Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What Would You Want from PF2?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7596822" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p>Okay...? </p><p></p><p></p><p>You did not lose the point in all of that, so, sure. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, your history lesson threatens to get us derailed <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p></p><p>First off, you say "5e loosens restrictions on magic" like its a bad thing. It's not. </p><p></p><p>Sure, they might have gone overboard with certain things, but in general - those restrictions on magic were hopelessly convoluted legacy rules for the most part. Getting rid of them is good. Getting rid of them is fun. That said, the challenge is to get rid of them in a way that doesn't overpower casters. They did not quite succeed: free cantrips nearly make ranged weapons obsolete. (OTOH, restrictions on Dex for martials were ALSO removed, so it's not like I'm moping for those poor poor Dex martials) </p><p></p><p>Concentration is not only for a very small number of spells. It truly changed the game visavi d20, shutting down the buffing game almost completely. The advantages are obvious: </p><p>- less LFQW</p><p>- focus on characters and not their buffs (in d20 the attacker has ridiculous advantages over an unprepared defender, which combined with generous teleporting almost single-handedly wrecks the play experience)</p><p>- MUCH easier dungeonmastering when monsters (especially humanoid ones, i.e. "NPCs") aren't expected to choose half a dozen buffs (and again, doesn't absolutely have to not to be a pushover, which arguably is an even better benefit)</p><p></p><p>Casters are still very good in 5E and they can still single-handledly win encounters. That is as it should be. Magic feels magical.</p><p></p><p>Thing is, they can't do that all the time. This allows martials to feel they are meaningfully contributing. Well minmaxed martials dish out insane damage and feel very welcome in parties indeed. </p><p></p><p>This is arguably 5Es greatest accomplishment, and not something I am keen to see PF2 roll back on. That 5E is far from perfectly balanced doesn't change that. That WotC clearly is resting on their laurels and feel they can ignore the game's flaws is deeply frustrating and unfortunate, but still doesn't change that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not sure what you're saying here. There is nothing that says rogues must suffer mediocre damage just to achieve those positive characteristics you mention?</p><p></p><p>Remember, WotC was desperate at the time of 5E's design. They played it safe in area after area. That is not necessarily what made 5E a success. </p><p></p><p>Nothing says you could not have achieved greater distinction between tanking and DPS and still enjoyed success.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, 5E is done. We're discussing PF2 here. My point is that Paizo could and should have gunned for those 5E gamers that are ready for something crunchier. I suspect this group of potential customers far exceed the number of PF1 fans so loyal to the brand name they are willing to leave PF1 behind.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If you by "SC" mean skill challenges, boy did you pick the wrong audience <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> I only encountered the utterly broken first set of rules, and had abandoned 4E before any of the rules patches and "essentials" arrived. (I do remember something about Obsidian? rules that so clearly showed the WotC dev that wrote the initial PHB rules had no clue how math worked)</p><p></p><p>Anyway, published 5E modules hardly ever discuss group checks. For good reason. Unless you play just to have a good time and isn't sensitive to every challenge being trivial, you don't use them. You don't need to be a hardcore minmaxer to see how easily clerics and bards trivialize atomic skill checks. I really do feel the very idea should be given a rest.</p><p></p><p>Rogues are masters of skill tests anyway, thanks to expertise + reliable talent. That's just a much smaller part of play than WotC wants you to believe. The "skill monkey" edge given to Rogues is small, and not nearly significant enough to justify the class' medium offensive and mediocre defense.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Gloriously wading through your dead enemies is enough of a trick <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>That is, I really don't understand those who clamor for more out-of-combat tricks for the fighter. The clue is in the class' name! </p><p></p><p>And besides, the rules framework offered by D&D in social and exploratory contexts is so rudimentary that just assigning a great score in Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma goes a looong way of estabilishing said Fighter as a credible historian, survivalist or charmer. </p><p></p><p>Sure the dedicated specialist will trump him (if a Ranger or Bard is in the party) but that's just as it should be. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that if Paizo can't or won't raise the bar to 5E-like levels in areas discussed here, that doesn't matter for many of us... WotC might well be our only hope. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7596822, member: 12731"] Okay...? You did not lose the point in all of that, so, sure. :) Again, your history lesson threatens to get us derailed :) First off, you say "5e loosens restrictions on magic" like its a bad thing. It's not. Sure, they might have gone overboard with certain things, but in general - those restrictions on magic were hopelessly convoluted legacy rules for the most part. Getting rid of them is good. Getting rid of them is fun. That said, the challenge is to get rid of them in a way that doesn't overpower casters. They did not quite succeed: free cantrips nearly make ranged weapons obsolete. (OTOH, restrictions on Dex for martials were ALSO removed, so it's not like I'm moping for those poor poor Dex martials) Concentration is not only for a very small number of spells. It truly changed the game visavi d20, shutting down the buffing game almost completely. The advantages are obvious: - less LFQW - focus on characters and not their buffs (in d20 the attacker has ridiculous advantages over an unprepared defender, which combined with generous teleporting almost single-handedly wrecks the play experience) - MUCH easier dungeonmastering when monsters (especially humanoid ones, i.e. "NPCs") aren't expected to choose half a dozen buffs (and again, doesn't absolutely have to not to be a pushover, which arguably is an even better benefit) Casters are still very good in 5E and they can still single-handledly win encounters. That is as it should be. Magic feels magical. Thing is, they can't do that all the time. This allows martials to feel they are meaningfully contributing. Well minmaxed martials dish out insane damage and feel very welcome in parties indeed. This is arguably 5Es greatest accomplishment, and not something I am keen to see PF2 roll back on. That 5E is far from perfectly balanced doesn't change that. That WotC clearly is resting on their laurels and feel they can ignore the game's flaws is deeply frustrating and unfortunate, but still doesn't change that. Not sure what you're saying here. There is nothing that says rogues must suffer mediocre damage just to achieve those positive characteristics you mention? Remember, WotC was desperate at the time of 5E's design. They played it safe in area after area. That is not necessarily what made 5E a success. Nothing says you could not have achieved greater distinction between tanking and DPS and still enjoyed success. Anyway, 5E is done. We're discussing PF2 here. My point is that Paizo could and should have gunned for those 5E gamers that are ready for something crunchier. I suspect this group of potential customers far exceed the number of PF1 fans so loyal to the brand name they are willing to leave PF1 behind. If you by "SC" mean skill challenges, boy did you pick the wrong audience ;) I only encountered the utterly broken first set of rules, and had abandoned 4E before any of the rules patches and "essentials" arrived. (I do remember something about Obsidian? rules that so clearly showed the WotC dev that wrote the initial PHB rules had no clue how math worked) Anyway, published 5E modules hardly ever discuss group checks. For good reason. Unless you play just to have a good time and isn't sensitive to every challenge being trivial, you don't use them. You don't need to be a hardcore minmaxer to see how easily clerics and bards trivialize atomic skill checks. I really do feel the very idea should be given a rest. Rogues are masters of skill tests anyway, thanks to expertise + reliable talent. That's just a much smaller part of play than WotC wants you to believe. The "skill monkey" edge given to Rogues is small, and not nearly significant enough to justify the class' medium offensive and mediocre defense. Gloriously wading through your dead enemies is enough of a trick :) That is, I really don't understand those who clamor for more out-of-combat tricks for the fighter. The clue is in the class' name! And besides, the rules framework offered by D&D in social and exploratory contexts is so rudimentary that just assigning a great score in Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma goes a looong way of estabilishing said Fighter as a credible historian, survivalist or charmer. Sure the dedicated specialist will trump him (if a Ranger or Bard is in the party) but that's just as it should be. Except that if Paizo can't or won't raise the bar to 5E-like levels in areas discussed here, that doesn't matter for many of us... WotC might well be our only hope. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What Would You Want from PF2?
Top