Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
My Pathfinder 2e Post-Mortem
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Justice and Rule" data-source="post: 8869567" data-attributes="member: 6778210"><p>Great, lengthy report!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this is part of the problem with most d20 systems and perhaps one of the hidden surprises of 4E: while I've never played it, having something of a hard limit on how much you can heal actually helps move things along rather than slow things down. It's like long rest/short rest problems in 5E: if you allow players to regain all their resources, they will try to every time. I think it was [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] who mentioned WWN's way of limiting healing, and I managed to integrate it into this game pretty well, and I would do the same in 5E if I were to run it again.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm going to disagree here slightly: I do think there is a decent amount of variance in the usefulness of Skill Feats and there are definitely some weird feats that are largely flavor. I've always found <em>Dubious Knowledge </em>to be one of those, and <em>A Home in Every Port </em>is another one that could probably use a rework. For the most part, I actually like a lot of them, though.</p><p></p><p>Your choice of Make an Impression is one of those things that I think people take a bit too mechanically. Not on the "Only influence one person" part, but more the amount of time and how you integrate that in a more flowing manner. To me, I like the distinctions between people who can quickly do some spot influence on people versus people who can do better on groups and such. It's little distinctions that I think can help distinguish how different people actually talk and influence: Someone who has Group Impression isn't about making speeches (which I wouldn't really consider what the action is about since it refers to being "in conversation") but someone who can manage a large talking circle all at once and directly influence people on a topic in a way others just couldn't, while someone who has something like Quick Impression can just get that "You son of a b****, I'm in" reaction in an instant. Plus forcing people to spend a bit more time to influence individuals is a pretty good penalty in and of itself and feels completely proper for the style of fiction.</p><p></p><p>But I think you also have to be a bit more lenient on how you do such things; to me, the 1 minute part is more a guideline for the table. Obviously they probably need a hard limit for society play, but I try to allow a bit of flex in there. Also, when people want to influence multiple people, I ask them their targets, give them a minimum amount of time, and after we've found the grove of the conversation I have them make all their rolls at once and see the results. They could probably give better instruction of how to integrate it more organically, but I like the rules there more than most. And remember, Make an Impression is largely meant for quick, temporary improvements in attitude and not a guide to all diplomacy.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hm. Interesting. Maybe this is where having a VTT really helps me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not going to disagree too much here: I do think giving off-turn stuff can help really create a more dynamic encounter. Legendary Actions are one of the things where 5E really nailed it, but they were extremely dumb to largely use it for creatures who got 3 of them. I loved taking away the multiple attacks of giants and giving them legendary actions to make up for it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is one of those prep things; I find I'm not as good at remembering this stuff if I'm just pulling it out, but when I prep for this stuff I'm really good. Was it 4E that had a basic SOP for each creature? Those were useful and could help you see the underlying advantages of each creature that you might miss if you weren't looking. That's easier to do in PF2, even if I enjoy what the system does.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I can see this, though I haven't had the problem yet. Or, at least, I haven't recognized where I have gotten it wrong.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Striking Runes are an okay fix, the true fix is just Automatic Bonus Progression. Still disappointed they didn't just go with that and do away with half the tracking you need to do with upgrading equipment. Other than that, I find magic items to be generally good.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, poison is way too complicated. It's interesting and in-depth, but the amount of tracking it needs is a bit much for what it delivers on. Conceptually I like it, in play it can be a real hassle if you have a bunch of them you need to track. Other conditions I'm pretty fine with.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Wait, which feat is that? I seem to remember something like that, but it's not coming to mind nor can I find it on a quick search. But I like the structure because it allows me to modify the game while having a clue as to how the game writers wanted to integrate such stuff. It's probably why...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>... we can agree to disagree here. I like the downtime stuff, especially the difference VP systems in the GMG for this stuff compared to XGtE, which comes off as kind of half-baked. I have my problems with crafting, but just <em>having </em>a system to work off of crafting is a huge help for myself.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>4E is just a very different thing. I think this system hits a bit better if you want the classic feel of D&D where you can have some quick, meaningless chance encounters and not completely bog things down. 4E just doesn't do that because it wants every combat to be a <em>Pirates of the Caribbean-</em>style epic set piece. That seems like a great way to play (and I wish I could get my friends to invest in such things), but not sure if that's all I want to run.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Justice and Rule, post: 8869567, member: 6778210"] Great, lengthy report! I think this is part of the problem with most d20 systems and perhaps one of the hidden surprises of 4E: while I've never played it, having something of a hard limit on how much you can heal actually helps move things along rather than slow things down. It's like long rest/short rest problems in 5E: if you allow players to regain all their resources, they will try to every time. I think it was [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] who mentioned WWN's way of limiting healing, and I managed to integrate it into this game pretty well, and I would do the same in 5E if I were to run it again. I'm going to disagree here slightly: I do think there is a decent amount of variance in the usefulness of Skill Feats and there are definitely some weird feats that are largely flavor. I've always found [I]Dubious Knowledge [/I]to be one of those, and [I]A Home in Every Port [/I]is another one that could probably use a rework. For the most part, I actually like a lot of them, though. Your choice of Make an Impression is one of those things that I think people take a bit too mechanically. Not on the "Only influence one person" part, but more the amount of time and how you integrate that in a more flowing manner. To me, I like the distinctions between people who can quickly do some spot influence on people versus people who can do better on groups and such. It's little distinctions that I think can help distinguish how different people actually talk and influence: Someone who has Group Impression isn't about making speeches (which I wouldn't really consider what the action is about since it refers to being "in conversation") but someone who can manage a large talking circle all at once and directly influence people on a topic in a way others just couldn't, while someone who has something like Quick Impression can just get that "You son of a b****, I'm in" reaction in an instant. Plus forcing people to spend a bit more time to influence individuals is a pretty good penalty in and of itself and feels completely proper for the style of fiction. But I think you also have to be a bit more lenient on how you do such things; to me, the 1 minute part is more a guideline for the table. Obviously they probably need a hard limit for society play, but I try to allow a bit of flex in there. Also, when people want to influence multiple people, I ask them their targets, give them a minimum amount of time, and after we've found the grove of the conversation I have them make all their rolls at once and see the results. They could probably give better instruction of how to integrate it more organically, but I like the rules there more than most. And remember, Make an Impression is largely meant for quick, temporary improvements in attitude and not a guide to all diplomacy. Hm. Interesting. Maybe this is where having a VTT really helps me. Not going to disagree too much here: I do think giving off-turn stuff can help really create a more dynamic encounter. Legendary Actions are one of the things where 5E really nailed it, but they were extremely dumb to largely use it for creatures who got 3 of them. I loved taking away the multiple attacks of giants and giving them legendary actions to make up for it. This is one of those prep things; I find I'm not as good at remembering this stuff if I'm just pulling it out, but when I prep for this stuff I'm really good. Was it 4E that had a basic SOP for each creature? Those were useful and could help you see the underlying advantages of each creature that you might miss if you weren't looking. That's easier to do in PF2, even if I enjoy what the system does. I can see this, though I haven't had the problem yet. Or, at least, I haven't recognized where I have gotten it wrong. Striking Runes are an okay fix, the true fix is just Automatic Bonus Progression. Still disappointed they didn't just go with that and do away with half the tracking you need to do with upgrading equipment. Other than that, I find magic items to be generally good. Yeah, poison is way too complicated. It's interesting and in-depth, but the amount of tracking it needs is a bit much for what it delivers on. Conceptually I like it, in play it can be a real hassle if you have a bunch of them you need to track. Other conditions I'm pretty fine with. Wait, which feat is that? I seem to remember something like that, but it's not coming to mind nor can I find it on a quick search. But I like the structure because it allows me to modify the game while having a clue as to how the game writers wanted to integrate such stuff. It's probably why... ... we can agree to disagree here. I like the downtime stuff, especially the difference VP systems in the GMG for this stuff compared to XGtE, which comes off as kind of half-baked. I have my problems with crafting, but just [I]having [/I]a system to work off of crafting is a huge help for myself. 4E is just a very different thing. I think this system hits a bit better if you want the classic feel of D&D where you can have some quick, meaningless chance encounters and not completely bog things down. 4E just doesn't do that because it wants every combat to be a [I]Pirates of the Caribbean-[/I]style epic set piece. That seems like a great way to play (and I wish I could get my friends to invest in such things), but not sure if that's all I want to run. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
My Pathfinder 2e Post-Mortem
Top