Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="meltdownpass" data-source="post: 8219388" data-attributes="member: 7029921">I'm on board with all of this.<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Streamline rules: I have no idea what is in the beginners box, but I did want to call out that I find the copy of PF2 noticeably poor as rules text. In many cases the rules text itself could easily be rewritten to be less verbose and better communicate intent. The most accessible rules writing style tends to use short declarative sentences, bolded keywords, and structures such as lists. PF2 rules text would benefit from adopting some of these conventions. </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Reduction of Feats: Absolutely. I recently decided to rebuild a character from the ground up. A level 10 character with the simplest possible rules still has to make ~40-50 decisions. About 30 of those are feats, and there are literally hundreds of feats. As a player when I make a decision for a character, I want that decision to describe a significant characteristic that expresses itself through roleplay and mechanics, not a +1 bonus to Performance checks during night-time dance festivals under a full moon.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Simplified Classes: This one is a little vague. The broader point of too much design being driven by the tactical miniatures boardgame seems apt to me.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Striking Rune Removal: Yes. Big mistake to put any kind of more-or-less mandatory math bump as a magic item to begin with.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Remove +1/Lvl: Never going to happen, but it would be nice.</li>
</ol></blockquote>

[QUOTE="meltdownpass, post: 8219388, member: 7029921"] I'm on board with all of this. [LIST=1] [*][B]Streamline rules:[/B] I have no idea what is in the beginners box, but I did want to call out that I find the copy of PF2 noticeably poor as rules text. In many cases the rules text itself could easily be rewritten to be less verbose and better communicate intent. The most accessible rules writing style tends to use short declarative sentences, bolded keywords, and structures such as lists. PF2 rules text would benefit from adopting some of these conventions. [*][B]Reduction of Feats[/B]: Absolutely. I recently decided to rebuild a character from the ground up. A level 10 character with the simplest possible rules still has to make ~40-50 decisions. About 30 of those are feats, and there are literally hundreds of feats. As a player when I make a decision for a character, I want that decision to describe a significant characteristic that expresses itself through roleplay and mechanics, not a +1 bonus to Performance checks during night-time dance festivals under a full moon. [*][B]Simplified Classes[/B]: This one is a little vague. The broader point of too much design being driven by the tactical miniatures boardgame seems apt to me. [*][B]Striking Rune Removal[/B]: Yes. Big mistake to put any kind of more-or-less mandatory math bump as a magic item to begin with. [*][B]Remove +1/Lvl[/B]: Never going to happen, but it would be nice. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification