| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or y'know people just having a different opinion than you about the system.
Genuinely don't know what's worse, the tendency of internet arguments to devolve into crappy fallacies, or the prevalence of fallacy hunting and self victimization in those same discussions.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or y'know people just having a different opinion than you about the system.
A couple of the louder people in this form have very strong ideas which are somewhat valid, but only in the particular approach that they have to the game. They don't always see the different way other people play the game. I try not to be in this category, and I enjoy their comments mostly, but ...
Genuinely don't know what's worse, the tendency of internet arguments to devolve into crappy fallacies, or the prevalence of fallacy hunting and self victimization in those same discussions.
Yep that fact that you can label an argument, often doesn't have any bearing on whether or not it is a valid argument.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1 psychic refocus
This and eidolons using mundane items I'm super curious about.
With the influx of Summoners and Psychics at tables I've played at recently, I've noticed GMs are pretty 50/50 on how they rule these two. We even had a long but fun quibble on the psychic refocus trick with one table. Hilariously, the Psychic player wasn't even the one who brought it up.
|
One thing I think that I'm really missing is a feat that allows for limited use of Coercion in combat.
I would love something which allows you to use Intimidation to perhaps force people to attack you for a round. You would need quick Coercion as a prereq, so maybe a feat at master Intimidation.
Something simple, [>], enemies within 10ft of you have to make a will save or spend their next action attacking you.
Shield usage... I swear they turned these into consumable items...
The Starfinder rules about shields seem better fit for Pathfinder.
Maybe to expand: you only get the shield's bonus to AC after Raising the Shield, but this essentially grants any attacker a free Sunder attempt on it. In Starfinder and in P1E, the opponent has to declare wanting to Sunder that shield, weapon or whatever. Right now, there's no reason to use a shield, unless they make a rule to allow you to transfer damage from yourself to the shield.
I also double-checked and there's no "Shield Parry" feat either.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You realise that PF2 shield block prevents you from taking any damage up to the value of the shield's hardness, right?
|
One thing I think that I'm really missing is a feat that allows for limited use of Coercion in combat.
I would love something which allows you to use Intimidation to perhaps force people to attack you for a round. You would need quick Coercion as a prereq, so maybe a feat at master Intimidation.
Something simple, [>], enemies within 10ft of you have to make a will save or spend their next action attacking you.
I had similar thought, but for deception and out of combat. My heavy armor thaumaturge would like to be loud and help my friend sneak.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You realise that PF2 shield block prevents you from taking any damage up to the value of the shield's hardness, right?
It's still a free Sunder attempt that can destroy my shield simply by Raising it. You can literally lose your shield after one or two encounters, because it tanked too much damage.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You realise that PF2 shield block prevents you from taking any damage up to the value of the shield's hardness, right?It's still a free Sunder attempt that can destroy my shield simply by Raising it. You can literally lose your shield after one or two encounters, because it tanked too much damage.
The Repair action fits neatly into other 10-minute activities and avoids this problem. There's even a quick repair skill feat to make it a functionally-guaranteed thing given 10 minutes.
|
|
I had similar thought, but for deception and out of combat. My heavy armor thaumaturge would like to be loud and help my friend sneak.One thing I think that I'm really missing is a feat that allows for limited use of Coercion in combat.
I would love something which allows you to use Intimidation to perhaps force people to attack you for a round. You would need quick Coercion as a prereq, so maybe a feat at master Intimidation.
Something simple, [>], enemies within 10ft of you have to make a will save or spend their next action attacking you.
Draw Attention instead of Create a Diversion.
I can dig it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You realise that PF2 shield block prevents you from taking any damage up to the value of the shield's hardness, right?It's still a free Sunder attempt that can destroy my shield simply by Raising it. You can literally lose your shield after one or two encounters, because it tanked too much damage.
or you could take ten minutes and repair it, while others are refocusing or healing?
That said, several high level shields won't survive a single hit, which has been discussed and homebrewed to death. Personally, I wish they would just say "you can't block with this shield."
|
|
Hm. Mechanically Fascinated does exactly what you need. Only to make it unbreakable. But the name and theme is not a match.
I had similar thought, but for deception and out of combat. My heavy armor thaumaturge would like to be loud and help my friend sneak.Draw Attention instead of Create a Diversion.
I can dig it.
That could be a way to do it, though the Fascinated condition has some extra bells and whistle Draw Attention probably would not need.
I was thinking something closer to a deception check against Will to give an enemy a perception bonus against you and a perception penalty against everyone else. Scale targets with proficiency. Maybe slap a flat footed rider on there if an enemy crit fails.
Nothing fancy.
[too many people to quote]
Here's my problem: You don't get the shield's AC bonus unless you Raise the shield.
WHY WOULDN'T I RAISE MY SHIELD IF I HAD ONE? This is like Fighting Defensively with an item requirement.
I feel like...
1) the shield's stats should apply to you all the time. Yeah, good luck explaining that "your buckler doesn't protect you". I swear, there was supposed to be a "shield parry" feat, like Twin Parry, but that was dropped.
2) Raising the Shield should automatically grant you Shield Block, and vice-versa.
3) there should be a feat that halves the damage to your shield when using Shield Block, y'know, as if you deflected the blow instead of tanking it.
4) Quick Shield Block doesn't do anything like negating damage. If I have AC 20, the opponent rolls 21 and my shield grants +2 AC for 22, that attack is negated. Quick Shield Block blocks damage, but nowhere doe sit change the success of an attack roll.
Like I said, in Starfinder, you have a base AC shield bonus, but if you align it (a.k.a. Raise it), you get a higher bonus, until the end of your next turn. Under no circumstance does your shield is subject to damage unless the opponent explicitely sunders it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had similar thought, but for deception and out of combat. My heavy armor thaumaturge would like to be loud and help my friend sneak.One thing I think that I'm really missing is a feat that allows for limited use of Coercion in combat.
I would love something which allows you to use Intimidation to perhaps force people to attack you for a round. You would need quick Coercion as a prereq, so maybe a feat at master Intimidation.
Something simple, [>], enemies within 10ft of you have to make a will save or spend their next action attacking you.
Draw Attention instead of Create a Diversion.
I can dig it.
Isn't this just the Aid action? Aid doesn't require that you perform the same kind of action as the ally being aided, being loud and annoying with Intimidation to aid your ally in stealth is plenty viable.
|
|
Isn't this just the Aid action? Aid doesn't require that you perform the same kind of action as the ally being aided, being loud and annoying with Intimidation to aid your ally in stealth is plenty viable.
Different approaches to achieve similar outcomes.
Aid buffs an ally, where as Draw Attention would debuff an enemy. So a party could do both to really help out one member on a needed stealth check.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue.
Shields do less than they should. Look at HEMA matches where they use shields, they aren't constantly dropping and raising them, instead, they are a part of each motion with many attacks coming from behind the shield. Unless you are very new to using a shield you aren't opening up your defenses and constantly having to spend a moment bringing your shield back into play.
It's sad that a level 20 fighter uses a shield worse than a guy who dons armor some weekends for sport.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue.Shields do less than they should. Look at HEMA matches where they use shields, they aren't constantly dropping and raising them, instead, they are a part of each motion with many attacks coming from behind the shield. Unless you are very new to using a shield you aren't opening up your defenses and constantly having to spend a moment bringing your shield back into play.
It's sad that a level 20 fighter uses a shield worse than a guy who dons armor some weekends for sport.
If I am not mistaken there is a stance a Fighter eventually gets which essentially permanently raises their shield until they choose to undo the stance. I don't know what level, but it does exist.
|
|
Isn't this just the Aid action? Aid doesn't require that you perform the same kind of action as the ally being aided, being loud and annoying with Intimidation to aid your ally in stealth is plenty viable.Different approaches to achieve similar outcomes.
Aid buffs an ally, where as Draw Attention would debuff an enemy. So a party could do both to really help out one member on a needed stealth check.
In my case, I had two stealthly allies to help, and we were low level, so hitting aird DC 20 would be harder than enemy will DC.
It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue.
Shields are worthless unless you raised them, which is an action.
- You need to Raise the Shield in order to use Shield Block.
- Simply Raising the Shield only adds the AC bonus, which to me sounds pretty pathetic, especially since you just cannot normally keep it raised.
- Quick Shield Block allows you to Raise your Shield to then use Shield Block as a reaction, but UNLIKE Raising your Shield normally, the extra AC bonus isn't factored in. Like I said, you cannot negate an attack as a reaction if your AC would be enough for a Strike to miss with your Shield raised.
Here's another thing: Shields are added in Starfinder AFTER P2E... and for some reason, it's less of a hassle to use them.
Who actually complained about shields adding an AC bonus in P1E to warrant such a replacement again?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will also point out that in narrative, your shield is not falling and being raised every 6 seconds, but is being constantly held up for as long as you spend actions. Keeping a shield raised in an effective fighting position takes some amount of mental and physical effort, which is represented by the action you need to spend every turn, just like the action you need to spend every round to sustain a spell. You can forgo raising a shield for a round or two to focus on more offence or defense, but just like a real Hema fighter, you will need to spend some time to get the shield back in position again. But the shield isn't constantly bobbing up and down in narrative any more than characters are moving 25 feet, stopping, and then moving 25 more feet all the time
That's not really how that works. What extra offense is unlocked by a warrior not using their shield effectively? None, in fact, you can often hide the path of a cut behind your shield giving your foe less of a chance to react. The movement of the shield is an integral part of each attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I am not mistaken there is a stance a Fighter eventually gets which essentially permanently raises their shield until they choose to undo the stance. I don't know what level, but it does exist.It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue.Shields do less than they should. Look at HEMA matches where they use shields, they aren't constantly dropping and raising them, instead, they are a part of each motion with many attacks coming from behind the shield. Unless you are very new to using a shield you aren't opening up your defenses and constantly having to spend a moment bringing your shield back into play.
It's sad that a level 20 fighter uses a shield worse than a guy who dons armor some weekends for sport.
Lvl 12 paragon stance.
Anyway, I wouldn't stick with irl stuff when it comes down to balancing a board game.
That's a poor point of balance. The balance between having a shield and not should be the general damage and reach of a two-handed weapon versus the added defense and possible feints opportunities that come with using a shield. If anything two-handed weapon users should be the ones using an action to take a defensive stance to gain some added defense as needed.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The movement of the shield is an integral part of each attack.
That certainly doesn't sound like something that should require zero effort or engagement to use properly. That's a good point.
So sounds like PF2 handles shields much better than PF1 or 5e.
That's a poor point of balance.
But it's not. Shields are quite good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
- Quick Shield Block allows you to Raise your Shield to then use Shield Block as a reaction, but UNLIKE Raising your Shield normally, the extra AC bonus isn't factored in. Like I said, you cannot negate an attack as a reaction if your AC would be enough for a Strike to miss with your Shield raised.
This is just plain wrong.
It is Reactive Shield that let's you raise a shield as a reaction. And it does factor the raised shield's bonus to AC.
If your AC is 30 without the shield raised, you are attacked with a roll of 31, and you use your reaction for Reactive Shield, your AC becomes 32 and the attack misses.
Quick Shield block, on the other hand, gives you an extra reaction that you may only use to Shield Block. Thus you could both AoO and Shield Block in the same turn.
Or, take the previous example, but the attack roll is 41. It would be a critical hit, but raising your shield with Reactive Shield makes it only a normal strike. Then, with Quick Shield block, you can reduce the incoming damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That certainly doesn't sound like something that should require zero effort or engagement to use properly. That's a good point.
So sounds like PF2 handles shields much better than PF1 or 5e.
It takes training but once you train it's just a part of how you make attacks while carrying a shield. It's like a boxer keeping a hand back and their chin tucked. It's just how you fight while you have a shield.
But it's not. Shields are quite good.
If something is good but the way you use it breaks the illusion that your character is a skilled warrior the rule is stupid. Much like a lot of how Paizo wants to use action economy to balance* classes it falls flat to those who aren't the core audience of this messageboard.
*By balance they apparently mean worse than CRB classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or, take the previous example, but the attack roll is 41. It would be a critical hit, but raising your shield with Reactive Shield makes it only a normal strike. Then, with Quick Shield block, you can reduce the incoming damage.
How is this meant to work narratively? You use your shield to deflect an attack that would otherwise hit a vital area but somehow also block part of the attack in a way that damages your shield and saves you from damage. Yet, if you just blocked you'd still be critically hit and if you were just reactive you'd avoid the crit but not block any damage... Does Paizo understand how shields are actually used?
|
|
That certainly doesn't sound like something that should require zero effort or engagement to use properly. That's a good point.
So sounds like PF2 handles shields much better than PF1 or 5e.
It takes training but once you train it's just a part of how you make attacks while carrying a shield. It's like a boxer keeping a hand back and their chin tucked. It's just how you fight while you have a shield.
But it's not. Shields are quite good.If something is good but the way you use it breaks the illusion that your character is a skilled warrior the rule is stupid. Much like a lot of how Paizo wants to use action economy to balance* classes it falls flat to those who aren't the core audience of this messageboard.
*By balance they apparently mean worse than CRB classes.
Who do you expect is the core audience of this message board?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who do you expect is the core audience of this message board?That certainly doesn't sound like something that should require zero effort or engagement to use properly. That's a good point.
So sounds like PF2 handles shields much better than PF1 or 5e.
It takes training but once you train it's just a part of how you make attacks while carrying a shield. It's like a boxer keeping a hand back and their chin tucked. It's just how you fight while you have a shield.
But it's not. Shields are quite good.If something is good but the way you use it breaks the illusion that your character is a skilled warrior the rule is stupid. Much like a lot of how Paizo wants to use action economy to balance* classes it falls flat to those who aren't the core audience of this messageboard.
*By balance they apparently mean worse than CRB classes.
People who are generally pleased with PF2 and who don't feel that core aspects of the game are greatly in need of a rework.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It takes training but once you train it's just a part of how you make attacks while carrying a shield.
An active part that requires constant engagement though, right?
Or do HEMA practitioners have their shield arm hang limply at their side and just automatically gain increased defenses, like a 5e character does?
If something is good but the way you use it breaks the illusion that your character is a skilled warrior the rule is stupid.
Eh. If the problem is a disconnect between the rules and how you envision things, changing your perception is probably easier than changing the rules, especially if that rule serves a compelling purpose within the game design itself.
In general I think this is a bad rule of thumb because you can take any rule and likely be able to find someone, somewhere who finds its construction problematic, which would effectively mean all rules are stupid. A valid position to have, I suppose, but not a particularly helpful one for making games.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The devs realized that having the game be less simulation and more game based is better for the health of the game and the fun of most players. I'm not sure if that's been said outright but it's what I believe and I'm pretty sure I've read others say the same. It's fun for most people to have choice and variety in the actions they can take from turn to turn. I know players in my group are always happy to narrowly get missed by a hit or a Crit because they raised their shield. If it was just a constant bonus it would be (probably too strong in a game where those +1s matter so much right from LVL 1) boring to me, and I think a lot of players. Yes, in real life you can pretty easily swing a sword more than three times in 6 seconds, or effortlessly put a second hand on a two handed weapon. It doesn't matter, it's about balance and fun.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The devs realized that having the game be less simulation and more game based is better for the health of the game and the fun of most players. I'm not sure if that's been said outright but it's what I believe and I'm pretty sure I've read others say the same. It's fun for most people to have choice and variety in the actions they can take from turn to turn. I know players in my group are always happy to narrowly get missed by a hit or a Crit because they raised their shield. If it was just a constant bonus it would be (probably too strong in a game where those +1s matter so much right from LVL 1) boring to me, and I think a lot of players. Yes, in real life you can pretty easily swing a sword more than three times in 6 seconds, or effortlessly put a second hand on a two handed weapon. It doesn't matter, it's about balance and fun.
My Paladin is feeling untouchable in these past few sessions. I think I was only hit once and I still used Shield Block.
People talking s&+~ about Shield Block have no idea how good this is in actual play. Characters are rolling at most 10-ish damage at earlier levels and it increases a bit after striking runes come into play. Shields can grand up to 5 (or 6 with certain classes) damage resistance quite early on. It's damn good. A nightmare for ranged attackers as well (they rely mainly on dice rolls with little to no flat bonuses to damage).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only problem I have with shield block is the Sturdy or Wovenwood Shields are almost necessary to make it useful at higher levels, which limits the type of desirable shields. I'd rather see shields interesting and scale by level than a type of shield that scales while you forego other types of shields to obtain this one type of shield that allows you to keep using shield block.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only problem I have with shield block is the Sturdy or Wovenwood Shields are almost necessary to make it useful at higher levels, which limits the type of desirable shields. I'd rather see shields interesting and scale by level than a type of shield that scales while you forego other types of shields to obtain this one type of shield that allows you to keep using shield block.
We've been on fighting on the same trenches on this topic. Yeah, Sturdy should've definitely been a rune. Even if they nerfed it somehow (slightly decreased hardness) or created shield types to apply different hardness and HP boosts (whatever). But this hasn't been as clear as with the launch of the Treasure Vault, with lots of cool base shields that simply don't exist past level 4 for specialized characters.
Thankfully, Paizo's team has been doing a lot, lot better when it comes to new block-oriented shields having reasonable Hardness and HP for their levels.
It takes training but once you train it's just a part of how you make attacks while carrying a shield.An active part that requires constant engagement though, right?
Should a monk have to burn an action each round to keep their crane stance active? That takes more effort than keeping a shield active.
Eh. If the problem is a disconnect between the rules and how you envision things, changing your perception is probably easier than changing the rules, especially if that rule serves a compelling purpose within the game design itself.
I would argue that the execution of the rule could have been done more elegantly than via an action with feat chains that add in reactions that are only endgame viable with sturdy shields. I don't think anybody will say that PF2 has done a particularly elegant job going from dents to slightly too low shield hardness and HP.
They could have done something other than the 50 percent break thresholds for shields as well given they are built to get beaten on. The broken threshold for shields at 50 percent following a uniform rule isn't necessary. They should make shields stop being effective at 25% or so hit points rather than 50 percent. Shields should have different rules for broken thresholds given their sole function is to take blows and absorb damage.
The devs realized that having the game be less simulation and more game based is better for the health of the game and the fun of most players. I'm not sure if that's been said outright but it's what I believe and I'm pretty sure I've read others say the same. It's fun for most people to have choice and variety in the actions they can take from turn to turn. I know players in my group are always happy to narrowly get missed by a hit or a Crit because they raised their shield. If it was just a constant bonus it would be (probably too strong in a game where those +1s matter so much right from LVL 1) boring to me, and I think a lot of players. Yes, in real life you can pretty easily swing a sword more than three times in 6 seconds, or effortlessly put a second hand on a two handed weapon. It doesn't matter, it's about balance and fun.
The designs could have shifted that balance easily enough while still giving players things to use their actions on.
A shield user might get actions related to feinting with their shield that gives a bonus to the feint attempt. They could get a shield bash that gives a bonus to an athletics attempt to shove or knockdown an opponent but that costs the shields AC bonus until the start of that character's next turn. There are plenty of options that can be balanced around.
For users of weapons that can use a variable number of hands, you could use stances that make changing the number of hands on a weapon mid-combat more meaningful. There are things like half-swording or using a hand on the hilt and a hand on the blade to block an attack from a larger weapon that could easily feel engaging and not disrupt balance significantly.