Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Eirikrautha" data-source="post: 7375660" data-attributes="member: 6777843">Ideally, that would be how it worked.&nbsp; But both organizationally and mechanically, it's not.&nbsp; I've benn at PFS tables at Cons where players were told outright, &quot;You don't have X feat, so you can't do that.&quot;&nbsp; Maybe those GMs were &quot;doing it wrong.&quot;&nbsp; But I've watched it happen, and I don't think its that rare.&nbsp; It becomes the expectation that, if a mechanical option is available that it will become the preferred method of doing that thing.Your own examples support this.&nbsp; If &quot;attack people’s weak points from a hidden position&quot; is codified in the game rules as &quot;do more damage&quot; then only a Rogue gets sneak attack damage.&nbsp; If the game is balanced around the chance a Battlemaster has to disarm, then either you trivialize the BM's ability by giving everyone else the same chance to succeed, or the game mechanics numerically &quot;persuade&quot; others not to try because the numbers mean they have a radically lower chance of success (this was one serious problem with PF1's skill system).&nbsp; Either way, the build choices reduce the *viable* choices.Of course, this is necessary in any RPG.&nbsp; The question is the extent.&nbsp; And that circles back around to my original point.&nbsp; The OP could tell very quickly whether the new PF would fit his balance of where player choice occurs,</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Eirikrautha, post: 7375660, member: 6777843"] Ideally, that would be how it worked. But both organizationally and mechanically, it's not. I've benn at PFS tables at Cons where players were told outright, "You don't have X feat, so you can't do that." Maybe those GMs were "doing it wrong." But I've watched it happen, and I don't think its that rare. It becomes the expectation that, if a mechanical option is available that it will become the preferred method of doing that thing. Your own examples support this. If "attack people’s weak points from a hidden position" is codified in the game rules as "do more damage" then only a Rogue gets sneak attack damage. If the game is balanced around the chance a Battlemaster has to disarm, then either you trivialize the BM's ability by giving everyone else the same chance to succeed, or the game mechanics numerically "persuade" others not to try because the numbers mean they have a radically lower chance of success (this was one serious problem with PF1's skill system). Either way, the build choices reduce the *viable* choices. Of course, this is necessary in any RPG. The question is the extent. And that circles back around to my original point. The OP could tell very quickly whether the new PF would fit his balance of where player choice occurs, [/QUOTE]

Verification