Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8151718" data-attributes="member: 70468">I think we all recognize that we have different views on the game by default. There’s a limit on how interesting it is to continue talking about that. At some point, I want to start poking and prodding the parts that people are saying are problematic.In this case, I’m using problematic pretty broadly. I don’t think any of us here really have a problem with striking runes except in an abstract sense that they’re a vestige of the magic item Christmas tree from previous editions, which is kind of weird if one assumes they intended to move away from that model.As an aside, I don’t think they intended to get rid of the Christmas tree so much as mitigate it. After all, there are still apex items and other kinds of fundamental runes and skill-boosting items. You just don’t e.g., have your belt slot tied up because you’re a fighter, and you’re expected to have a level-appropriate belt of giant strength in that slot. Again, that’s why I brought up investiture. You can wear ten belts if that’s your thing, thus mitigating the Christmas tree. But I digress.As far as we can tell right now, PF2 features fairly solid math. I’m starting to see comments on reddit from people claiming that Age of Ashes was easy, and they had to buff the encounters to make them challenging, so maybe people are starting to figure out how to break it. However, assuming it’s solid, we should be able to reverse engineer the math’s assumptions and make them explicit. When we do that, we can start tweaking and playing with them.Personally, I’m not really bothered by striking runes. I think they’re more interesting than just a flat boost to damage (“rolling dice is fun”), but that’s about it. I’m going off on this tangent because I wanted to see if it’s possible to determine to make them (and devastating strikes) completely optional. The audience for that is people who do want to eliminate them. If someone is interested in PF2 (for whatever reason), but they like the low item experience they get in another game, it’d be nice to have recommendations for how they can achieve that.It’s helpful to understand the game as written and intended. That’s how you can identify problems and address them, but I don’t see a lot of value in further constraining myself once those things have been identified, nor am I interested in proselytizing about the problems I perceive with that configuration. What’s the point? I’d rather fix the parts I don’t like or understand the system, so I can provide suggestions to others about the parts they don’t like. Also, some people may like the default, and those problematic elements could be features they’d love.Anyway, that’s why I’m digging into the math behind striking runes. It’s not a topic I feel super strongly about, so I left it as a tangent here. I don’t think it could really sustain a thread on its own when no one is really interested in digging into it, and I’m not even that interested. Given the lack of traction, I’m fine with just letting the tangent die, but if someone posts about it, I’ve got my work saved here and can reference that in a future discussion.</blockquote>

Verification