Search results

But there's a very important component missing here. The "diplomacy" in Diplomacy works because the game is set up to function that way. You could remove it and replace it with a system, but, crucially, no system is required BECAUSE the game IS about the negotiation itself. We don't need to put...

It's a perfectly valid question, though, since the rule set as is, is lacking. Mainly nothing, because there are no mechanics. Which is, of course, a problem. Of course it makes them worth using. That's the POINT of a mechanic. It should be worth using. Intimidation is absolute effing trash...

Of course spells are the only viable example, since there are no rules and WOTC does not believe in providing mechanics for anything that isn't magical (slight exaggeration, but only slight). Explain to me, what does intimidate do? What happens when I intimidate someone, mechanically? What...

I've seen people really dislike how archetypes can replace base class features, and how that makes using multiple archetypes in some cases quite complicated. You might have archetypes that are incompatible because they modify or replace the same base class feature.

Yeah I personally love them (mmmm my vivisectionist beastmorph alchemist I played was lots of fun) but they can be really difficult to grasp for some people. I think PF1 benefits heavily from gradually introducing content. Throw everything at new players and their eyes will gloss over.

I have played an adventure path that involves at least two of these bastards, might've been three even, and all of them were horrible. The first of them was some kind of wood golem, I think. We had to run in panic, twice. Nothing works against these guys. Defensive magic? lol Since they...

I can't imagine a single reason why I'd run 3.0 over PF1 and the absolutely vile skill system in 3.0 is just eww... Anyway I think PF1 is in some ways quite bloated. Been a long time since I played it, but a lot of optional content should be limited by the GM. I'm talking about things like...

I remember it being very vague and there being pretty much no mechanics that interact with it aside from skill checks. Like intimidation. What does it even do?

But there is no framework here at all. The system really does not even have rules for social encounters. Frankly the closest things to concise social encounter rules is the charm spell, because at least that thing is pretty predictable in what it allows you to do.

That would also be possible. "This rule applies to all player characters" Or this one "This rule only applies to non player characters" Done.

That smells like a logical error. You are asserting that if social rules exist they have to apply to all characters, and the rules applying to all characters is bad so the rule must not exist. This can be trivially proven false by counter example. We can obviously construct a rule that does...

I'm against having any kind of initiative system for social situations, but I'm not seeing an issue with abilities that can be useful in social situations. They shouldn't be instant things, but rather mechanics that you can point to and say that "yes I can do that". The bribe example above was...

That does sound like a problem. I'll have to check out the playtest I guess.

To be quite honest it doesn't matter as long as casters aren't the utility demons they are in D&D. If casters are more restricted it doesn't really matter.

They are necessary. Otherwise you have a class that it "designed" to be good at social stuff... But they don't actually HAVE any social stuff to be good at. Now the important thing is that they don't actually dominate the gameplay, but they should be there, and you should be able to know what...

Wrong type of AI. You can optimise logistics, as far as I know, without using generative AI. This is why these AI discussions are annoying, because people throw around various pieces of terminology without detailing what they actually mean. Logistic analysis can be done using standard...

Different thing entirely. Now admittedly I don't know how this golf thing works, but the whole AI debate has been oversimplified and there are a whole bunch of distinctions here between what different people mean when they use the term AI. The golf AI example sounds like what I'd call...

Is there a writeup of this somewhere (that isn't a 3h video)? I can't access the playtest currently.

I have yet to play it myself so I cannot speak of how well it works in practice, but Icon RPG is a system where character growth in combat is very horizontal. As you gain levels you learn more abilities you can use and some abilities gain more utility and synergy, but very little of the design...

I'm curious if they're going to reimplement some of the stuff from the old source books. OG Dragonbane, that being Drakar och Demoner, was usually pretty light on mechanics and crunch, but there were a few systems and things that might work if modernised. 1: Chronomancy was part of the least...