Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arakasius" data-source="post: 7756404" data-attributes="member: 6944960">Lots of hyperbole again from people who have not played the game and likely never had any intention of playing the game.Now that I've DM'd about 5 hours of game over 2 nights I feel like I have more to add now. Our group enjoyed it a lot and is moving over our PF1 game to PF2. We spent the last 1.5 hours of last night working on moving their level 11 characters over.The combat class feats people think are required to make function characters is no more true than not being a functional ranged character who is a non fighter in 5e. A ranged Paladin is just fine in PF2 despite not getting double/triple shot. A fighter will do 2 attacks at -2 against separate targets. A paladin can just do iterative attacks but can hit the same target. Does this mean the Paladin archer doesn't function? No it just makes it a bit worse, and they can do things like Blade of Justice or Righteous Ally to give damage buffs to their weapons to have higher static bonuses or more dice rolls on it. The class feats in general are not giving bonuses to hit, and in only a few cases are they giving bonuses to damage. Could I see them moving a couple combat generalist feats into the general feat pool? Sure, but I don't expect a lot of it because doing that is part of what allows casters to steal all the martial's tricks and put them on a class with 9th level spells. Martials having exclusivity to martial attacks to me is no more unfair or broken then casters getting exclusive access to powerful spells.As for feedback, well they have no need to just listen to the people who shout loudest, whatever their motives are. And there are some very loud people on the internet and tbh from what I've seen regarding the skill system people are arguing about they want things that are worse for the game. Unless people think PF1 was fun when the game got past 7th level and skills became pointless in the face of magic. That being said there is still a lot of stuff that I would be happy if they change/modify.1. I wouldn't mind being a bit more conversational in tone in certain parts of the rulebook, mostly around the modes of play. I'm perfectly fine being very concise and specfic within battle.2. I don't think there is much point to the -2 penalty for the opportunity attack types (AoO or Retributive Strike). I could see them just going to flat roll on that.3. Dying rules are changing I guess, it seemed fine from the one unconscious person we had in our session but I'm curious to see what they go with.4. I could see them tweaking the multiclassing rules (since now only way to multiclass is through archetyping since you can't change your original class) Then again in PF1 unless you were doing full BAB to full BAB multiclassing was a total trap.5. I would like the ready action to be a 1 action thing so you can do something cooler with the ready like cast a spell.6. I wouldn't mind trying level/2 for all the level based numbers to keep numbers a little down, but I love the new proficiency numbers in that like 5e it guarantees the upper and lower bounds of a party are within a certain value.7. Not sure how much I love the take on some polymorph forms. Mainly I'm not a big fan of something like Righteous Might not allowing you to cast spells. Now I don't mind just having the elemental forms have their own stats again and not be based on their own. I also don't mind not having Natural Spell and making Wild Shape just a reskin for full casters. Now being a beast feels like a beast, but I don't like things like Righteous Might shutting down casting. I also find the rules for some of the durations on them a bit weird. It's hard to make a druid who stays at an animal the full time.8. Inflexibility of signature skills in how you can take them independently from your class. I don't mind that its an opportunity cost, but there should be more options to add a signature skill so you can get to legendary in something that's not typical for your class.9. Resonance probably needs changes. I like the goal of limiting magic item use (per 5e) but there is probably a better/cleaner way to do than the current rules.I'm not concerned about feat/tweaking options. This is Paizo and they're going to add a lot more to that. That's why it amuses me that people are focusing so much on the feat balancing between classes. This is a playtest and its pretty clear the final game is going to have more than what is presented here, and further books will of course add even more.Edit: 10. Ancestry feats likely need changes I think to be more front loaded. I'd shift more bonuses to heritage feats, give two choices at level one and then give less options to take on ancestry feats as they level.</blockquote>

Verification