Search results

Action economy Spells no longer auto-heighten

That doesn't solve the siloing problem, because it's not future proof. It only solves the page space issue, which is the lesser problem.

Paizo's answer to "combat styles shouldn't be siloed in classes" is "ok, we'll duplicate some of the class feats across the classes". *forehead slap* So just follow Paizo's lead, and rehash the existing feats.

Stuff like this I can see them fixing. The more glaring issues I have with the system, like class siloing, the sorcerer, and Resonance, I can't.

Well, PF2 isn't being marketed as a brand new system. The fact that they're sticking a "2" on the end of "Pathfinder" suggests that it should resemble Pathfinder. When the product they're putting out as a sequel does not feature even remotely the same level of customization as its predecessor, I...

I suspect that this new way of detecting magic items will be heavily houseruled, because it's clearly bogus and confusing.

Here's the first two paragraphs, which OP only partially quoted:

Siloing of weapon styles into class feats rather than general feats is a big one. Class feats being dependent on one central class feature (like Ranger's Hunt Target and Paladin's Retributive Strike) is another. Hunt Target reduces the multiattack penalties against your target, but half the...

How do you figure? The find it exceedingly hard to believe that there are players that feel that PF1 is too divergent from 3.x (such that they are actively avoiding it, as opposed to just continuing what they're doing due to inertia), but could be lured to PF2, a game which diverges even harder...

OK, fine. Using your definition, dedication feats and half-level restrictions are not taxes because the system isn't outright broken (that we know of). There are a few, but hardly "plenty", and those few are high level. If it weren't for the half-level thing, I'd multi into fighter just...

I think you need to define "feat tax" then. I define it as "feat you have to take to get some other feat, that you wouldn't take on its own merits". It is quite different. I didn't have to multiclass to advance a fighting style in 3.PF. I could do it faster by multiclassing into fighter...

Those are good options, but I don't want my only combat options to be so heavily tied to my class features. Yes, no argument here. I don't mind spending feats to get what I want. I do mind spending a feat on Fighter Dedication (a feat tax because it gives me nothing that I want itself) to...

The longbow is an iconic ranger weapon. The shortbow (the best way to not run into Volley BS without multiclassing) is an iconic rogue, bard, or horse archer weapon. I agree that fighters should be supreme at fighting, but rangers should be able to at least achieve basic competency with ranged...

Mitigating a -2 on virtually every shot I'm going to make is min-maxing? Wow.

Zero need? Did you miss where longbows have the "Volley 50" property, which means you take a -2 penalty to attack targets within 50 feet (most encounters take place within this distance, and it's a rare encounter that allows the opportunity to really use the full range of a longbow). This would...

I'm saying that any character (although only martials would typically be interested) could take combat feats without interfacing with the multiclassing rules. I can't make a longbow ranger (a pretty iconic archetype) without multiclassing into Fighter. OK, so I take Fighter Dedication as my...

When the fighting styles are sprinkled among the martial classes when before they were feats anyone could freely take, I'd call the dedication feats taxes. Just because the dedication feats are better than Dodge or Point Blank Shot doesn't mean they're not taxes.

I haven't read it cover to cover yet, I've only jumped around looking at stuff that was immediately of interest to me. Could you explain what you mean?

As well they should, if people are sincere in what they don't like. This playtest is Paizo telling us what the current state of PF2 is. Presumably, if no one raised any issues, the playtest will become PF2. So some crucifiction is necessary and justified if people don't like the playtest, or...

Your tone suggests you think that this has not already happened.