Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ichabod" data-source="post: 9047889" data-attributes="member: 1257">
<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Hit points vs. damage is just counting in different directions. I don't see one having value over another.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think &quot;exceeds&quot; is actually more confusing than &quot;equals or exceeds.&quot; People are going to want to know &quot;What is the number I need to roll?&quot; That is &quot;equals or exceeds.&quot;</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">I like attacks of opportunity.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rolling for AC adds more rolls and more math, slowing down the slowest part of the game. Having gone from 3rd to 5th to PF2E and back to 5th, I find I really like the simplification of 5th. Also, like most probability, it's not as intuitive as you might think. If you have a +7 to hit and they have a 20 AC, you need a 13 to hit, which is a 40% chance. But if you have a +7 to hit and they have a +10 to defense, you have a 38.25% chance to hit. Why? Imagine they roll a 10 on defense, for a 20 total defense. Now you have that same 40% chance to hit. But they can roll 9 numbers less than ten (which makes them easier to hit) and 10 numbers greater than 10 (which makes them harder to hit). I think having the one roll makes the probabilities easier to understand, which is a good thing.</li>
</ul>I think the only sacred cow I would want to get rid of is the narrow pigeon-holing of some of the classes. &quot;Rangers and druids do outdoors stuff&quot; and &quot;fighters aren't magical and just beat things up.&quot; Open that up more or deemphasize classes so that all the classes can reasonably contribute to all the pillars of play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ichabod, post: 9047889, member: 1257"] [LIST] [*]Hit points vs. damage is just counting in different directions. I don't see one having value over another. [*]I think "exceeds" is actually more confusing than "equals or exceeds." People are going to want to know "What is the number I need to roll?" That is "equals or exceeds." [*]I like attacks of opportunity. [*]Rolling for AC adds more rolls and more math, slowing down the slowest part of the game. Having gone from 3rd to 5th to PF2E and back to 5th, I find I really like the simplification of 5th. Also, like most probability, it's not as intuitive as you might think. If you have a +7 to hit and they have a 20 AC, you need a 13 to hit, which is a 40% chance. But if you have a +7 to hit and they have a +10 to defense, you have a 38.25% chance to hit. Why? Imagine they roll a 10 on defense, for a 20 total defense. Now you have that same 40% chance to hit. But they can roll 9 numbers less than ten (which makes them easier to hit) and 10 numbers greater than 10 (which makes them harder to hit). I think having the one roll makes the probabilities easier to understand, which is a good thing. [/LIST] I think the only sacred cow I would want to get rid of is the narrow pigeon-holing of some of the classes. "Rangers and druids do outdoors stuff" and "fighters aren't magical and just beat things up." Open that up more or deemphasize classes so that all the classes can reasonably contribute to all the pillars of play. [/QUOTE]

Verification