Search results

So from what I’ve gathered, a fairly common criticism of PF2 is that it’s too complex, granular, and cumbersome because of so many moving parts. But had Paizo made PF2 simpler and less complex, wouldn’t it compete with 5e even more directly? Why would you play PF2 if it was even closer to the...

Not a single officially published NPC in 5e uses the PC creation rules. They don’t get feats or ASIs, they don’t get XP, they don’t have inspiration. All built with the “monster” creation rules.

Apparently 5e is also a board game because PCs and NPCs don’t follow the same rules.

Sure, but that's not very relevant when discussing the addition of 4e skill challenge rules into 5e. We should probably reference the final version that came out a whole decade ago. The basic structure of the skill challenge can imported without any issues since both editions use an extremely...

The skill challenge rules were iterated on in 2009 and 2010, so the DMG1 version was outdated one year into the edition, much like static racial bonuses, some of the monster math, the flying rules, magic item crafting, and so on. WotC was very aggressive in updating the game back then.

I see that as poor framing of a challenge. If the challenge is something you can overcome with just, say, convincing a single person, it probably shouldn't even be a skill challenge. Not all skill checks are supposed to be part of a skill challenge, and Rules Compendium has examples of skills in...

Definitely, although 2010 is only 2 years after the initial publication of 4e, and DMG2 was even earlier in 2009, so it’s not like the improved and evolved rules were published years later in an obscure online article. The rules were improved very quickly, all things considered.

Whenever the 4e skill challenge rules are discussed, there’s often a lot of misremembered stuff tossed around. The rules don’t prescribe a certain order for the checks, for example, or that everyone has to roll. One player once told me that they didn’t like the rules—yet turns out the player had...

The power is worded poorly, that's all. Instead of saying that you turn into the form of a wolf or a tiger, it should simply emphasize and empower the lupine or feline aspects of a shifter's bestial form (since in 4e shifters by default are either wolf or cat-like). So I'd re-word the effect as...

It’s interesting how arcane spell failure from armor has essentially gone full circle. Impossible to cast in armor (sans elven chain) in 2e; percentile failure in 3e; -2 to spell rolls/“DC” (translated to other editions) in non-proficient armor in 4e; and now impossible to cast in 5e—except if...

To me the 5e witch is found in the warlock class. Take the archfey, fiend, or celestial patron, and the tome or chain pact. You can get rituals like augury and beast bond; you can get a familiar; you can take thaumaturgy or druidcraft; you get hex and polymorph; you can heal. Basically you can...

If the aim is to treat combat as a failure state and something to avoid, I honestly don’t see the core chassis of 3rd edition suitable for that purpose. 3.5 has a lot of its rules devoted to detailed, grid-based combat. That’s one of its draws, the tactical nature of fights and all the rules...

I kind of like the simplicity of replacing feats with ability score increases. Definitely reduces complexity all around. The fixed spell DC sounds interesting too, although I'd be curious to see how it plays out in practice. Two hurdles that come to mind: monsters and their feats, and magic...

Average damage would probably work better. Maximum damage is what critical hits are in 4e, although magic weapons and implements add damage die on crits (1 die per plus). The hp issue isn't really an issue at all if you play with MM3, Monster Vault, and MV: Threats to Nentir Vale creatures...

Maybe cap it to 5th-level, automatically gain one level of exhaustion, takes an hour per spell level, no checks? Something simple and straightforward.

I think the topic is about rules that play well vs. rules that read well. A lot of people read the rules instead of playing games with the rules. I think this is something that'll always happen because it's a lot easier to find time to read books than to organize a game. I'm pretty sure WotC...

In the past few years, turn-based RPGs have been much more popular than RTwP RPGs. Why would they go RTwP when turn-based sells a lot more? Also, the two high-profile RTwP RPGs of the last few years (Pillars 2 and Pathfinder: Kingmaker) both added turn-based modes post-launch. Isn't it obvious...

Isn't that just a general personal preference gripe with regards to how PF2 handles information? Getting information is gated behind a rather elaborate process through Recall Knowledge, whereas some folks prefer to resolve it much quicker and without too much difficulty. To me it looks like...

Isn't Recall Knowledge meant for knowing how to disable a hazard? In the Game Mastering section of the CRB it says (about Recall Knowledge), "For a check about a specific creature, trap, or other subject with a level, use a level-based DC (adjusting for rarity as needed)."

I agree, but I've seen players frustrated because they can't hide on the same turn as they become invisible. You can pull that off in other editions but not in 5e, so maybe they did that with another character in another game and find it annoying when invisibility doesn't allow you to become...