Sorry to be off topic, but it would be better if we could get past the personal suppositions and focus on the game itself I think.
I'd rather this thread not get locked down because I've read many good points, some of which I even disagree with, that have helped me focus my thoughts on this game.
Realistically I think it is to late for that. I may have to copy paste my opinions on the clone thread that is surely to come later.
See I just don't understand. I actually really like the druid changes. I don't know what you could possibly be complaining about. There is some wild shape things that need to be rounded out but over all I really like it.
Nerfing is only important in regards to the internal consistency of the system. If the problem is the numbers just aren't as high that really doesn't matter as long as the monster numbers are reducded as well. at that point what once was a +44 being just a +23 doesn't have any flavor differences its just a number.
Now if your complaint is that spell casters are no longer over powered to the point where they make everything else trivial then that is something I can understand but I am against. If you want spells to trivialize the game then that is irreconcilable in my book.
Just about every single change to the Druid is what I don't like. Wildshape is probably the single worst change as it affects not only combat but role playing- even the existential feel of the class. It's rather pointless out of combat and chokes some of the soul of what was a really complicated, rich class.
If you want to reduce this to a debate about power gaming and magic, I decline that invitation. It's not about numbers; it's not about being able to sizzle monsters or make the fighter feel bad. It's about vaporizing the class features of the Druid.
In response to Epic fail.
I think you messed the quote up a bit.
So its not about numbers. that good. So let me see If I can help clarify your complaints because they are still to vague to do anything with. So can I assume your wild shape complaint is about the duration of the spell? sp class features then so like the poison resistance and fey magic resistance ones? and the walk with no trail one that copied the spell pass with no trace?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For clarity, the changes that PF2 has made, the overall ideas behind them, have alienated my group. Not playtesting as such; not working with an incomplete project.
There's a mindset to nerf class abilities and magic in general that take out flavor and fun in the game. I'm sorry if that's not specific enough, and I'm working to make my thoughts clearer. But I look at what they did to the Druid in particular with horror. The same goes for the other spell casting classes that I haven't studied as closely. I just don't see, barring a severe change of heart, without throwing out the guiding principles that led to the changes, how they could be re-worked so that I'd ever want to play PF2.
Basically this. There is no way I can love the game that nerfs magic so hard and at the same time stiffles optimization/system mastery too. The "cherrypicking your power level" quote from Jason basically sealed the deal for me. I like character building game for 3.x/PF...PF2 doesn't come close to scratching that itch, because the sameness of the options is clearly visible. There are good parts, there are genius ideas here but the goal Paizo is going for is not for me, or most of my friends. There is hope that the game will be something tolerable, something that will be possible to fall back on when not playing PF1, but frankly as it now stands I'd rather play some non d20 RPG (I certainly wouldn't play 5e).
Basically this. There is no way I can love the game that nerfs magic so hard and at the same time stiffles optimization/system mastery too. The "cherrypicking your power level" quote from Jason basically sealed the deal for me. I like character building game for 3.x/PF...PF2 doesn't come close to scratching that itch, because the sameness of the options is clearly visible. There are good parts, there are genius ideas here but the goal Paizo is going for is not for me, or most of my friends. There is hope that the game will be something tolerable, something that will be possible to fall back on when not playing PF1, but frankly as it now stands I'd rather play some non d20 RPG (I certainly wouldn't play 5e).For clarity, the changes that PF2 has made, the overall ideas behind them, have alienated my group. Not playtesting as such; not working with an incomplete project.
There's a mindset to nerf class abilities and magic in general that take out flavor and fun in the game. I'm sorry if that's not specific enough, and I'm working to make my thoughts clearer. But I look at what they did to the Druid in particular with horror. The same goes for the other spell casting classes that I haven't studied as closely. I just don't see, barring a severe change of heart, without throwing out the guiding principles that led to the changes, how they could be re-worked so that I'd ever want to play PF2.
See this is the frustration I still don't know what the actual problem is.
Do you just not like that spells are suppose to no longer replace skills? is it that you think you should still one shot encounters with damaging spells? Its not the readers job to decipher what your saying its your job as the writer that is if you want to make yourself heard.
If you don't think there is any chance of them fixing it then why are you still here at all? obviously you have some glimmer of hope that it will turn out how you want it, OR your just doing that lame internet thing where you want to make a big giant show or your leaving and have try to stir up drama. (that thing you see facebook people do every day)
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm quite sure Paizo was aware that there's a % of playerbase who enjoy the PF1's power paradigm who won't switch over. I'd guesstimate that being around 20% of the existing base. The question of "how many people won't switch over" is the basic question of every edition change (one that WotC got right with 3e/5e and bad with 4e).
Unfortunately the "let people twink out and reward their system mastery" design goal is pretty much incompatible with "make the game approachable for people who don't do system mastery" goal, as much as I'd love for that to be otherwise.
But just like PF1 is not a game for everyone, neither will PF2 be.
