Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9230593" data-attributes="member: 7026617">I don't think its so much &quot;didn't learn the lesson&quot; as &quot;weren't able to avoid it entirely&quot;, which is, honestly, an intrinsic risk of exception based design; since nothing is built to a common metric, bad assumptions can sneak in to individual design and not even be realized until something is out in the field for a while.The problem with both of these (though I find it more tolerable at the tactical end, since it doesn't make the problem as consistently visible in most cases) is if you're going to care about these things at all, you've got two real choice; set the ceiling so it is still manageable, or make the floor so it isn't crippling.&nbsp; The former virtually mandates engaging with that level if you don't want to feel like the game is punishing (which can be super irritating to people who kind of don't want to have to lean into that), but the latter makes it all too easy to break the game.&nbsp; You can compress the ends, but at that point probably the decisions at each end don't matter much (which is an objection fans of PF1e have had for the strategic layer in PF2e, because while its hard to completely screw up there, its also hard to get an enormous amount out of it).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 9230593, member: 7026617"] I don't think its so much "didn't learn the lesson" as "weren't able to avoid it entirely", which is, honestly, an intrinsic risk of exception based design; since nothing is built to a common metric, bad assumptions can sneak in to individual design and not even be realized until something is out in the field for a while. The problem with both of these (though I find it more tolerable at the tactical end, since it doesn't make the problem as consistently visible in most cases) is if you're going to care about these things at all, you've got two real choice; set the ceiling so it is still manageable, or make the floor so it isn't crippling. The former virtually [I]mandates[/I] engaging with that level if you don't want to feel like the game is punishing (which can be super irritating to people who kind of don't want to have to lean into that), but the latter makes it all too easy to break the game. You can compress the ends, but at that point probably the decisions at each end don't matter much (which is an objection fans of PF1e have had for the strategic layer in PF2e, because while its hard to completely screw up there, its also hard to get an enormous amount out of it). [/QUOTE]

Verification