Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 8149983" data-attributes="member: 12731">You're right insofar that any given game can't achieve really tight math if it needs to support both magic-less and magic-full characters.The bigger question that needs to be asked what is preferable?I just know that I don't want tight math if it depends on anemic items. Yes, I love PF2's tight math. No, I don't agree with their design decisions - specifically that they include the items in their math and so feel compelled to make them almost as lifeless as 4E's.Including items into the math compels the game, adventure and GM to hand them out. The better and more fun they are, the harder it becomes to avoid Christmas forests.So the solution isn't 3E. Or 5E - Pathfinder 2 sports much more challenging and interesting monsters and combats. There could have been a game going for the best of both worlds by making combats challenging (like PF2) and then offer cool and interesting and really character-defining items (a la 3E or 5E) for those groups that feel they don't appreciate the lethality!...and since monsters are much more capable and powerful, it's much easier to hand out fun items even to groups that doesn't need them, simply because I don't need to completely replace monsters (or add so many of them). The more the group struggles, the more items they can be assisted by.Give a party of PF2 characters their selection of 5E items, and it's still easy to put the fear of God into them, just by adding a single L+4 monster to whatever encounter they think they're too cool for! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f608.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":devilish:" title="Devil    :devilish:"  data-smilie="29"data-shortname=":devilish:" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f606.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":LOL:" title="Laugh    :LOL:"  data-smilie="17"data-shortname=":LOL:" />I am saying I don't see any need for PF2's tight math to be extended to items. The game would have served my needs much better if items were NOT expected/incorporated in "the math", so you aren't forced to hand out striking runes etc - but offer cool and powerful items (with clearly defined prices) when you do find them.In PF2 you only have the illusion of an a la carte menu. In reality you must put your money towards fundamental rules. Not cool.tl;dr: the benefit that a striking rune confers should totally be my choice (as GM) to hand out, not something whose absence cripples the character.</blockquote>

Verification