Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
It’s LAUNCH DAY For The Pathfinder 2 Playtest!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 7756468" data-attributes="member: 37579"><p>Plus the -2 volley penalty for using a longbow within 50 feet. Longbows in Pathfinder 2 are only effective without penalty between 51-100 feet.</p><p>So in a game where you're always going to be fighting people +/- 3 levels of you and need a 10+ to hit, a -3 penalty to most attacks is steep and will always put you behind the curve. It's a 30% reduction of accuracy. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not going to respond to this. Because, as you say later: </p><p></p><p>5th Edition discussion doesn't belong here. It's largely irrelevant to the discussion.</p><p></p><p>It's also whataboutism. Pointing out the flaws in 5e (and debatable ones at that) doesn't make the flaws in Pathfinder 2 forgivable or negate its problems. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is kinda the catch. It's designing the fighter like a caster. Instead of letting players focus on one or two signature thing, it's giving them lots and lots of options they may not want. It's giving players who might just want to hit things a bunch of martial "spells" and a large hand size of options. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The point is that the game is purposely designed for "balance" over "play". It wants you to play the expected characters that fit into the boxes designed by the game designers and how they conceptualise the classes and ancestries. Playing against type is harder, as is making variant characters. </p><p></p><p>And while the archer ranger build might be viable at low levels, at high levels the character will get feat after feat that doesn't benefit them and that they do not want. They'll have to pick from options that do not appeal to them and offer no benefit. It's the game telling you that you're playing it wrong. Or to "buy splatbook X" where the paladin gets an archery build with two new feats and six reprints.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think they'll be fine. They seem much more in line with other classes. </p><p></p><p>But the <em>point </em>is that having general combat feats and having the wizard take one instead of a caster feat is NOT going to move them from "fine" to "broken". </p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed. </p><p>I just think the baseline feats that let you get adequate at archery, two-weapon fighting, using a shield, and other fighting styles need to be generic. There's lots of room for other generic combat feats. Like Quick Draw, Blind-Fighting, or maybe even Shield Bash. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The whole point of roleplaying games like Pathfinder is being able to build the characters you want. Pathfinder's whole selling point over 5e is increased customization and options. But the game is applying shackles and needless limitations to that customisation, which is defeating the primary selling point of the game. Instead of freeform creation, it's presenting classes with a bunch of established feat chains built around a single theme, which is a little too like the subclass design of 5e. Having the freedom not to take a subclass' feature isn't really a viable option if the other options don't work with your build. That's not a meaningful choice, that's a choice between optimal and in-optimal... which is the exact opposite of what is being asked for. </p><p>That's a huge freakin' design flaw.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 7756468, member: 37579"] Plus the -2 volley penalty for using a longbow within 50 feet. Longbows in Pathfinder 2 are only effective without penalty between 51-100 feet. So in a game where you're always going to be fighting people +/- 3 levels of you and need a 10+ to hit, a -3 penalty to most attacks is steep and will always put you behind the curve. It's a 30% reduction of accuracy. I'm not going to respond to this. Because, as you say later: 5th Edition discussion doesn't belong here. It's largely irrelevant to the discussion. It's also whataboutism. Pointing out the flaws in 5e (and debatable ones at that) doesn't make the flaws in Pathfinder 2 forgivable or negate its problems. Which is kinda the catch. It's designing the fighter like a caster. Instead of letting players focus on one or two signature thing, it's giving them lots and lots of options they may not want. It's giving players who might just want to hit things a bunch of martial "spells" and a large hand size of options. The point is that the game is purposely designed for "balance" over "play". It wants you to play the expected characters that fit into the boxes designed by the game designers and how they conceptualise the classes and ancestries. Playing against type is harder, as is making variant characters. And while the archer ranger build might be viable at low levels, at high levels the character will get feat after feat that doesn't benefit them and that they do not want. They'll have to pick from options that do not appeal to them and offer no benefit. It's the game telling you that you're playing it wrong. Or to "buy splatbook X" where the paladin gets an archery build with two new feats and six reprints. I think they'll be fine. They seem much more in line with other classes. But the [I]point [/I]is that having general combat feats and having the wizard take one instead of a caster feat is NOT going to move them from "fine" to "broken". Agreed. I just think the baseline feats that let you get adequate at archery, two-weapon fighting, using a shield, and other fighting styles need to be generic. There's lots of room for other generic combat feats. Like Quick Draw, Blind-Fighting, or maybe even Shield Bash. The whole point of roleplaying games like Pathfinder is being able to build the characters you want. Pathfinder's whole selling point over 5e is increased customization and options. But the game is applying shackles and needless limitations to that customisation, which is defeating the primary selling point of the game. Instead of freeform creation, it's presenting classes with a bunch of established feat chains built around a single theme, which is a little too like the subclass design of 5e. Having the freedom not to take a subclass' feature isn't really a viable option if the other options don't work with your build. That's not a meaningful choice, that's a choice between optimal and in-optimal... which is the exact opposite of what is being asked for. That's a huge freakin' design flaw. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
It’s LAUNCH DAY For The Pathfinder 2 Playtest!
Top