Search results

That's good that other players didn't do that. I literally had players blowing off AoE encounter powers on single target monsters just to use them. It really killed my immersion as a DM.

I don't know anything about 5E battlemaster or 4E fighter martial exploits. I can't speak on those. What I know of 4E is they had encounter powers that were used every discrete encounter whether it was a group of kobolds or a group of giants. I didn't matter. My players blew off their encounter...

To tell you the truth. I've always wondered what percentage of DMs have players who min-max and really try to push the power game to the envelope versus players who enjoy a fun time with their friends, make some character concept they like based on a story or movie or some idea they dream up...

No. Because I can work them into the narrative and players don't feel compelled to use short rest powers or focus point powers every encounter. They save them for appropriately tough encounters and I as a DM can work into the narrative when a player can refocus or take a short rest if I want to...

May be differing ideas of what we feel is challenging as well. Only way we would be able to tell is to play at the other's table, see what differs. I hate short combats for BBEG encounters. If the party wins in less than 10 plus rounds of play, then I haven't done my job to challenge them as a...

I am saying PF2 is the first game to bring 1 to 20 to my table with minimal modification of the APs. I ran high level characters, but it took tons of time to create encounters capable of challenging high level characters. There certainly weren't PF1 APs that challenged PCs as written. I'm well...

The summoned creature does what you tell it to do as far as I know. I can't imagine a DM would not let you to do this. And you seem to forget that you can summon creatures for longer durations and to do more things with rituals. Which is what I've been trying to convey. There is more to the...

We shall see. I think there is a lot of appeal in a game where the players get to play level 1 to 20 and feel challenged. DMs can run an entire adventure path without much modification. That a DM doesn't feel like he has to spend a week or more preparing his enemies only to see them decimated...

I don't play 5E, though I don't hate it. I don't agree that 5E has the same powers. They are more on demand abilities with an often long recharge. I can use the 5E paradigm to tell a story. There is more variability and powers can be used by players in a naturalistic way. The base attack is a...

I think it is the wizard losing his unique niche and being built poorly compared to other classes. Interesting 1 action options within the new paradigm should be a design rule for PF2.

I"m thinking of letting casters add weapon specialization damage to cantrips. I don't see a problem with it right now. I think part of the reason they didn't is because casters can do insane damage at higher levels with bursty spells versus martial better round to round damage. But I don't know...

Ah. I despised those. Any game that puts something like that in the game, I will never buy. It would literally be an automatic avoid. That paradigm for character power was so anathema to storytelling in my experience.

A bunch of us on the D&D forums already hashed out the numbers ages ago for GWM and Sharpshooter. Might even be able to find old threads on it. GWM and Sharpshooter are obviously and vastly superior to any other fighting style in 5E than a Sorlock by a very large margin. And only become more so...

Wizards have a problem, at least at low level. I quit my wizard as well. Someone went way overboard nerfing wizards. I will have to work on this likely in the future. Wizards are one of the few classes along with possibly sorcerers where Paizo swung and missed in PF2. So not even going to try to...

I disagree. I think the choices do matter. Some examples: The ranger archer often chooses between Hunted Shot, Deadly Aim, and Hunter's Aim depending on the circumstances. Hunted Shot when dealing with damage resistance. Deadly Aim against soft target mooks. Or Hunter's Aim against high AC...

That is up to you decide. I'm mostly happy with PF2.

What are right choices? You can't for example make a ranger archer and expect to be as good as another ranger archer picking the two-weapon feats while the other guy is going all in on archery feats. You won't be as good at both as the guy who focuses on one. Or if you decide to mix up...

First, I want to make it clear I'm not looking to insult anyone or decide which way to play is better or any of that arbitrary subjective opinion. I am merely illustrating my experience with power gaming over the decades in every edition of D&D/PF1 and many other games. I know some of you who...

What is AEDU? Don't even recall that. At the same time I don't need or like any kind prescribed structure. I did not like the Controller-Defender-Damage dealer structure at all. Monsters weren't terrible, though eventually became weak as my players mastered the game.

What did you like in 4E? I think one of the few things I thought wasn't too bad was skill challenges. They tried to make skills more interesting than 3E or previous editions. It wasn't terrible. But powers didn't feel like fighting styles. I much prefer feats or abilities that make something...