| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
for a long time, I have been dissatisfied with most magic items in pf2e, and after a long time looking at it, I think I have finally been able to put my finger on why; It's the near ubiquity of once-per-day restrictions on activated abilities, which means that you cannot in most cases actively augment your playstyle with magic item's active abilities because you will quickly use them all up if they become a regular combat option.
From my understanding, the cause of this is the last-minute extraction of resonance, a character resource that existed in the playtest based on charisma that was spent to activate magic items, and when it was cut out, all the items that had previously required resonance where defaulted to one use per day.
I'm unsure how to go about fixing this, as I know for a fact that unlimited usage of magic items is just an invitation to break things somewhere. My tentative thought is to create a ten-minute action that functions similarly to refocus to allow a player to regain an item use once per hour, though at the moment it is still pretty vague and undefined.
To be honest, I think it's intentional.
There are some effects, that if you can use them once per combat are going to really change the game.
Goz Mask for example. If you introduce a mechanic that allows you to refocus it after 10 minutes then you can pretty much count on having it 90%+ of combats. Which means now your whole party buys 1 and use Obscuring Mist. The flat 25% chance to miss by the enemy that the whole party ignores would completely change the game dynamic.
In short, there isn't an easy way to introduce the kind of change you want.
I think the best thing to do is simply to allow for higher level, more expensive versions of certain items to have more uses per day. But we don't have guidance on how to adjust the pricing for such things.
If an item doesn't have the invested trait, you could simply buy multiples of them. But the invested trait will stop you from switching between multiple Goz mask.
That said, a party of fighters, investigators, rogues, and rangers with the Blindfight feat and a few horns of Fog (one per party member) should be a force to be reckoned with because they ignore concealed.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could probably just reintroduce Resonance. You could also make it only apply to activating items instead of investing them.
|
To be honest, I think it's intentional.
There are some effects, that if you can use them once per combat are going to really change the game.
Goz Mask for example. If you introduce a mechanic that allows you to refocus it after 10 minutes then you can pretty much count on having it 90%+ of combats. Which means now your whole party buys 1 and use Obscuring Mist. The flat 25% chance to miss by the enemy that the whole party ignores would completely change the game dynamic.
In short, there isn't an easy way to introduce the kind of change you want.
I think the best thing to do is simply to allow for higher level, more expensive versions of certain items to have more uses per day. But we don't have guidance on how to adjust the pricing for such things.
If an item doesn't have the invested trait, you could simply buy multiples of them. But the invested trait will stop you from switching between multiple Goz mask.
Actually, you can Invest another Goz mask after using the first one.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Usually people dislike the fixed DCs and lack of good custom item creation rules, this is a new angle and I'm here for it.
Actually, you can Invest another Goz mask after using the first one.To be honest, I think it's intentional.
There are some effects, that if you can use them once per combat are going to really change the game.
Goz Mask for example. If you introduce a mechanic that allows you to refocus it after 10 minutes then you can pretty much count on having it 90%+ of combats. Which means now your whole party buys 1 and use Obscuring Mist. The flat 25% chance to miss by the enemy that the whole party ignores would completely change the game dynamic.
In short, there isn't an easy way to introduce the kind of change you want.
I think the best thing to do is simply to allow for higher level, more expensive versions of certain items to have more uses per day. But we don't have guidance on how to adjust the pricing for such things.
If an item doesn't have the invested trait, you could simply buy multiples of them. But the invested trait will stop you from switching between multiple Goz mask.
I suppose if you leave open investment slots, then you could buy multiple and invest in each as you go through the day. I forgot about that.
And actually that applies to any item with investment.
So...yeah. That's probably not good actually. Like if a whole party buys 4 Goz masks each, that's probably enough for most days of combat. And still leaves you with 6 items you can fill out the rest of your investiture with. I'd really have to look closely at if you can get what you need with only 6 items, but this could be problematic even by base rules.
This makes me question why we don't see this as a more common strategy whether it be Goz mask, Blindfight, or Cat's Eye elixir and Obscuring Mist via spell, wand, or Horn of Fog.
Most enemies aren't going to be prepared to deal with it.
Dispel magic might be the most common way (wind affects would work better) but dispel could be overcome by using another item to cast obscuring Mist again.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
This makes me question why we don't see this as a more common strategy whether it be Goz mask, Blindfight, or Cat's Eye elixir and Obscuring Mist via spell, wand, or Horn of Fog.
Most enemies aren't going to be prepared to deal with it.
Dispel magic might be the most common way (wind affects would work better) but dispel could be overcome by using another item to cast obscuring Mist again.
because despite all the internet people indicating otherwise most players are not actively trying to break the game
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Concealment is significant, but the fog spells just aren't as encounter breaking as they used to be. Mist Form elixirs would accomplish something similar. And it has real costs both for gold and actions.
Still, I feel like my fighter is going to have Horn of Fog and blindsight feat for boss fights that start to go side ways
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This makes me question why we don't see this as a more common strategy whether it be Goz mask, Blindfight, or Cat's Eye elixir and Obscuring Mist via spell, wand, or Horn of Fog.
Most enemies aren't going to be prepared to deal with it.
Dispel magic might be the most common way (wind affects would work better) but dispel could be overcome by using another item to cast obscuring Mist again.
As someone who rolled in a party where the fighter and ranger both had blindfight, and others had similar options, I can confirm that your fog scrimmage tactic totally makes things easier the vast majority of the time.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Magic items in PF2 aren't super interesting. Mostly there to extend casting or toss in some rarely used effect.
I'm glad the magic item Christmas tree is gone, but PF2 did a fairly boring job on magic items. My players barely remember them other than to pick up the standard needed items like striking weapons and armor.
About the only popular items have been the cloak and boots of elvenkind which allow you to turn invisible.
I've taken to making magic items up to make them more interesting. I don't think a single player in my group likes PF2 magical items.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do agree that I feel like there are a lot less standout items in PF2 than in PF1.
If you use Automatic Bonus Progression it becomes really hard to find anything you're interested in. And you're only interested in those items because they're the required math enhancers in a normal game.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Very much a problem I have as well, at least as far as permanent specific items are concerned. A lot of them have great flavour, but when you get down to how they actually affect your character, they really... don't. Not much beyond boring math enhancers, anyway and we have ABP for those. Not only the (fixable) frequency is problematic, but also how little they actually do.
Just take the new Avalanche Boots, a level 17 (!) apex item. Beyond the math, they allow you to Shove someone slightly further once per hour. At that level, my character could smash in a castle gate with his bare hands, fly and literally walk on water. My sword hit harder than an artillery shell. One level later, he turned into a literal divine servitor. I'm sorry, but how am I supposed to get excited about loot like that?
There are quite a few exceptions or even categories of exceptions. Staves are great, because they actually affect how you play your character and consistently do so. Same with Spellhearts or even mundane things like customizations. Not everything has to involve large, sweeping changes like a star gun. Even more subtler ones like the new Thrower's Bandolier are awesome, because they actually influence my character.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the more disappointing aspects of some items are:
1) Short durations
2) Limited uses
3) Low DCs
If we could scale up the DC of items by purchasing higher level versions (some items have this but not all) it would be nice. That's why Staves are nice. Charge them during some downtime and then it acts like a spell battery when you need it most, and it uses your DC instead of a fixed one.
Short durations wouldn't be as punishing if items had more uses.
But buying an item for a one time use per day can feel very underwhelming.
The problem being as noted earlier, certain items/effects can much more easily break the game so it has to be carefully curated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd love to have more access to items that were relatively small effects but more frequently usable - stuff that gave little at-will or per-refocus effects, and required investment.
That said, I'd love to have them because my CharOp bits long to exploit them, and I remember them fondly as small but important parts of various abusive 4e combos. So... I can understand why Paizo is being parsimonious about such things.
You could probably just reintroduce Resonance. You could also make it only apply to activating items instead of investing them.
This, i always thought the main issue with resonance was the congitive dissonance to have it be applied to consumables like scrolls and potions.
If they had removed that and not thrown the whole system out I feel like it would have likely been more accepted.The other issue is bonuses and DCs, but with limited uses per day this is much easier to solve by letting them all be scaling with your level, simply removing the items level from its current DC or bonus and appending it with the line + your level would be a simple solution.
You could probably just reintroduce Resonance. You could also make it only apply to activating items instead of investing them.This, i always thought the main issue with resonance was the congitive dissonance to have it be applied to consumables like scrolls and potions.
If they had removed that and not thrown the whole system out I feel like it would have likely been more accepted.The other issue is bonuses and DCs, but with limited uses per day this is much easier to solve by letting them all be scaling with your level, simply removing the items level from its current DC or bonus and appending it with the line + your level would be a simple solution.
The problem there is that they explicitly *want* these things to go obsolete. They don't want a level 15 character to have a level 6 item that gives them a meaningful improvement to their combat ability - if there was such a thing, the price would make it too much of a must-have. The idea of these things is that you get them and enjoy them and then let them go and find something else.
Now, I mean, I'd like to be able to build a character entirely around the tentacle gun too, but I do understand where they're coming from on this one.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem there is that they explicitly *want* these things to go obsolete. They don't want a level 15 character to have a level 6 item that gives them a meaningful improvement to their combat ability - if there was such a thing, the price would make it too much of a must-have. The idea of these things is that you get them and enjoy them and then let them go and find something else.
Now, I mean, I'd like to be able to build a character entirely around the tentacle gun too, but I do understand where they're coming from on this one.
But that only specifically happens with items with DCs. Items that give buffs are useful 1-20. Items that give special actions based on your own abilities are useful 1-20. Or just special actions that don't use DCs in general. Wands are useful 1-20. Why is it fine for all of these items to be evergreen, but as soon as a DC is involved, it has to become bad 2-3 levels after you get it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of great items in PF2 that become common purchases on almost every character because they offer things like speed increases, or the ability to turn a wall into a door when you need it, that are fun and unexpected.
One weird consequence of the number of once a day items, to me, is that it can actually be much more advantageous to spend half as much money on 4 to 12 consumables that do the same thing, because by the time you have used the ability 4 to 12 times, it is no longer a thing you are trying to do multiple times a day anyway. once you have gained a couple of levels, you can go back and buy the much cheaper feeling 1x day item without feeling like you are sacrificing something big. Consumables are a massive power booster in PF2 and can completely flip the script on encounters if you can remember to use them and buy the ones that you actually want to use often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the more disappointing aspects of some items are:
1) Short durations
2) Limited uses
3) Low DCs
I also add situational items.
While we have runes that makes a player to customize and make really useful itens many of the restant of permanent itens fells in one of these situations and becomes forgettable or undesired.
This basically makes the players focus in metas like Sturdy Shields, Staves and sometimes Wands and Spellhearts. Also many consumable itens falls into similar situations, many are situational and to much expensive and looses all attractiveness and all this occupies a good space into the books.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In PF1, I could buy a violent respawning auto-cannibalistic cat construct that takes on my face. I would enjoy a bit more of that energy in PF2.
In PF1, I could buy a violent respawning auto-cannibalistic cat construct that takes on my face. I would enjoy a bit more of that energy in PF2.
Book of Freaks?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally never understood the "magic item tree" complaint. I always saw it as "look at all the cool items I have". Compared to now where its "look at all the cool items I have and will later have to sell to get more". Idk to me it feels like now its even more of a magic item tree where you need to keep chaging its leaves or else it just ugly (outdated).
Also a lot of wasted book space typing the same item 4 times.
The magic item tree looks dumb in the mind's eye. Having to buy a cloak, a ring, a belt, armor, a weapon, and the like to meet the saving throw minimums makes everything look like exactly the same like they're checking boxes.
Some of us want magic items to feel like Sting in Lord of the Rings or Excalibur. Very unique, make you more powerful, and not something everyone else around you is wearing.
You want magic items to feel magical, not common. PF2 has not hit the mark on that, but at least everyone doesn't have to be draped in exactly the same magic items to meet the math of the game other than weapons.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of really fun and flavorful items in PF2, and the fact that many of them are not invested does mean you can reasonably have 2 or 3 of them. Even some of the DC items really are fine as long as they involve having to spend an action to make a check. The law bringer's lasso for example is a great action waster even into higher levels because escape is an attack action so you are stealing an action and giving MAP. Items that make doors where there weren't ones before, horns that make fog once an hour, the rod of wonder, there are tons of really fun items in PF2.
There are also a lot of items that have such specific applications that it can feel like a real bog sorting through them. I think someone making some guides to wonderous items and how parties might be able to use them would probably help GMs and players find things worth spending their resources on.
At the same time. Too much good stuff will lead players to trying to hold on to everything they find and a lot of treasure is meant to be treasure, that just has an interesting story to it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kind of agree. I think there are a handful of things PF2 does right with magic items and better than PF1 (admittedly a low bar).
But when going shopping it's admittedly kind of hard to get excited. There are a handful of not-really-useful kind of cool flavor items, but I think there have only been a handful of times I've found an item that I thought could meaninfully become a core part of a character. The idea mostly just doesn't exist.
Oddly enough, one exception to that recently has been some of the new magic/alchemical ammo in Treasure Vault. There are a couple of options that don't rely on fixed DCs that actually make my archer more fun to play because it gives me a situationally useful bag of tricks beyond striking as a turret.
But between fixed DCs and conservative effects a lot of other items just don't quite make it there.
I'm glad the magic item Christmas tree is gone
Even that's only barely. We've gone from "big six" to four runes... plus miscellaneous gear for item bonuses to skills. Maximally upgraded weapons are more important than they've ever been for martials too.
The magic item tree looks dumb in the mind's eye. Having to buy a cloak, a ring, a belt, armor, a weapon, and the like to meet the saving throw minimums makes everything look like exactly the same like they're checking boxes.
Not only is it mathematically kind of boring, but there's also a flavor perspective that chafes some players. Kind of undermines the heroic fantasy when you need a specific checklist of generic magic items to remain competitive. If they were unique items purpose forged for a goal that might be okay (only a sword forged with blah blah blah can slay the demon king), but +5 resistance is hypergeneric.
Of course, PF2 makes that worse with weapon runes but still sucked in PF1.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I would like is to keep the idea of "equipment matters" that was favoured during development; However, instead of rejecting ABP as standard to achieve this, I would favour the exact opposite. Put pretty much all of the math enhancers into a mandatory ABP-type system; Because, while those make equipment matter, they don't do so in a way that is interesting, which imo defeats the point. With that out of the way, items are judged and balanced purely on their other effects.
Not every item can be super powerful, nor should it be. So for that to be reflected, we create a new "tier" of permanent item: "Core items". This category includes major pieces of equipment that can either enhance your playstyle or even change it. This would include weapons, armour, shields, grimoires, staves, weapon-like equipment a la Thrower's Bandoleer and things like that. Their effects would include granting the effects of feats, changing/enhancing feats or even features, and other effects on that level. Another dimension to individualize your character and a way to allow for playstyles, especially niche ones, to come online much quicker, as you don't need to wait for like 3 feats (level 6) to make it function.
Due to their great effect, you should probably be limited in how many of these you can have "active" at the same time and other measures to prevent stacking. Mostly what the investment system is right now, but reserved for more influential items. For other items with more minor effects, like the Messenger's Ring's animal messenger, Resonance or even the existing frequency restrictions would be sufficient. Consumable items are in a decent place, so they don't really need to change.
I'm an amateur at best at this, but I think you get the idea ^^
-
Obviously, this cannot be realized in 2e. So that'd be my wish for 3e, which is hopefully far in the future.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm okay with being a magic item Christmas tree.
Fixed DCs that become obsolete are a problem. On the one hand I see the pros:
- It keeps the pricing balanced. An effect that inflicts -2 on an enemy is just as good 10 levels later, but what was a reasonable price at first is too cheap later. Especially for 1x/day items, you could just buy a barrel full and break the balance.
- Old items getting obsolete opens up space for new items you find. If you already have all the items you want and you're maxed out on invested items, it's hard for the GM to provide exciting loot. If some of the stuff you currently have was looking a bit dated, you're more excited if some new thing drops.
But I think the cons outweigh them a bit;
- You have an item with an effect you really like, but there are big gaps where it's just not high enough DC.
- You feel like you constantly have to change things up just for the sake of keeping up.
I think we'd be better off with a good balanced rule for how much GP it costs to upgrade an item from level X to Y to increase its DCs from level X appropriate to level Y appropriate.
Maybe even introduce "upgrade sticker" runes as a loot type. Just like finding a better fundamental rune on a runestone, find a wondrous item upgrade rune as loot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm okay with being a magic item Christmas tree.
Fixed DCs that become obsolete are a problem. On the one hand I see the pros:
- It keeps the pricing balanced. An effect that inflicts -2 on an enemy is just as good 10 levels later, but what was a reasonable price at first is too cheap later. Especially for 1x/day items, you could just buy a barrel full and break the balance.
- Old items getting obsolete opens up space for new items you find. If you already have all the items you want and you're maxed out on invested items, it's hard for the GM to provide exciting loot. If some of the stuff you currently have was looking a bit dated, you're more excited if some new thing drops.But I think the cons outweigh them a bit;
- You have an item with an effect you really like, but there are big gaps where it's just not high enough DC.
- You feel like you constantly have to change things up just for the sake of keeping up.I think we'd be better off with a good balanced rule for how much GP it costs to upgrade an item from level X to Y to increase its DCs from level X appropriate to level Y appropriate.
Maybe even introduce "upgrade sticker" runes as a loot type. Just like finding a better fundamental rune on a runestone, find a wondrous item upgrade rune as loot.
That's the rub. Many of us are not ok being an magic item Christmas Tree. Makes items very mundane. If everyone in the group has to have a Major Striking weapon, makes a Major Striking weapon seem real common.
PF2 is better than PF1 in that regard, but still not quite there for magic items. It is easier to just make something up unique and run with it since magic items have a pattern and only a few are necessary.
I admit I'm curious to the ramifications of having magical items function off your class DC as opposed to fixed DC.
If nothing else it seems as easy experiment
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, I just want to say, it was a pretty commonly held notion during the playtest that Resonance was a problem specifically because it pit permanent items, item slots, and consumables against each other, but if it was used for just one (or even two) of those things it would have had some promise. Personally, I only cared for it in concept being applied to the use effects of permanent items since it's narratively unsatisfying to be unable to drink a potion when you need to, but spending a resource to juice up a glove of blasting feels totally different.
So I'd be in favor of a reborn Resonance mechanic specifically for giving some more impact to 1/day items and items with a static DC. Tie it to charisma again, as well!
Second, I am very much unsatisfied with the whole concept of "disposable" permanent items. Everyone has stories about collecting magic items at the bottom of the backpack from quests long ago, only to remember them at a critical, tense moment and pulling out the PERFECT solution to a problem. Everyone gets all excited to remember the item, the session where they got it, and how it's been with them this whole time.
Then you see the DC is so low it would be a waste of the actions to retrieve and use it.
I'd love it if there were a way to preserve the classic experience where an old item saves the day. If not with a new Resonance, maybe with a hero point.
I admit I'm curious to the ramifications of having magical items function off your class DC as opposed to fixed DC.
From my whiteroom analysis, it kind of fixes part of the problem of item obsolescence - but not all of it.
And as was mentioned previously, item obsolescence is only partially a problem. There are some good points to it too.
Horn of Fog never becomes obsolete. It is a level 6 item and a level 18 character would be happy to find one laying around somewhere.
Sealing Chest sort of becomes obsolete under either item DC or character's DC. Because the effect is based solely on the item level of the chest. Well, and the item level of the items you are putting in it. But at level 18 having a 4th level Sealing Chest probably isn't any better than any other box.
Level 3 Dawnlight mostly becomes obsolete. You can still get use out of casting Light, I suppose. But a level 18 character isn't going to be using it to counteract Darkness from an enemy spellcaster, or using the +7 spell attack bonus version of Disrupt Undead on level appropriate enemies.
Upgrading to the Level 11 version of Dawnlight is better for that level 18 character, but still not great. The spell attack bonus for Disrupt Undead is at +18, but the character's class DC (converted to a bonus) or spell attack bonus is almost certainly at least 7 points higher than that and probably more.
Using the class DC or spell DC instead of the item's fixed bonuses would mean that the 3rd level version of the item would be plenty if all you want it for was casting Light and Disrupt Undead.
But 4th level Vital Beacon would be really nice even at level 18. So upgrading isn't a complete waste in either case. I think there are some items that don't have things like that. The only difference between the lower level versions and the higher level versions is their item DC. At that point there is no reason to have the higher level version of the item if you are using character's stats for it.
-------
So the big ramification that I see is that in some cases (there are plenty already, but even more if class DC is used) it throws off the wealth by level to have low level items keep their usefulness permanently. A level 18 character could buy hundreds of level 3 permanent items.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As time goes on, I reconsider my previous opinion on Resonance Points. I had thought it was unnecessary for there to be a daily resource (which would have required tracking) for using consumables such as potions. It would have made using items require bookkeeping like spellcasting does, which I always hated. It also reminded me of healing surges in D&D 4E.
Looking back, Resonance could have allowed limited-use magic items to be more functional and relevant than they are now. At least at my tables, players rarely use wands, scrolls, or magic items in combat, and talismans not at all. The magic items they do use are just for healing.
If I could, I would have kept Resonance in the game, but made it so healing items didn't use it, but kept healing items at their current power.
I think the biggest issue, especially with the frequency items get added to the game, is the decision paralysis and mom/maxing power stretching that can happen now when players get higher level and have gold to spend. I kinda wish less items got the common tag and more time was spent in the game mastery guide talking about how to handle magical item access to not overwhelm players with the core rules.
I personally really dislike APB as it was implemented in PF2 and don’t think it fits well into the rest of the game (I think it makes casters worse), but might have preferred it being baked into the game for the sake of making magic items less overwhelming to new players.
At the same time, sometimes newer players make less worse choices with items than min/maxers because they are often willing to keep items given in an adventure, which good GMs will use to help prep the players for what is ahead. But when it comes to start buying stuff, they might just sit on their gold until they can buy the next “core item” when there is a good chance that will be found or become cheap as dirt before the next time gold can be spent. Meanwhile they are a martial who has no extra tricks, because they are just focused on weapon runes, or much, much worse, a caster who is just saving up for a staff currently out of reach, complaining about not having enough spells per day to cast when they could have 20 scrolls on hand and still probably end up according the staff at exactly the same time in the future when they can actually spare the time to go buy it.
There is also the issue of GMs not switching up treasures for their players in published material and then players hoarding items that are really just oddly shaped coins that no one can really use and that can set a party back too, especially if the GM is paying attention to wealth by level and the party has expensive, but ill fitting items for their level.
Addendum:
The Misdirecting Haversack becomes completely obsolete and there is no upgrade. It is a level 6 item like the Horn of Fog, but a level 18 character will find it to be almost completely worthless other than to use against low level non-hostile NPC towsfolk. A level 13 creature with low perception would succeed by rolling a 2.
But isn’t the point of the haversack to fool common folks, not ancient dragons and arch angels? I think some of the hate on flat DCs is only feeding the treadmill that characters are only ever supposed to be interacting with at level encounters and situations. Some flat DCs are good at setting clear points where both the party and the world have moved beyond plateaus from the past.
Flat DCs on the haversack make sense to me. I do think it would be cool if it was easier for crafters to upgrade runes and it could be done a few levels earlier than crafting new ones, but that is a fun thing GMs can decide to do at their own tables.
But isn’t the point of the haversack to fool common folks, not ancient dragons and arch angels?
Possibly. Yes and no depending on the campaign and the scenario at hand.
Trying to sneak in a love letter to an NPC noble past some NPC guards, I could see having the guards be low level enough that it would work even if the characters are much higher level.
Though at that point what is the point of the Haversack? Why not just use Conceal an Object and your own character's skill DC and auto-succeed against the low level guards?
Trying to espionage out some incriminating documents out of a secure BBEG's hideout past their high level door bouncers...
First, I just want to say, it was a pretty commonly held notion during the playtest that Resonance was a problem specifically because it pit permanent items, item slots, and consumables against each other, but if it was used for just one (or even two) of those things it would have had some promise. Personally, I only cared for it in concept being applied to the use effects of permanent items since it's narratively unsatisfying to be unable to drink a potion when you need to, but spending a resource to juice up a glove of blasting feels totally different.
So I'd be in favor of a reborn Resonance mechanic specifically for giving some more impact to 1/day items and items with a static DC. Tie it to charisma again, as well!
Second, I am very much unsatisfied with the whole concept of "disposable" permanent items. Everyone has stories about collecting magic items at the bottom of the backpack from quests long ago, only to remember them at a critical, tense moment and pulling out the PERFECT solution to a problem. Everyone gets all excited to remember the item, the session where they got it, and how it's been with them this whole time.
Then you see the DC is so low it would be a waste of the actions to retrieve and use it.
I'd love it if there were a way to preserve the classic experience where an old item saves the day. If not with a new Resonance, maybe with a hero point.
My final report for the playtest on resonance was pretty similar; my preference was for keeping resonace, but making it solely for activation of permanent magic items, and to the main purpose of magic items to expand your abilities rather than enhance math. This also solves the magic christmas tree issuse since if youve only got, like, say, 1+cha activations; most people will only be keeping a few items at top levels since more likely than not, this will be more effective than cobbling together as many items as possible to get more activations, and you won't even need investment; which, imo, is a very clunky system that forces a number of weird roleplaying issues; such as adventurers being excessively unwilling to doff their gear during day (say, for example, taking off the demon mask to go to a ball) because they'd lack the investment points to get the benefits again if they did
I think everyone is kind of on the same page that math enhancer items are not exciting, but very potent, so my general preference is either axing them completely or tying them to activations
I feel ABP kind of attempts the first, though my experience with the system leaves me with mixed feelings; I dont like how it encourages player to silo everything even more into three skills and ignore everything; under the base rules, its very common to be able to "fake" your way into making skills you have at lower proficiency levels more relevant at higher levels by patching the numbers with items, while in ABP, that simply doesn't happen. Furthermore, ABP doesn't really solve the math enhancers are boring issue since it still doesn't really improve items with effects that remain relevant at broader level ranges and can be used more than once a day. The only thing I do like about ABP is how it encourages my players to pack multiple weapons to cover weakness or to have fallback options (ex. Melee characters packing ranged sidearms and actually using them since it doesn't have one less damage die and item bonus on attack rolls compared to their main weapon, packing multiple damage types to target weaknesses and circumvent resistance, etc)
Tying to activations, in my head, would require math to assume no bonuses, but work kinda like items such as the liar's ring where you get a drastic bonus to a few super important checks since getting numeric bonuses actually can be really exciting when it's active choice to be like "no, the duke definitely believes my lie"; not enough to disrupt game balance, but significant enough to feel like the activation felt notable and interesting
But isn’t the point of the haversack to fool common folks, not ancient dragons and arch angels?Possibly. Yes and no depending on the campaign and the scenario at hand.
Trying to sneak in a love letter to an NPC noble past some NPC guards, I could see having the guards be low level enough that it would work even if the characters are much higher level.
Though at that point what is the point of the Haversack? Why not just use Conceal an Object and your own character's skill DC and auto-succeed against the low level guards?
Trying to espionage out some incriminating documents out of a secure BBEG's hideout past their high level door bouncers...
The description of the haversack itself makes me think it is an item that is mostly sold to Pathfinder Agents and is most useful for mundane subterfuge. If I am GMing, and I have a high level cloak and dagger adventure planned, I probably want my players to be more actively engaged in the whole thing than carrying the right accessory, no matter how well it matches my shoes.
Now, as the GM, if I am running a whole campaign on espionage, I might very likely make a custom version of the bag that is a higher level, with a higher DC, for the party to find after an encounter or two of having difficulty sneaking documents around, but I wouldn't really want my players trying to save up to buy it before those encounters happen.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm thinking you are missing the forest by focusing on this one particular tree.
The Misdirecting Haversack is one concrete example of a type of item. One that has no upgrade options, and has a fixed DC that becomes irrelevant after a few levels.
After those levels, there is no point in having the item any more. The character's own skills (assuming that they have them) will be a better choice than using the item.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand that argument, but I am suggesting that universally scaling DCs on items is a bad idea because it ruins the world building of having some things working at certain levels and not at others. There is only so far that the right item is going to take you in PF2. Often times, there is an upgrade for it, but when there isn't, it usually feels like that was a narrative world building decision and not an arbitrary "none for you" decision to hurt players.
I agree that many of the more encounter focused items can be tricky though, because you really love using your spider beast gun and then...it feels like using that gun gets to be a worse and worse choice, although Beast Guns seem pretty good about offering upgrades at the appropriate level and that is all about preventing there from being items you just buy once and use forever. I am not sure I would have made that design choice myself, although having static DCs as baseline can allow for classes and archetypes to have more cool options they can grant to specialize in those items.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is only so far that the right item is going to take you in PF2. Often times, there is an upgrade for it, but when there isn't, it usually feels like that was a narrative world building decision and not an arbitrary "none for you" decision to hurt players.
It seems kinda arbitrary to pick a particular level that all adventures of a particular theme have to be set at.
Currently that can be homebrewed around by using the Gamemastery Guide's item creation tables to create an item of the appropriate level. Those tables can even be used to create a smoother upgrade process.
But none of that is actually called out as being a possibility very well. Skilled and talented GMs can make it work. For everyone else, these types of items feel like a waste of space because they only work at such a narrow band of character/enemy levels. So unless the stars all align and we happen to be doing something that would need that item at the level that the item is available (not too pricey to get) and relevant (not obsolete yet) then it isn't a useful item. And there doesn't appear to be any way to deal with that (other than the advanced homebrew option mentioned earlier in this thread, but not in the rules).
And none of this addresses the item usefulness imbalance - that there are other types of items that don't have this obsolescence problem (Horn of Fog, or Spellhearts or Tattoos that actually grant a full scaling cantrip, items that give a bonus to a skill rather than an ability with a fixed modifier, ...). So it seems rather unfair that some items become obsolete rather quickly and others don't.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Unicore: I sort of agree with you that worldbuilding is an issue here. But it has to come from two sides.
Most of the heist scenes I've seen in APs and scenarios have used level-appropriate DCs for obstacles. In theory it's the sort of thing where actually simple DCs should be used a lot. While the casino or whatnot might have an elite security chief, that doesn't mean everyone who works there should be a level 10 card dealer or something. If the players were to brute-force the situation they'd be up against level-based DCs of their main opponents. But the point of a heist is to circumvent all that and find gaps in the defenses where the barriers aren't elite strength.
Think of a typical James Bond movie; he's knocking out a lot of guards that don't really stand much of a chance. Makes it look easy, most of the time, because he's rolling against DCs that make sense for the situation, while Bond is actually overpowered for the situation. It's only coming into contact with main opponents that he really has to exert himself and roll level-appropriate DCs.
If adventures were like that, items with static DCs might keep making sense a lot longer. But I don't really see adventures like that a lot.