Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 6308134" data-attributes="member: 6688277">I can agree with you that PF certainly is more fiddly, but your experiences with 3.x are not the same as I have seen throughout these boards. Our 3.x groups actually liked the options and all other actions one could perform - trip, bull's rush...etc They actually succeeded on their checks and the system helped them out with which ones they wanted to be specialised in with feats, so I'm puzzled why your group had such difficulty performing them.But yes it was the rules that made them switch - the rules are the ones that turn a combat into a grind. Lets just take 4e for example...and these are preferences for style of play which assist in play immersion1. Our group prefers the ol' Vancian style of spell casting (house rule made)Once you begin messing with rate of powers, it starts affecting balance, which is a critical component of 4e (more house rules)2. Our group prefers the cleric as the actual healer (house rule made)Now you start having problems with screaming people to a state of awake and healthy, other "healing" related powers need to be looked at. (more house rules)3. Optimisation (of ability scores) is almost a necessary evil, it wasnt too our liking (house rule made)Again you messing with a core element of the system - its affects monsters, DC checks....(more house rules)the list goes on...Thing is, making house rules for style of play preferrences in 4e wasnt as easy as it was in 3.x or as it is in 5e, because 4e was a tight working complete system, pull one cog out here and you affect a myriad of other components. That was our experience with it, its great that you didnt feel the need to make house rules, but for those that did because they didnt want to be forced into a magic-everything world, it was a pain.Powers were essentially manoeuvres a character was specialised in that had a variable refresh rate. If you felt that anyone could do anything (martial at least) at any time with no thought as to if the result of their action was better than someone who was specialised in certain power, then sure you dont have to account for where balance breaks down. It is a free-fall system. It probably would have made a better game for us, if we had scratched power restrictions completely like you seem to have done.It certainly would have helped to know that a Fighter could have made the Spinning Sweep manoeuvre more than once per encounter (I mean all it does is 1[W]+ str dam mod + knock target prone)According to you, using page 42 - the wizard, rogue and leprechaun characters could do the same thing multiple times, but the Fighter, using the rules, could only use that power once in an encounter. Hell and then you tack on other "conditions" with those moves and combat goes wild. It certainly would have been more fun, I grant you that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification