Search results

True true.

Problem with starting at level 10 instead of attempting to readjust class features is that some classes really get overpowered at higher levels. You'd have to do something to nerf casters, because it's around levels 5-10 that casters seriously overtake martials and playing beyond that point is...

No no no. Your complaint might as well exist in the current system too. You can run into a GM who says that since some particular skill does not have any concrete rules about what it can do, it can't do anything. I'd rather have a defined base line of things each skill can do rather than some...

I have no idea I'm just quoting your assertion where you said 30%. I am not defending anything or arguing anything only pointing out that the 30% estimate is wrong given the numbers in the post that you replied to.

Want to add my disclaimer that I'm not the one who made the barb or fighter so I don't know if those numbers are correct or not, I just wanted to show that the 30% comment made by someone else above is wrong given the numbers in the post they're replying to.

Assuming the fighter hits for 6.5 on average and the barbarian hits for 14, the fighter is on average at about 50% of the damage dealt by the barbarian, not counting accuracy. Taking accuracy into account we get roughly 0.55 * 6.5 = apprx 3.25 as average damage for the fighter and 0.88 * 14 =...

It's interesting how that's the standard approach in some systems. I think it would be fairly adaptable even to D&D though it would take some adjustments. For example, in Lancer (I keep bringing that system up, but it's so appropriate for this thread) you normally have three different results...

I think systems with stronger narrativist intent tend to have rules to support it that type of play. A system isn't more narrativist just because it has less rules. Lancer, for example, has rules for interacting with the narrative in ways that are completely alien to D&D, and looking at how...

It's a system where you buy abilities with power points. It doesn't have classes at all. Obviously the mind control guy uses magic and thus anyone with immunity to magic is immune. Anyone with any power that can interact specifically with the magic descriptor can interact with it. On the other...

You could have something like the kineticist from PF2, or the psychic from PF2. They both rely on a small set of powers and feel like casters.

Nah. In most other systems magic tends to be much more restricted. Either there's a real cost involved, there's some risk involved, or it's in some way much more difficult to use liberally like magic is in D&D. Try Call of Cthulhu, Dragonbane, Mörk Borg, etc etc I admit I haven't played any...

Nah it's a real problem, and we know it's a real problem because 1: Not only is it a recurring subject in every D&D-related forum I've ever been to, but... 2: It's also interestingly not a recurring subject in several discussion forums where D&D isn't the main system being discussed, and...

A reference pear.

I think that's because spells are part of a unified subsystem. Classes without access to spells tend to have their abilities here and there with no rhyme or reason to their placement. Some abilities might be feats, some might be class abilities etc. etc. This is, I think, why all classes...

Right! The laughing smiley is hard to read. lowers his guns My nickname might be a tad too confrontational. Perhaps I should get it changed.

Soo ehh... My point isn't really that PF2 is super fast for character generation or anything. I made the comment more to say that it really surprised me how fast it works in practice. I was expecting more of a slog a'la 3.5 or PF1. It's not as fast as, say, 5E.

What's with your confrontational use of the laughing smiley?

Gonna have to agree with payn on this. The leveling in PF2 is pretty smooth. It really benefits from planning things out in advance, but you don't have the crazy levels of complexity you had in PF1 or 3.5 etc.

I agree that there's a lot of unnecessary complexity in pre-4E dnd, but I play systems simpler than those that still use asymmetric design. Lancer, for example, has build complexity below anything in 3.5 and the likes and uses an NPC-construction system that works something like this: You...

I mean in this case whether it is good or bad is fairly obvious, yeah? The more complex PC-generation is, the less you want the NPC and PC systems to be symmetrical. I don't think there actually is any benefit to having the two character generation procedures be the same where it takes this...