I kinda like that, actually.
Out of scope for PF2e, obviously, but not bad.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Adding +1/level to untrained ... Hmm, I think I should phrase this better...
Making it so that characters with no training in a skill still have a marginal chance of success at a level appropriate challenge is so that the content creators can add challenges with obscure success conditions without worrying too much about preventing the players from completing the scenario.
For example, having a door that requires an occultism check to open. That is fine if you have a Bard in the group, or anyone who has taken training in occultism. But any particular group of players may not have that skill among them. If there was no hope of success without training, then the level 15 group of Cleric, Druid, Fighter, and Arcane Sorcerer that don't have occultism trained among them wouldn't have much hope of succeeding at a DC 33 occultism check. At that point the game would get...
you don't need to give everyone training wheels in every skill to do that that. You just need to change your dice philosophy.
Stop worrying about Success/Fail mechanics and use dice rolls as narrative control. The Call of Cthulhu rpg does this very well.
You have a Locked Door and for the adventure to continue that door has to open. Players make a dice roll, but instead of the roll determining success or fail (because frankly fail means the adventure ends here) the roll is about who controls the narrative of the door opening. Player succeeds he gets to describe how he manages to decipher the sigils and solve the occult puzzle, and how his character is so very clever and awesome. Player fails the roll the DM describes how he clumsily fiddles with the sigils, is blasted with a nightmarish vision of cosmic evil but still manages to get the door open, now trembling in fear he peers into the darkness beyond.
Either way door is open and the adventure continues.
I'd do something like:
Prowess: melee to hit, damage, AC, movement, movement based saves
Endurance: ability frequency, multi-hit penalties, carrying capacity, armor restrictions, health based saves, HP, weapon size
Awareness: Ranged to hit, perception, unskilled checks, reading emotional responses, negotiation and performance, divine magic, saves regarding self control
Focus: Learning and remembering, ignoring distractions, fine motor skills, out of combat skill checks/ taking 10, arcane magic.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cool (Ability to get a single click from the greasers)
Grit (Ability to seem tough even when you're old)
Moxy (Ability to impress even when you're young)
Panache (Ability to swing off chandeliers)
Sass (Ability to make excellent one-liners)
Raditude (Ability to do sick skateboard tricks)
Je ne sais quoi (How nice you look in photos)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cool (Ability to get a single click from the greasers)
Grit (Ability to seem tough even when you're old)
Moxy (Ability to impress even when you're young)
Panache (Ability to swing off chandeliers)
Sass (Ability to make excellent one-liners)
Raditude (Ability to do sick skateboard tricks)
Je ne sais quoi (How nice you look in photos)
I don't think we have ever been in agreement as much as we are at this moment. <3
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Adding +1/level to untrained ... Hmm, I think I should phrase this better...
Making it so that characters with no training in a skill still have a marginal chance of success at a level appropriate challenge is so that the content creators can add challenges with obscure success conditions without worrying too much about preventing the players from completing the scenario.
For example, having a door that requires an occultism check to open. That is fine if you have a Bard in the group, or anyone who has taken training in occultism. But any particular group of players may not have that skill among them. If there was no hope of success without training, then the level 15 group of Cleric, Druid, Fighter, and Arcane Sorcerer that don't have occultism trained among them wouldn't have much hope of succeeding at a DC 33 occultism check. At that point the game would get...
you don't need to give everyone training wheels in every skill to do that that. You just need to change your dice philosophy.
Stop worrying about Success/Fail mechanics and use dice rolls as narrative control. The Call of Cthulhu rpg does this very well.
You have a Locked Door and for the adventure to continue that door has to open. Players make a dice roll, but instead of the roll determining success or fail (because frankly fail means the adventure ends here) the roll is about who controls the narrative of the door opening. Player succeeds he gets to describe how he manages to decipher the sigils and solve the occult puzzle, and how his character is so very clever and awesome. Player fails the roll the DM describes how he clumsily fiddles with the sigils, is blasted with a nightmarish vision of cosmic evil but still manages to get the door open, now trembling in fear he peers into the darkness beyond.
Either way door is open and the adventure continues.
Hmmm... I'm stealing that from CoC from now on.
And I think PF2e should have that in place of this always minimum 50% success "tight" math set up. I really don't like it. It's lame.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
~sigh~ It's nowhere near always 50%...
~adds tally mark to nearby wall~
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The narrative control thing is pretty interesting, and far preferable to the more or less random system we have now and its encouragement of waiting on successes. It does mean ceding some amount of narrative control to players, which would be a non-starter for pre-written campaigns and stories iterated on over time. I've done this a little with a home game, but going all in on the topic could be fun. Some of my players don't have good enough memory to ensure internal consistency of narrative declarations on success though, it could be rough.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Firstly, let's clarify that as "feats that don't just involve inflating numbers", which is closer to what I said. Because feats that just inflate numbers is how you get optimization creep.
Then, to give a few of my favorite feats from the playtest as examples: Catfall; the rogue feat that lets you sneak through walls; the barbarian feat that lets you breathe fire; the barbarian feat that lets you fly while raging; the monk feat that lets you walk across water.
None of these feats push the envelope as far as the power level of a character of that level. However, they are all really cool. They are things that a player is going to get excited about being able to do, and they let a player expand or refine their character concept.
No one really gets excited, comparatively, about getting a +1 bonus to attack rolls, even if it is mechanically the superior option. Equally, no one is likely to get very excited about getting a small amount of elemental resistance that sucks slightly less if you happen to be fighting a dragon.
This, very much! The main flaw of PF2 is the lack of a sense of wonder. Skill feats and magic is where the sense of wonder should manifest.
For example, I hate that all transmutation powers only last a minute. This is completely mood-killing. Its possible to houserule, but then the issue of wat other things should be houseruled for balance comes up. I'd prefer a system that works out of the box. If I have to houserule things too much, I might as well just play my homebrew.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me the biggest issue is how boxed up everything is. The Core systems I think are great, it's the effort to carefully confine and control the sort of character people make that is getting to me.
My ideal change would be to get rid of that.
You get Feats
You can select feats from the lists you have unlocked by your choice of Ancestry, Class, Background, Archetype and Skills plus the General ones.
You also get some bonus feats depending on your class.
Pick the Feats you want, nobody will tell you what you have to take.
If you want to stack up on Ancestry feats you can
If you want to get lots of skill feats that's your choice
None of this; you get 2 of these, 3 of these and 1 of these.
That and prerequisites for the more powerful feats instead of level gating. F'K I hate level gating. Seriously a Feat chain of prerequisites gives the impression of learning and improving. Level Gating is like getting your ID checked at the bar.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
While there is merit to progression, I really hate the feat taxes that were prevalent in 1e.
I think that is why so many people have mentioned how Catfall as a great model for all skill feats.
I'd rather have feats that are available as early as possible and get have improvements based on level progression; even if it means getting a few less feats over all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...even if it means getting a few less feats over all.
That would be a plus in my book. Fewer feats that scale better would be very welcome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mostly me. (not that others haven't mentioned catfall a lot I just mention it constantly. )
Pick the Feats you want, nobody will tell you what you have to take.If you want to stack up on Ancestry feats you can
If you want to get lots of skill feats that's your choiceNone of this; you get 2 of these, 3 of these and 1 of these.
So what you're saying is no one's going to touch ancestry or skill feats.
That and prerequisites for the more powerful feats instead of level gating. F'K I hate level gating. Seriously a Feat chain of prerequisites gives the impression of learning and improving. Level Gating is like getting your ID checked at the bar.
You actually liked Combat Expertise?
You actually liked Combat Expertise?
No Combat Expertise and Power Attack should be default combat options and not feats at all.
but I liked Combat Expertise better when Stamina combat came out and Fighters could get it without having to be smart.
and if one set of options is deliberately weaker than another, which should be the better solution
Raising up the weak options to be on par with the better ones
or forcing everyone to take some of the weak options just because it full fills some check list of a "Balanced Character"
Cause honestly that's what some of these feel like right now. "These options are crap, but we are forcing you to take some of them anyway."
Mostly me. (not that others haven't mentioned catfall a lot I just mention it constantly. )Okay.
What you haven't seen my All skill feats should work like catfall post yet? I'm sure I've put it in at least 12 places. (13 now.)