Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tigris" data-source="post: 9290678" data-attributes="member: 7043270">I personally dont see why you would want to remove elite, minion, and solo monsters. Having these specially designed monsters, increases a lot on how different encounters can be.  Solo monsters can be quite different with having more actions, reactions and more area attacks etc. so having a normal monster instead, really will not be the same.This especially since 4E has a LOT stronger conditions you can apply to enemies. To make bosses work in PF2 they had to reduce how strong crowd control can be a lot. Thats why there are so many conditions which in the end just give -1or -2  to armor and or attack.Also the critical hit rule from PF2 increases the scaling per level a lot. This is one of the main reasons why in PF2 enemies double in power per 2 levels instead of per 4 levels in 4E. This further reduces the variance you can have in encounters, since the level difference which is allowed becomes much smaller. Further it makes rolls take longer. Before when you roll a 15+ you know "Oh I hit" now you still have to compare your attack to the enemy defense to see if it was a crit. 4E is already considered to take long, and this makes it take longer.Additional this rule would make the +hit effect in 4E even more stronger than they already are! Some classes could get (together with the leader) hits when rolling a 2 or 3. This would mean they crit on a 12 or 13 which is an extreme increase of damage.The secondary attack minor actions also make multi attacking less special and again increases the time needed per turn, since there will be more attack rolls for some (not that high) additional damage and it does not really add any choice. If you dont have anything better to do you will just do a 2ndary attack, especially enemies which dont use the swift action. Also having 2 attacks in a turn with different modifiers is again increasing time and is not really elegant.In general I dont see why one would take design lessons from Pathfinder 2 since I think it took some of the worst parts of 4E instead of the good parts and is all just about multi attacking with basic attacks (with different names).4E combat is a lot more varied than PF2 combat, and also it had to jump through MANY hoops in order to make these things work (the crit and 3 action economy)<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Having a really extreme scaling</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Getting away from a lot of area damage and strong conditions</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Having martials become a lot more similar under the hood (a lot of their "special attacks" are just passives enhancing basic attacks)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You need heavy negative modifier to make combat work</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Combat needs to be reduced to 3 turns (from the more tactical 5 turns) and the number of enemies in general needs to be halved, to make combat not take too long.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification