Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 8099925" data-attributes="member: 12731">You would have thought Paizo had learned from WotC that the gamer base is much more tolerant to a slower crunch rollout than previously thought. But nope. Pathfinder 2 is happily turning on the hose, <a href="https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/d20-crash.296091/" target="_blank">partying like it's 2002</a>...&quot;extremely small bonuses in limited circumstances&quot;... My advice, don't read the section on Talismans...&quot;Skill feats that were required to do things that as a DM, I would have allowed otherwise&quot; Yes, one of my biggest beefs with the game is that Paizo is actively obliterating the &quot;yes, but&quot; gamesmastering style. Paizo is reserving every little corner of the design space for themselves. Either there is already a feat to &quot;let you do that&quot; or it is reserved for future publication.You are absolutely meant to face crippling restrictions on nearly every non-standard action (mainly swashbuckling stuff), so that you will want to take a feat that removes the limitation. You want to jump fences faster? Crawl through gutters faster? Climb without becoming defenseless? You can't. But you can if you take this feat (sometimes with a ridiculously high level requirement).That's a negative way to build a ruleset. I strongly dislike that design philosophy. More importantly, I believe it compares unfavorably with 5E's design philosophy which seems to say &quot;you can absolutely do that, and if you take this feat, you'll become awesome doing it&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 8099925, member: 12731"] You would have thought Paizo had learned from WotC that the gamer base is much more tolerant to a slower crunch rollout than previously thought. But nope. Pathfinder 2 is happily turning on the hose, [URL='https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/d20-crash.296091/']partying like it's 2002[/URL]... "extremely small bonuses in limited circumstances"... My advice, don't read the section on Talismans... "Skill feats that were required to do things that as a DM, I would have allowed otherwise" Yes, one of my biggest beefs with the game is that Paizo is actively obliterating the "yes, but" gamesmastering style. Paizo is reserving every little corner of the design space for themselves. Either there is already a feat to "let you do that" or it is reserved for future publication. You are absolutely meant to face crippling restrictions on nearly every non-standard action (mainly swashbuckling stuff), so that you will want to take a feat that removes the limitation. You want to jump fences faster? Crawl through gutters faster? Climb without becoming defenseless? You can't. But you can if you take this feat (sometimes with a ridiculously high level requirement). That's a negative way to build a ruleset. I strongly dislike that design philosophy. More importantly, I believe it compares unfavorably with 5E's design philosophy which seems to say "you can absolutely do that, and if you take this feat, you'll become awesome doing it". [/QUOTE]

Verification