Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8149926" data-attributes="member: 70468">Yes, I’m just talking about your change to reduce ABP to a minimum.This is a contradiction. 5e still has stat-boosting items. It still has +X weapons. By pretending they aren’t part of the math, it ensures that it can never provide good tools for assessing how strong the PCs are or what they can face.You don’t have to necessarily make them an assumption. That’s where I was going about alternate ways to assess characters. If, as you say, they can replace levels, then those level-altering items ought to be flagged with a level modifier or something to indicate that, so the GM can take that into account.Investiture means you don’t have to worry about item slots. Stat-boosting items can exist, and they don’t compete with other items in that slot because you can just wear both of them.It may not serve as a practical limit on how many you can wear, but neither did item slots in 3e. I can’t recall (even past 20th level) a character in a campaign I’ve run filling every single slot. What items slots did do was ensure players ever only wanted stat-boosting items in their slots.That’s why having an expected progression is fine with me. Those items don’t compete with fun items for slots, so they can exist and provide an alternate sense of progression. That striking runes are so good doesn’t bother me either because I’d give them out anyway. Yes, obviously it would be better if PF2 provided a way to assess them for GMs who didn’t want to do that or be bound by that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenada, post: 8149926, member: 70468"] Yes, I’m just talking about your change to reduce ABP to a minimum. This is a contradiction. 5e still has stat-boosting items. It still has +X weapons. By pretending they aren’t part of the math, it ensures that it can never provide good tools for assessing how strong the PCs are or what they can face. You don’t have to necessarily make them an assumption. That’s where I was going about alternate ways to assess characters. If, as you say, they can replace levels, then those level-altering items ought to be flagged with a level modifier or something to indicate that, so the GM can take that into account. Investiture means you don’t have to worry about item slots. Stat-boosting items can exist, and they don’t compete with other items in that slot because you can just wear both of them. It may not serve as a practical limit on how many you can wear, but neither did item slots in 3e. I can’t recall (even past 20th level) a character in a campaign I’ve run filling every single slot. What items slots did do was ensure players ever only wanted stat-boosting items in their slots. That’s why having an expected progression is fine with me. Those items don’t compete with fun items for slots, so they can exist and provide an alternate sense of progression. That [I]striking runes[/I] are so good doesn’t bother me either because I’d give them out anyway. Yes, obviously it would be better if PF2 provided a way to assess them for GMs who didn’t want to do that or be bound by that. [/QUOTE]

Verification