged back in Detect Magic in my opinion (my players had a hard time understanding they needed Read Aura to identify a magic item).
I'm also in the "no vancian casting" camp. It's not fun to make everyone at the table lose their time because I'm not sure weither I should prepare two Fireballs and one Dispel magic, or one Fireball and two Dispel magics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magic Item identification right now is annoying and seriously limitig Adventure design. There is no more putting the Dragon slaying sword in the dungeon where you are surprised by the Dragon, because you cannot assume the Party to regularly rest an succesfully identify the item.
There is also no interesting Outcome to misidentifying/not identifying. It is a pure time cost.
And as mentioned, the difference between one hour and 10 minutes is mostly meaningless - either you are on a Counter, then you don't want to waste time, or you aren't. If quick ID does not lower the timer to Actions instead of Minutes, it is not interesting to me.The whole item ID process could go the way of the dodo or for heavens sake, make it a simple Recall Knowledge.
I have no issue with the idea that recall knowledge might be a way around having to magically identify the properties of an item who's story might be known, but I think the new system still leaves plenty of opportunity for having the dragon slaying sword located in the dungeon with the dragon.
I think it could be rather fun to have a treasure item that is a sword with clear indicators that it could be a dragon slaying sword, either from visual clues on the weapon itself or hints in the room the treasure is found in. This gives the players the excitement of having a clue what the weapon does without certainty and makes it more fun and rewarding to try it out and learn in combat how effective it is. If all identification defaulted to 1 round, then this kind of "what is it?" uncertainty would pretty much be removed from the game. (...)
What I do when I want to make this effect is that I don't say every effect to my players, or in a blurry way. For exemple, for this dragon slaying sword, I would say "This sword, with runes all along its blade and ornated with a dragon engraved in the pommel, gives off a powerful aura, so complex you can't understand it all. But you sense the magic flowing on the blade, and you feel like you can sense its crafter's hatred for dragons. But you can't point exactly its abilities." Add some poetry to it and voilà.
But I'd keep that kind of blurry description for artifacts or special magic items, so that it would keep its impact, compared to less impressive items your PCs might recognize (like Elven capes, flaming swords, etc etc...)
It's easier to say "you don't succeed" or "it takes more time" 10% of the time, than "it takes less time" 90% of the time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, what if as part of the resonance rework / adding more 'carrot' to reward players, you could spend a point to identify an item up to your level as a single action, resonating with how it works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do you identify magic items "instantly" in PF1 again? It takes 3 rounds for detect magic to even tell you the location of magical auras. It takes another 3 rounds of closely examining the time. You aren't going to be able to do that when the dragon surprises you. It is completely impractical to do in combat. I'm sure there are some spells that let you do it quicker, and probably some feats and such too, but I don't think people meant expending limited resources. And all that assumes you succeed on the spellcraft check-- DC 15+caster level can be really hard at low levels.
As for it taking an hour not being "interesting," I'm not sure what you folks think that hour should be spent on instead. Combats don't take hours; the average encounter doesn't take 30 seconds. Exploring small dungeons doesn't take hours-- walking between rooms doesn't take that long. The most common thing I can think of that actually uses up this time is travel, but you can travel only 8 hours out of the day and the assumption is that the rest of the time involves you stopping to rest or eat meals and such anyway, so you should be able to just do that over lunch.
There's the occasional obstacle or puzzle that consumes hours, like clearing the rubble from a doorway or deciphering a really large set of notes. That doesn't strike me as especially more fun than identifying magic items. There's also stuff like "spend most of the day observing guard movements before we enter the camp" but that usually just involves one member of the party sneaking anyway, and your wizard is just twiddling their thumbs at that point. I guess there was taking 20 on searching every room?
It seems like the big problem is that it doesn't guarantee the party can immediately use cool items they find if there's a chance you'll be attacked or have a time crunch. I think if there is a risk of actively being attacked you probably didn't want to hang out for six rounds anyway, and waited to move to a place where you would be safe for an hour anyway. Time crunches of course another problem, but adventures rarely put you in situations where you can't take an hour. I think if you don't like ID'ing magic items taking time, you might as well remove those rules entirely. Which it sounds like some folks have basically done already, since lots of folks here seem to think it was done in one action in PF1. Just tell players what dem items do. Nothing wrong with that. I stopped using appraise a long time ago for similar reasons.
For myself, I don't mind that it takes a little longer to ID an item. It helps to make items feel a little more wondrous and a little less of a cheap commodity. I could dig if it was easier to figure out which items were magic and which aren't a little easier. But I'd really rather they leaned a little further into "pause things for an hour." I'd like them to add a first aid action you can take repeatedly that takes a similar length of time, or a one hour healing ritual as referenced up thread. Taking an hour in game doesn't take 30 seconds of real life time, and it makes the day actually feel like a day.
(I also think potions being labeled is rather reasonable, haha.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you identify magic items "instantly" in PF1 again? It takes 3 rounds for detect magic to even tell you the location of magical auras. It takes another 3 rounds of closely examining the time. You aren't going to be able to do that when the dragon surprises you. It is completely impractical to do in combat.
Well, most of the time my players identify items out of combat, so I don't count rounds (18 seconds is low enough). But they never try it in combat because of the 3 rounds for detect magic. So what's the point in making it 1 hour/10 minutes with a feat, if you can't already do it during combat (the only moment I think it would be too powerful) ?
As for it taking an hour not being "interesting," I'm not sure what you folks think that hour should be spent on instead. Combats don't take hours; the average encounter doesn't take 30 seconds. Exploring small dungeons doesn't take hours-- walking between rooms doesn't take that long. The most common thing I can think of that actually uses up this time is travel, but you can travel only 8 hours out of the day and the assumption is that the rest of the time involves you stopping to rest or eat meals and such anyway, so you should be able to just do that over lunch.
There's the occasional obstacle or puzzle that consumes hours, like clearing the rubble from a doorway or deciphering a really large set of notes. That doesn't strike me as especially more fun than identifying magic items. There's also stuff like "spend most of the day observing guard movements before we enter the camp" but that usually just involves one member of the party sneaking anyway, and your wizard is just twiddling their thumbs at that point. I guess there was taking 20 on searching every room?
I find it more interesting to observe guard movement than to identify magic items. At least you can start making out plans with the guards' movement pattern and it make fun discussions around the table.
Last Saturday, I played a game where 3/4th of the adventure was exploration, with nice descriptions and a bunch of reflexion on how we couuld manage to continue our travel. It was pretty fun. But something that made puzzles fun was that it wasn't just throwing a dice and be done with it : our GM actually made a map for the puzzle and let us think about it, with only throwing dices when we had to do physicial prowess (like making a long jump).
I think if there is a risk of actively being attacked you probably didn't want to hang out for six rounds anyway, and waited to move to a place where you would be safe for an hour anyway. Time crunches of course another problem, but adventures rarely put you in situations where you can't take an hour.
I strongly disagree.
While just wasting less than a minute is quick enough to think you have time to do so after clearing a room, unless you are being chased.
On the "potion being labeled", did you think about the situation when it is labeled... in a language you don't know ? =P
Just drink the potion and hope it is not poison :)
Did it last game. My warrior nearly lost an arm due to a fulgurant necrosis triggered by the potion :(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I assume the 10 minute time is to ensure that everyone's spells end, and that your quick repair guy can repair one of the party's shields. It's an item maintenance short rest that they probably expect after most encounters.
How do you identify magic items "instantly" in PF1 again?
Occultists?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did it last game. My warrior nearly lost an arm due to a fulgurant necrosis triggered by the potion :(
Did you have my old DM? Because that happened to our half-orc fighter in one of his games.
|
|
YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem.It could be a damage output or damage avoidance problem instead, couldn't it?
Sure. If they totally changed the way that combat worked then the healing problem might well be solved. It would have the moderately minor effect of changing several cleric options from incredibly valuable to being traps but that IS minor. Clerics would no longer be healbots, they'd be able to use their domain powers, etc.
But it seems pretty darn unlikely to me that there is any plan to change things to THAT extent. From what I've seen the combat system is working fairly well (at least at low levels). Characters are being more or less challenged to the right amount, people seem to find it enjoyable, it is basically working (can use some tweaks but tweaks they are).
They'd only go there if they REALLY had to if for no other reason than it would invalidate most of their current survey data.
Modifying healing seems a rather more likely (and IMO better) solution
Almarane: that's a good post and one I intend to respond to when I have time. For now:
YES, THERE IS A HEALING problem.It could be a damage output or damage avoidance problem instead, couldn't it?
Sure. If they totally changed the way that combat worked then the healing problem might well be solved. It would have the moderately minor effect of changing several cleric options from incredibly valuable to being traps but that IS minor. Clerics would no longer be healbots, they'd be able to use their domain powers, etc.
But it seems pretty darn unlikely to me that there is any plan to change things to THAT extent. From what I've seen the combat system is working fairly well (at least at low levels). Characters are being more or less challenged to the right amount, people seem to find it enjoyable, it is basically working (can use some tweaks but tweaks they are).
They'd only go there if they REALLY had to if for no other reason than it would invalidate most of their current survey data.
Modifying healing seems a rather more likely (and IMO better) solution
To be fair, we also now they are looking at the possibility of the monsters being overtuned. IIRC Jason used very similar language to how they currently are treating healing, and lowering DPR might also lower the healing needs.
The other thing to keep in mind is a point Jason reiterated several times. The playtest is designed to push the game to the breaking point. The game is currently harder than they think adventures should be because pushing it to that point and then seeing when it actually breaks yields really valuable data.
Did it last game. My warrior nearly lost an arm due to a fulgurant necrosis triggered by the potion :(
Great stuff, thus the fun of random potion drinking.
|
Why is "identifying magic items" fun or interesting? Like half the time I don't bother with it in PF1, instead choosing to just tell people about their new toys.
I tend to drop a lot of custom and cursed items for my PCs. This makes finding items significantly more exciting than buying the "optimal option" from Ultimate Equipment because they can find some unique and powerful weapon properties. That is traded off with the risk of the item being cursed, though sometimes the curse is rather minor and worth the tradeoff.
Finding and IDing items can be a great source of fun. If you're a GM, I highly recommend spicing up the often mundane or tedious aspects of adventuring (overland travel, IDing items, learning spells, etc.). Rather than getting rid of these "time/energy suck" activities, you can transform them into activities the PCs actually look forward to participating in from a RP perspective.
Well in the scenario of there being a time limit on you completing a mission, it can be "fun" to have iding items take an hour.
The party finds a potion on the dead body of the second in command goblin. If we wait an hour to ID it then we will certainly be found out and the Chieftan will be ready. So you could wait til after the goblin fortress is cleared out, or you could take your chances and spend an hour IDing it, or hell let's just drink it now and rush in what's the worst that can happen?
It still takes the same amount of time out of game to ID it so what really is everyone's problem with it? it's still one roll.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Modifying healing is the easier and more likely solution, I agree. I'd be pleased if they were looking at more complicated solutions as well though, otherwise the end game will just be a pile of bandaids. If it just needs a bandaid, then healing tweeks work of course.
I believe I saw somewhere that they felt combat was insufficiently deadly. If they think there's a healing problem, and that combat is insufficiently deadly, I'd expect to see lower player health pools or higher damage output combined with increased mitigation from AC/TAC or increased absorption via active shields. It's possible that clerics currently permit a toe-to-toe combat style that they didn't intend.
I'm speculating of course. How commonly are people standing and fighting in most games?
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Hurka : Sure, I agree. But I'd still keep the "mystery" around artifacts or special items, so that the mystery doesn't feel old after a while. I don't see the intereset of failing ID attempts on healing potions and Elven capes.
Another problem that I haven't seen pointed out : with items not being ID'ed, the GM needs to keep track of who has which item. Here are two examples (the second one really happened in my PF1 games) of this issue :
PC : I drink my potion.
GM : Okay. What does it do ?
PC : I don't know. Tell me. I did not ID it.
GM : Uh, okay... Where did you find it ?
PC : Uh... I dunno... I think it was on the werewolf chief...
GM : Let me check it out in my notes... *searches through notes for several minutes* Uh, that's weird, he did not have a potion.
PC : Hmm... Maybe the merefolk from one scenario earlier ?
*After several rounds of combat...*
PC : I attack the dragon !
*rolls rolls*
PC : I deal it 5 damages !
GM : Okay ! Hum... *thinks about how to narrate the dragon's death* What weapon are you using currently ?
PC : The sword the old man gave us.
GM : ... Wait. The one with a dragon on its hilt ?
PC : Yeah, why ?
GM : Uuuh... That's a dragon bane sword. The dragon should be dead five turns ago !!!
PC2 : *holding his dead character's sheat in his hand* You mean I shouldn't have taken the damages from its fire breath last turn !?
GM : ... :S
I already have problems remembering which PC uses which type of weapon...