Everything just feels very, Attack! Attack! Attack!


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think for right now they've made thing feel way too generic between the classes with Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk just kind of all looking like different flavors of hit that thing really, really hard. And yes I know that's kind of the point of melee classes but it just feels like limiting the combat feats by class has removed an element of zany fun and locked things into very ridged rolls.

The game also looks very Rocket Tag to me now.
I like what they did with spells though I'm already missing snowball just for nostalgic reasons if nothing else. But at the same time everything just seems high damage, low utility. The idea of making one spell scale with level is nice but kind of gimps the spontaneous casters for really no good reason. They should have just taken the psychic's under cast / over cast idea and made that the standard instead of making it a build playstyle.

Also are AC tanks just not a thing now?
I was going over Fighter and Champion on the web and outside the very strange thing they are doing with shields I don't see anything that really boosts your AC. No Combat Expertise, no doge, no armor focus, no shield focus, no mobile bulwark style (yes I know that came after the core but still).


I thought shields boosted your AC and let you block

Also all the feats you mention are arguably “taxes” because AC does not scale in the main game. To take dodge, shield focus and armour focus you need have several levels even as a fighter . A non fighter needs 5 to get +3 AC. Now everyone gets +5 AC at level 5

I guess this is partially countered by everything getting full BAB

I haven’t crunched the numbers but AC boosts I think are considered really powerful like attack boosts

*

And what did you miss about snowball? And standard evocation ranged touch did d6 per level cold damage up to 5d6? Aren’t there loads of spells that do that kind of thing now ?


The combat fears moved to Athletics.


Voss wrote:
The combat fears moved to Athletics.

Hopefully it works out better than it does in 5th Ed.


Baby Samurai wrote:
Voss wrote:
The combat fears moved to Athletics.
Hopefully it works out better than it does in 5th Ed.

They seem to be skill checks vs. 10+one of the monster's saves, so hopefully you don't run into the uselessness of combat maneuvers in 5e.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemist 23 wrote:

I think for right now they've made thing feel way too generic between the classes with Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk just kind of all looking like different flavors of hit that thing really, really hard. And yes I know that's kind of the point of melee classes but it just feels like limiting the combat feats by class has removed an element of zany fun and locked things into very ridged rolls.

The game also looks very Rocket Tag to me now.
I like what they did with spells though I'm already missing snowball just for nostalgic reasons if nothing else. But at the same time everything just seems high damage, low utility. The idea of making one spell scale with level is nice but kind of gimps the spontaneous casters for really no good reason. They should have just taken the psychic's under cast / over cast idea and made that the standard instead of making it a build playstyle.

Also are AC tanks just not a thing now?
I was going over Fighter and Champion on the web and outside the very strange thing they are doing with shields I don't see anything that really boosts your AC. No Combat Expertise, no doge, no armor focus, no shield focus, no mobile bulwark style (yes I know that came after the core but still).

As you say, melee classes are all about hitting things. Maybe you're looking for something like the Book of 9 Swords? The danger then becomes melee being too similar to magic. I, personally, wouldn't mind the option, though. As for class locking feats, they'd feel even more the same if everyone had access to the same feat pool.

Monk with crane style and shield has pretty high AC, as does anyone with expert armor. Anyone could take this style by level 4 wth multiclassing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemist 23 wrote:

I like what they did with spells though I'm already missing snowball just for nostalgic reasons if nothing else.

Worry not! The snowball spell comes with the Lost Omens World Guide as announced in the Saga Lands blog.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I really don't get what you're talking about. Even just looking at the Fighter I see a ton of combat feats that apply debuffs - I'd say Fighters are much better at doing things other than outright damage in PF2 than they were in PF1, especially if comparing Core v Core.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not to mention feinting and demoralizing being good actions to take instead of a waste of a turn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not sure where this comment is from martials all playoff the same. Barbarian and Fighter (as well as a bunch of other strength based martials) were all kinda the same. Did you want to power attack or cleave or vital strike? Did you want to mix things up and take the same demoralize builds that use the same feats? Yes I agree with you that each martial now has their own flavor and roll, but that is to prevent the PF1 issue of all martials basically playing the same. The only difference between PF1 martials was flavor and where they got their mechanical boost from, in combat they all played the same.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Saw the title of this thread and seriously wondered if this was someone playing the same game as me. XD
PF2 is anything BUT just attacking. Buffs, debuffs, positioning, etc. are SO important, just attacking mindlessly is asking to get yourself killed. Not to mention that Martials finally get interesting things to do instead of Power Attack all day! As someone said, loads of debuff and positioning Fighter feats, and other classes get cool tricks too.

And rocket tag really isn't much of a thing, at least in the Playtest it wasn't and I don't think that's changed much. Creatures and characters generally speaking can take more hits than in PF1, and often by some distance. Instant encounter enders are relegated to critical fails on saves, and doing nothing but throwing out basic attacks as much as possible is a terrible idea (except for Flurry Edge Rangers and Multishot Paragon Fighters, maybe one or two other builds) where in PF1 it was thoroughly optimal.


Using the Unchained RAE (ditching full attacks)/3 Actions economy and not everyone and their mother having AoO does wonders for curtailing the stand and whack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Alchemist 23 wrote:

I think for right now they've made thing feel way too generic between the classes with Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk just kind of all looking like different flavors of hit that thing really, really hard. And yes I know that's kind of the point of melee classes but it just feels like limiting the combat feats by class has removed an element of zany fun and locked things into very ridged rolls.

The game also looks very Rocket Tag to me now.

... What is your point of reference here? Because I certainly don't see how it can be PF1 if you feel like the game has become more rocket tag or samey attack attack attack.

Quote:
I like what they did with spells though I'm already missing snowball just for nostalgic reasons if nothing else. But at the same time everything just seems high damage, low utility. The idea of making one spell scale with level is nice but kind of gimps the spontaneous casters for really no good reason. They should have just taken the psychic's under cast / over cast idea and made that the standard instead of making it a build playstyle.

Invisibility still makes you invisible and fly still lets you fly. Utility is alive and well.

Quote:

Also are AC tanks just not a thing now?

I was going over Fighter and Champion on the web and outside the very strange thing they are doing with shields I don't see anything that really boosts your AC. No Combat Expertise, no doge, no armor focus, no shield focus, no mobile bulwark style (yes I know that came after the core but still).

AC tanking is built into heavy armor giving you higher AC at no real penalty (assuming you have high strength) and classes like the Champion getting enhanced AC proficiency progression.


Captain Morgan wrote:


... What is your point of reference here? Because I certainly don't see how it can be PF1 if you feel like the game has become more rocket tag or samey attack attack attack.

They sound kind of like a 4e player. If they're used to every class having their own set of powers it might feel jarring to switch to a game where 'just attacking' is a relevant and significant part of how you spend your action economy. Just be glad they never had to run into PF1 I guess where full attacking was literally the go to option for everyone who wasn't casting spells.

Even that aside most classes have a pretty decent number of extra things they can do via feat investment.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Everything just feels very, Attack! Attack! Attack! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.