Search results

I don't exactly think that's the case in what I've seen, especially on the PF2 Reddit. I've seen people correct people or direct them to play in different ways for PF2 in particular because while superficially-similar there are a lot of important differences people miss at first glance that...

Uh, people do say that all the time, they just don't say it in that direct a way, just like most people here aren't being like that. People tell us what 5E was designed for all the time compared to the critiques it gets. But also I find that to be a terrible comparison, because that doesn't...

In fairness, the early APs had the same misunderstanding, unfortunately. I speak as someone who remembers giving up pretty early on in our only session because of this.

I didn't say it had to be a + thread, there were clearly problems with how 4E ran. I just think talking about how it didn't conform to the standards of 3E is kind of like having a PF2 discussion where someone talks about how they should have never switched from PF1 in the first place. It's fine...

I get the reference you're trying to make, but I think it doesn't really work with what I was trying to say? No, but I think my point is that there are things we can talk about like the flawed monster math and such which are actually about 4E. People who couldn't change their mindset from 3E...

Sure, but that's not how it's been talked about in here. People are talking about how it's "illogical" or "mind control" because they aren't engaging with the system. I mean, it's kind of like critiquing my local bagel place for not serving fries: I'm not really critiquing it on what's it's...

To be honest, why are we really even entertaining the first type? I mean this earnestly and not in an insulting way: the power itself doesn't mention any sort of specific method that it's using, it's not outlining a specific technique or making mention of any sort of specific in-universe...

You could probably use the term "third rail" in a similar usage, being a topic that, when touched, usually draws severe backlash. It's not quite the same, but probably close enough for jazz. Honestly I would love to see something like this brought back. It's a very simple thing, but probably...

Maybe use the Weak Monster template, too. I believe the monsters from the AP are on Archive of Nethys, which means you can apply it to them through the website.

Yeah. I will say that one of the things they really did away with in the Skill Feats to make them much easier to use is the plethora of "You can do this, but at -2" conditions that were all over a bunch of feats. But in general I think the idea of always going with "level-appropriate" feats is a...

Yeah, that'd be a bit more difficult to keep them all advancing at a rate to keep up with the advancing level DCs. But it feels like at that point we're talking less about something inherent to the system and more about the intent of how a specific class was built; the Fighter wasn't meant to be...

The last Wizards game besides 4E that really did something with this design space I think was probably Star Wars: Saga Edition. The concept of the damage threshold and condition track were things that could still work in today's game and could really add something to the concept of "Big hits...

Society, I suppose? Recall Knowledge is more useful in the Remaster, but I can understand maybe seeing that as less of a combat skill. But also I don't think there's any sort of sacrificing of "combat competency" here because Athletics is basically one skill that you can keep up pretty easily. I...

<emphasis mine> Uh, what? How are you sacrificing combat competence? Athletics and maybe Acrobatics are the only "combat" skills, with the former being the most important and being something you basically get automatically from the class. All other skills for social stuff have good uses in...

Apologies, that's what I meant but did not specify: the execution of BA with the skill system just fails. I suppose I could really search for a problem when it comes to combat, but BA is not really as much the problem as the execution of some classes and monsters. I've always heard that PF2's...

Are you supposed to do all that, or can you have advisors who help with such things? I don't know the AP, but I think that is not a system problem but rather an adventure-building problem, especially when you start talking about "level-appropriate DCs". Reality doesn't make everything...

It is not. In the DMG, it never talks about preventing a player from attempting a check because they lack a skill or proficiency. It mostly goes over the expected results of the difficulty levels, going from the easiest (DC 5) to the Moderate (between DC10 and DC20) and the very difficult (DC...

The skill system just works way better as written. I can understand some people not liking the execution of some skill feats, but it feels like they've done a decent job in the Remaster of upping what you get out of things and making general usage clearer. It does a good job of not being a huge...

Where is it rules as written? I don't see it in the PHB in the Skills section, nor in the DMG section about skills. Those sections largely talking about when to apply proficiency bonuses or not for various uses, not gating skills.

It's a real problem in that the fix is just a Rule 0 solution, and I don't really see it as being "accounted for" in the rules. It's just something that has largely been dealt with through a community solution rather than one actually outlined by the rules.