Search results

So what you’re saying there is the Roll20 numbers are useless without context? 😉

Indeed, this for me is what makes it a “better pathfinder”. It’s still complex. But the complexity has shifted from piecing together all of the rules and kludges from the modified 3.x system (IMO) to meaningful choices with feats and actions in encounter situations. .

Exactly this (Although I disagree with the idea of the complexity being a problem ) This is what I was getting at. I think ”easier to learn” is really just meant to be a short hand for a reduction of edge cases and the trimming of more obtuse mechanics. Paizo felt a clear need for a second...

I took nothing as a personal affront. a) yes B) yes C) yes. I considered all of this. Before you, for some reason decided to post these as main design goals: "never again should spellcasters be able to end a fight with a single spell" "never again should a player be able to use system...

Yes, this is what I was alluding to. Effectively, just maintaining pf1 was unviable.

I don’t disagree that it’s a tough task, but at the time, this was their goal, to essentially make pathfinder play better. That’s what they were interested in doing. The 3.x clone of pf1 clearly wasn’t working for them anymore as they wouldn’t have worked on a new edition otherwise. Whether you...

Except none of what you said is true (quel surprise). Here’s the actual designer talking about the goals.

Alternatively make a thread with that actual question rather than begging it on every other thread. The discussion here is: is it time for pf2 essentials. And like most threads boil down to : yes, because I posed the question, no, I disagree and maybe that or something?

I think whatever the stance, a pathfinder essentials would not help. I shudder in memory of these very boards when 4e essentials was a thing. Numerous posts asking what the difference was, is it compatible etc (reflecting consumer confusion) and posts decrying the “dumbing” down of 4e vs those...

Yes, modifiers exist. Which is why it’s better expressed as AC hit = THAC0 - (roll + mods) so you’re only subtracting one number. That way leaves no difference to ascending ac adding multiple modifiers. I will also state that I certainly don’t think the rule books helped with their ham fisted...

Indeed, I agree, everything together made it oblique, which is why it was changed in 3e. But again, still not a confusing bit of maths. The negative armour class system: Already explained above Calling it THAC0: I mean, it literally says what it does on the tin (to hit armour class 0). But...

But back on topic... I also really like the proto prestige classes of avengers and such, charting a new course and direction. It’d have been an interesting alternative history if TSR had explored that idea further instead of canning the D&D line.

Huh, funny, because that's very different to what you said up thread. " It meant a confusing bit of math every single time." So now I'm confused. You are either arguing A) that it's confusing maths or that B)That apparently the system is forgettable. You struggle to remember the simple...

Absolutely, again, I’m not arguing that THAC0 is superior. It’s definitely one of the warts of a warty system (for me, part of its charm). Just merely illustrating that it is not some arcane, hard to understand, complex system. Also, you always need to roll high to hit. The confusion over high...

So to be clear, your argument here is that THAC0 is confusing maths because you can remember AC hit = BAB + roll, but you couldn’t remember AC hit = THAC0 - roll? Interesting.

Nope, it's perfectly relevant because that is literally how it plays. "What matters is how it plays. And it plays awful!" Ok, so now we've moved from "confusing maths" to it playing awful. So that's different from what you've said before, where it was "confusing maths". As shown, the maths is...

Quick: what’s 17-12? 17 - 10? 17 - 8? 17 - 19? congratulations, you just used THAC0 to work out the armour hit 4 times in quick succession. That’s all there is to it.

Thank you for proving my point in the post right below. Except again, you didn’t need to know the enemy ac. Ac hit = THACO -(roll + mods). You hit any ac equal or lower, the same as 3e but inverted. Again, it is not “a confusing bit of maths”. It is simple subtraction. As for confusing maths...

Exactly this for me. This is why I have moved more to OSE (and AD&D) for when I want things more simple (and in that more old school vibe) and PF2E for when I want that customisation and crunchy combat. 5E offers this middle ground that, clearly is ideal for a lot of people, but doesn't scratch...