Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8113717" data-attributes="member: 7026617">Same for things that make it more likely for opponents to make save fumbles and demotes their crit chances.&nbsp; Its probably one of the areas where I suspect experience with D&amp;D3 and PF1 give people false positives in expectations, since a +/-2 on those things there is pretty trivial and generally lost in the noise, where if you're paying attention the effect can be pretty notable in PF2.I have to admit I've rarely found an opportunity to use my bow in Age of Ashes and I'm probably more prone to closing up immediately than is always ideal (I'm often setting up my wife's character with a flank, but honestly, she's perfectly capable of doing a tumble through and getting a target flat-footed without my help).&nbsp; The only reason I've not done it more than I should is I'll often find a bard spell I want to throw early on.&nbsp; Part of that might be that so much of the encounters in the early part have been in-doors, and keeping things away from the oracle-sorcerer.The only time I recall making a third strike with my fighter was the one time his shield got broken and I was fighting a golem.&nbsp; I just had nothing else useful to do (moving away was undesireable because I didn't particularly want it closing up with the cloistered cleric.)It could be terminology, or it could be they just haven't run any systems that have a relatively high floor.&nbsp; (One observation I made about another post; I can name a number of systems where letting two encounter merge that were individually moderate in threat would be really, really bad.&nbsp; The whole BRP family of games come to mind.&nbsp; In fact, the only ones I have regularly used where its not true is ones that combine mook rules or brittle opponents with easy group-delete effects.&nbsp; Its not something I'd do in almost any post-gunpowder game, for example).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8113717, member: 7026617"] Same for things that make it more likely for opponents to make save fumbles and demotes their crit chances. Its probably one of the areas where I suspect experience with D&D3 and PF1 give people false positives in expectations, since a +/-2 on those things there is pretty trivial and generally lost in the noise, where if you're paying attention the effect can be pretty notable in PF2. I have to admit I've rarely found an opportunity to use my bow in Age of Ashes and I'm probably more prone to closing up immediately than is always ideal (I'm often setting up my wife's character with a flank, but honestly, she's perfectly capable of doing a tumble through and getting a target flat-footed without my help). The only reason I've not done it more than I should is I'll often find a bard spell I want to throw early on. Part of that might be that so much of the encounters in the early part have been in-doors, and keeping things away from the oracle-sorcerer. The only time I recall making a third strike with my fighter was the one time his shield got broken and I was fighting a golem. I just had nothing else useful to do (moving away was undesireable because I didn't particularly want it closing up with the cloistered cleric.) It could be terminology, or it could be they just haven't run any systems that have a relatively high floor. (One observation I made about another post; I can name a number of systems where letting two encounter merge that were individually moderate in threat would be really, really bad. The whole BRP family of games come to mind. In fact, the only ones I have regularly used where its not true is ones that combine mook rules or brittle opponents with easy group-delete effects. Its not something I'd do in almost any post-gunpowder game, for example). [/QUOTE]

Verification