|
Tibalt posted:I haven't been keeping up with Pathfinder enough to tell if you're joking. I’m not. It’s not a direct clone of 4E but it’s really quite obvious that Paizo has taken a lot of inspiration from and is looking to learn a lot from 4e. Powers, clear technical language, class balance, stuff like that. It’s been really promising so far.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 12:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
PF2e is both similar and different to 4e: The core mechanic is that everything is actions. Stand up? One action. Move? One action. Jump. One action. Attack. One action. use a potion, one action. Etc. Spells are usually two actions - and Magic Missile is one to three. On your turn you can do up to three actions-worth of stuff. So you could move and cast a spell, move attack move, attack three times, etc. If you attack multiple times in a turn, attacks after the first (or was it the second? It's been a while) are penalised, and the penalties increase for the third attack. It's an interesting core mechanic, but until there's a decent character builder and online spell listing system, it's a loving nightmare to build characters in. It's very 4e-ish in that everything is well codified, and there's a lot of symbology rather than free-text stuff in the core mechanics. But conversely, the spell list is basically identical to PF1e and therefore, 3.5, so it's wordy as gently caress and pretty woolly compared to 4e spells. I enjoyed it a lot, but I wouldn't play it again without digital tools or hardcopy books, trying to build from PDFs was a NIGHTMARE.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 13:34
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:I haven't been keeping up with Pathfinder enough to tell if you're joking. Arivia is a Paizo shill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 13:36
|
|
|
Pathfinder 2e takes the worst parts of 4e, combines them with the worst of Pathfinder, and unifies them into a great turd log.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 13:38
|
|
|
Not to mention the worst part of video games: paid early access
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 14:50
|
|
|
Do you have to pay for the playtest PF2E material now? I signed up a while ago to look at it and it's been free for me. PF2E learned a lot from 4E's keywords and strict rule templating, but it's the worst of 3.5 and 4e's system mastery and character building complications, and learned nothing from 4E and 5E's AEDU spread, or giving every character a relevant at-will attack. I'd still try it once or twice to see if the design ends up working or not 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
Yeah the playtest stuff was free - you could pay to get hardcopy, but the soft copy was free. I'd be willing to play it again, but I'd honestly prefer to see the action system hacked bodily out into a system with simpler progression and mechanics - I really like the 3-action-system concept, it makes it a LOT simpler to work out how things should work and tou don't have to have multiple types of action to track, but the cruft around it was just so... much...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 15:50
|
|
|
Calling them "bonus actions" was a mistake from the start. With new players, they often think it means they can take another Action, for free. Who can fault them? What else would a bonus action be? Then you get a little wiser and more experienced and realize bonus actions are a lesser thing but we can't call them that and, as mentioned above, we can't spend our big action for a little action despite framing it as if an Action is bigger/takes more time than a Bonus Action. The way it works, it'd be clearer if they called it a Red Action and a Blue Action, even if there's absolutely zero resonance to it, because that's functionally what you have. You're ordering a combo meal with one entree, one side, and uh.... 30 feet of coke. Like I said, there's no resonance, but at least it captures what you're doing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
Everyone gets 60 AP. Attacking costs 35 AP, Full Attacks cost 55 AP, Moving costs 1 AP per foot moved. Elves get an extra 5 AP, Dwarves lose 5 AP. This is not an entirely serious suggestion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
The biggest nightmare I had with bonus action as terminology was playing with brand new players and a newish GM who saw "two weapon fighting" listed under bonus actions for every character on dndbeyond and proceded to immediately confuse it for double attack Especially because I'm playing a monk and had to keep explaining what two weapon fighting actually meant and why I was allowed to take that second bonus swing at level 1 and a longbow ranger, greatsword paladin, and warhammer fighter could not
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Calling them "bonus actions" was a mistake from the start. They had two perfectly reasonable terms to use already “swift” or “minor”, so why didn’t they?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:You can't do that in 5e. This usually doesn't matter much but when it does, things get a little silly. At least IMO. Let's say for example you're some kind of, I dunno, Eldritch Knight with Misty Step. And you want to use Misty Step (a bonus action) together with Second Wind (also a bonus action) because you need to GTFO and recover. That's not allowed in 5e. Even if you'd be willing to give up your regular action and all of your normal movement, you're just not allowed to do it. For some reason you can't catch your breath and cast a spell which is "especially swift" (PHB p. 202) at the same time. But on the other hand, you can totally catch your breath, jog around a bit, and cast a slower spell at the same time. Why? Because we're the Aristocrats! I let my players uptick abilities from a bonus action to an action and haven't had any ill effects so far. Are there combos out there that can really abuse this house rule? We're not usually loophole abusers but there's gotta be tons of combinations I haven't considered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
I will not be satisfied until they print some feat or spell or something that gives you another bonus action each turn and call it a "bonus bonus action".
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:I let my players uptick abilities from a bonus action to an action and haven't had any ill effects so far. Are there combos out there that can really abuse this house rule? We're not usually loophole abusers but there's gotta be tons of combinations I haven't considered. I'm not seeing an obvious problem with doing that. The rule on casting multiple spells when one is a bonus action spell would still apply; bonus action attacks require that you take an attack action, so you couldn't stack them; one level in Hexblade would allow you to cast Hex and drop the Hexblade's Curse in the same turn, but if there's a problem there it has to do with Hexblade being a great 1 level dip. Movement needs to remain outside this downgrading action economy, of course, but nobody's suggested otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:Everyone gets 60 AP. Attacking costs 35 AP, Full Attacks cost 55 AP, Moving costs 1 AP per foot moved. Elves get an extra 5 AP, Dwarves lose 5 AP. AP is a good name because that's what you'd get trying to plan your turn out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I will not be satisfied until they print some feat or spell or something that gives you another bonus action each turn and call it a "bonus bonus action". Nehru the Damaja posted:Calling them "bonus actions" was a mistake from the start. With new players, they often think it means they can take another Action, for free. Who can fault them? What else would a bonus action be? Yeah it's true. Ideally they'd just come up with an entirely different term that has neither the word bonus or action. Like "Each turn you have an Action, an Exploit (bonus action), and a Gesture (free action)".
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:42
|
|
|
Baldur's Gate III was announced and looks to be using 5e as it's base. Warning the trailer is high on the body horror scale. https://baldursgate3.game/
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
Even Larian's failures (Dragon Commander) are pretty fun. I'm in
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Good news, Pathfinder 2e is just that! Everything I read about that strikes as a living headache. By comparison to me, and I understand the comparison is a bit unfair; 4e feels like is trying to be World of Warcraft, P2e feels like it's the act of developing, playtesting and bugfixing World of Warcraft all at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:They had two perfectly reasonable terms to use already “swift” or “minor”, so why didn’t they? They very specifically wanted it to have a new name. That's all it is. Edit: let's not have a discussion on 4e being WoW or whatever. It's hard for me not to edition war. Gharbad the Weak fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Jun 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
I enjoy a lot of editions for a lot of reasons. I'm kind of the Switzerland of the edition war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 20:56
|
|
|
I certainly have my preferences but I don't get the hate for any edition. Unless it's born of personal experience of being the only person in a good playgroup who doesn't like the edition everyone else loves the anger I sometimes see doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
RE: Bonus Action, I guarantee it comes fron wanting no action economy at all. The idea was supposed to be "every round you can do A Thing and that's it." That's why movement isn't an action. Then they needed to codify doing a smaller thing, without making actual seperate action types, and it all immediately goes to hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
I remember when I played the "DnD Next" play test and they seemed a lot looser with the whole turn rulings. They encouraged you to offer advantage on things if you had a good reason, and to be a bit loose with "anything goes in a turn if you could reasonably do it in 6 seconds." I don't know if something was written differently or if we just took things more seriously after PHB1.0 was published but something in our group changed between the beta and the release.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
A lot of things changed, the 4 elements monk was cool as hell in the playtest
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
Also there was a cleave like ability for the fighter
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:Even Larian's failures (Dragon Commander) are pretty fun. I'm in Seriously. I am extremely hyped for this. I heard somewhere that the other two Bauldur's Gate games (and Neverwinter and I'm sure some more I can't remember) are coming to consoles too. I don't think they're getting remastered, sadly, but I'm still looking forward to it. For some reason I'm not a big fan of playing them on my PC. If they port Planescape: Torment, I may die. I keep trying to get into that one, but I just can't, and I think having it on a console might help some. Especially if it's a Switch and I can just bring it to work with me when I'm by myself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:20
|
|
|
Soysaucebeast posted:Seriously. I am extremely hyped for this. I heard somewhere that the other two Bauldur's Gate games (and Neverwinter and I'm sure some more I can't remember) are coming to consoles too. I don't think they're getting remastered, sadly, but I'm still looking forward to it. For some reason I'm not a big fan of playing them on my PC. If they port Planescape: Torment, I may die. I keep trying to get into that one, but I just can't, and I think having it on a console might help some. Especially if it's a Switch and I can just bring it to work with me when I'm by myself. They are the enhanced editions, and Planescape and Icewind Dale are two of the games as well. They are all coming to Switch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I will not be satisfied until they print some feat or spell or something that gives you another bonus action each turn and call it a "bonus bonus action". The feat is called extra bonus action, and extra bonus actions are what you're doing when you use your extra bonus action feat to take a second bonus action when a spell or ability would allow you to take a bonus action, once per round. Bonus bonus actions are a different thing and happen whenever a spell or ability allows you to take a second bonus action, which has nothing to do with the extra bonus action feat and is dependent on the text of the spell or ability granting the bonus bonus action in the copy pasted format "once per round when you use this ability you may make an extra bonus action called a bonus bonus action if you had already made a regular bonus action this round. You may only make one bonus bonus action per round". These things are separated, the first appearing in the feats section and the second in an unindexed sidebar on the page after the rest of the action rules. Every 6 months, Crawford changes his mind about whether or not these things can stack. The 6e playtest survey asks if this feels lile D&D, and people respond "very yes", causing the new action rules to be broken into 7 different action types and hidden unindexed across the 3 core books*. 5 years later, the last d&d guy (the intern maintaining the twitter) notices this and tweets "actions are p bad eh, shoulda done better" which makes it all retroactively ok. *not exactly though, since the first 3 printings are missing the rules for bonus contingent half-actions. Nobody notices. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jun 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
I've said it elsewhere and before, but Baldur's Gate 3, if made by Larian, is a weird combo. Baldur's Gate was a series that started off jokey but got more serious as it went on, and had an emphasis on writing alongside real mediocre tactics and the #1 RTwP seller in the industry. Larian makes *very* jokey games with typically kinda poor writing but great gameplay, and Divinity 2 was extremely turn-based. It being 5e just makes it even odder, given how Divinity 2 made sure all characters, no matter how magical or non-magical, had a lot of cool options and abilities. I also wonder what Beamdog's thinking about all this. That said,  at the trailer just being non-stop body horror. Welcome to the world of adventure and jesus christ what's happening with his tongue and teeth?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
Just met a room full of Lava Children and I hate them so much. This is my new least favorite creature.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I've said it elsewhere and before, but Baldur's Gate 3, if made by Larian, is a weird combo. Baldur's Gate was a series that started off jokey but got more serious as it went on, and had an emphasis on writing alongside real mediocre tactics and the #1 RTwP seller in the industry. Larian makes *very* jokey games with typically kinda poor writing but great gameplay, and Divinity 2 was extremely turn-based. It being 5e just makes it even odder, given how Divinity 2 made sure all characters, no matter how magical or non-magical, had a lot of cool options and abilities. the story the head dev told during the reveal is that after divinity OS 1 wrapped up he pitched a Baldur's Gate 3 to Wizards (and didn't get a call back until after OS 2 came out) so at the very least this is a passion project for them
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:Just met a room full of Lava Children and I hate them so much. This is my new least favorite creature. Go on
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Go on 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
from a conceptual standpoint, Bonus Actions could have been different from Minor / Swift Actions because they were not independent. that is, if you did a particular Action, abilities and effects would let you "tack on" a Bonus Action at the end as a "rider" or "follow-up" effect, and you can see this in a number of the PHB abilities where you can, say, Attack, and then you can use a Bonus Action to also Martial Arts your target or whatever. This could be different from Minor Actions or Swift Actions because they wouldn't be things you can do by themselves, simply as a separate action on a different action-type - they'd instead require some kind of trigger. I say "could have been" because things went immediately off the rails when they started putting up abilities that just cost a Bonus Action to activate, and nothing else, which would indeed make them the equivalent of Minor / Swift Actions, except by another, more confusing name and this is part of why you know 5e's design is bad and hacky, because they couldn't even commit to what might have been at least a novel and distinct idea
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:because they couldn't even commit to what might have been at least a novel and distinct idea This particular thing seems mote like two people (or two teams) weren't communicating than a failure to commit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Go on Damage Immunities fire; bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from metal weapons Metal Immunity. The lava child can move through metal without hindrance, and it has advantage on attack rolls against any creature wearing metal armor or using a metal shield. They're as terrible as they look.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 03:13
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:This particular thing seems more like two people (or two teams) weren't communicating than a failure to commit. Bounded accuracy means that you can add lower level creatures to encounters, because they are still a threat. When building an encounter, creatures that are too low of a level don't count towards the experience budget, because they are not a threat. It's really not people communicating poorly. It's just poor design. Did they patch this? There's new encounter building rules, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Bounded accuracy means that you can add lower level creatures to encounters, because they are still a threat. Yeah in Xanathar's Guide. Though I thought that it's not that Low level guys don't count towards the budget, it's that they don't count towards the multiplier.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Damage Immunities fire; bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from metal weapons Not much of a change from AD&D. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 03:52
|
|