As someone who basically loathes the arbitrary-seeming Standard/Swift/Move categories of activations and actions, getting three actions to spend on whatever you are doing that turn sounds less fiddly, not more.  Granted when they presented it in Unchained it didn't mesh at all, but I'm optimistic it will be easier in a set up designed with it as a base assumption, not a patch job.

On the topic of the new Heal spell, while the above chart made things clearer, even I'm not convinced that it was required.  I used it because you set it up and I wanted to toy with the format, but I think the confusion could be resolved by making the "Heightened" portion more clarity.  The only question I had was whether or not heightening the spell added dice to the area affect use.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1035016Gronan doesn't hate change; he hates people. Big difference.

Yes, but change is caused by people.

jg

Quote from: Manic Modron;1035041It could be a decent spell set up to replace the entire Cure X range, but yeah, it really could use tighter language.

Again, you want to look at Starfinder as an example (or prototype) of what they're trying here.  Heal effects are "Mystic Cure", Feather Fall is officially the 1st-level iteration of Flight, etc.

jg

Quote from: Manic Modron;1035119As someone who basically loathes the arbitrary-seeming Standard/Swift/Move categories of activations and actions, getting three actions to spend on whatever you are doing that turn sounds less fiddly, not more.

It is when implemented by a sane person. Not when you start loading up with switches, trips, exceptions, and combos, which is what they're doing.

Quotebut I think the confusion could be resolved by making the "Heightened" portion more clarity.  The only question I had was whether or not heightening the spell added dice to the area affect use.

It's badly worded, but adding different numbers of dice depending on how many actions you spend and what the targets are is needless complexity. You don't really need the chart, but it illustrates the complexity. Here's 5e's cure wounds:

[table=width: 500]
[tr]
   [td]Actions Spent[/td]
   [td]Extra Healing dice[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
   [td]1[/td]
   [td]+1d8[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

There are no conditions or exceptions on its behavior. It's easier to remember, write clearly, and interpret consistently. If you need something different (like curing at range), there's simply a different spell rather than putting additional "if...then..." statements in the spell. Accurately and quickly parsing "if/then" logic is actually pretty hard for humans.

I think that the main thing to do is be clear the dice bonus isn't by action.  Heightening is still putting a low level spell in a higher level slot.   It doesn't sound as if there is an extra action requirement in 5e either, it is all what level the spell is cast at.  Assuming that the rule for Heightening is clear earlier in the magic chapter (a big assumption, apparently), the wording could tighten up a lot.


Heightened (+1) Increase the amount of healing or damage by 1d8, or by 2d8 if you're using the one- or two-action version to heal the living.

vs

Heightened (+1) Add an extra d8.  If casting on a single target for healing, add 2d8 instead.

Quote from: Manic Modron;1035157I think that the main thing to do is be clear the dice bonus isn't by action.

There's no need for a varying dice bonus at all. If you feel the need to start doing that kind of thing as an engineer, software developer, or game designer, you need to reexamine your original design.

This design breaks down because of the 3 action option. It is too unlike the the previous two options to get the same bonus. Take it out and make it a different spell. Also, don't make the dice vary between healing and hurting; it solves no real problems.

Second is that having different kinds of heightening is dumb. It improves nothing and solves no problems. If you can't find something sensible to add per slot, don't have any heightening at all. At that point, write a new spell.

So now you can do this:

Heal:
1 action: touch, 1d8+MOD
2 actions: Ranged touch, 30 ft.
Heightened: Increase the amount of healing or damage by 2d8.
3 actions: Ranged touch, 30 ft, reroll 1s and 2s.

Mass Heal:
3 actions, aura 30 ft, MOD healing or damage
Heightened: Increase by 1d8

No if/then logic, it's clear, easy to write concisely, etc.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1034984Paizo recently published a sneak peek of its spell system, and hooooo boy is this going off the rails. Their replacement for Cure Light Wounds, Heal, is a number of different spells mashed together that does different things depending on how many actions you spend and what level you cast it at. What makes it even more fun is that the effect of heightening it depends on how many actions you spent to cast in the first place. The result is that the text for D&D -3.75's basic cure system is this spaghetti:



Other things:

• Looks like cantrips get one damage die every two levels
• Casters are way more powerful when they don't move.
• Casters will also have Spell Points that they can spend to cast "Domain Powers"
  
• There will be rituals, which sound like a hybrid of 4e and 5e in implementation
• Most of the new critical effects seem reasonable, some sound asinine.
• There's no consistent rubric for heightening spell. Heal gains 1 or 2 dice every level, depending on action consumption. Vampiric Exsanguination gains 3 dice every 2 levels. Regenerate gains a flat bonus only when heightened to 9th level.

The other two spells they listed aren't as much of a mess as Heal. However, there is so much complexity and interaction in the spell system's design that I expect enterprising players will find ways to bust this system wide open.

What the actual fuck are they thinking? Is this now a game intended for accountants who like the flavor of Ikea furniture assembly instructions? My daughter's math homework is both more evocative and more clearly written than the mess you just posted from Paizo.

Quote from: Mistwell;1035244What the actual fuck are they thinking? Is this now a game intended for accountants who like the flavor of Ikea furniture assembly instructions? My daughter's math homework is both more evocative and more clearly written than the mess you just posted from Paizo.

Pathfinder: Common Core Edition

Paizo needs a decent technical writer.  (yes, among other things, of course )  I'm wondering how this, which reads like a brainstorm session rather than something coherent, will appear in the actual playtest documents.  And how playtesting will affect it.   Only 3.5 months to go.

Dear Paizo,

Please stop.  It's apparent that your strength is bad thought out, regressive characters, not game mechanics.  Might I suggest stealing 5e's basic mechanics?  They're open and it's clearly your forte.

Thank you,
-Someone who doesn't want your Pathfinder line of books to go under.

This doesn't sound like my type of fun.

I hope it attracts those who prefer that type of fun... and away from my tables.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1035279Dear Paizo,

Please stop.  It's apparent that your strength is bad thought out, regressive characters, not game mechanics.  Might I suggest stealing 5e's basic mechanics?  They're open and it's clearly your forte.

Thank you,
-Someone who doesn't want your Pathfinder line of books to go under.

Their strong point is paying Wayne Reynolds to draw spikes on things to overcompensate for how busy his backgrounds are.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1035016Gronan doesn't hate change; he hates people. Big difference.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2416[/ATTACH]

Meow.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1035290Their strong point is paying Wayne Reynolds to draw spikes on things to overcompensate for how busy his backgrounds are.

Oh, he's got a lot more issues than that.  The only good about his art is the colours, he knows how to make things pop.  Everything else, like perspective, body proportions, backgrounds and anything else you want to mention, he needs a LOT more practice to be any good.

Quote from: Franky;1035277Paizo needs a decent technical writer.  (yes, among other things, of course )  I'm wondering how this, which reads like a brainstorm session rather than something coherent, will appear in the actual playtest documents.  And how playtesting will affect it.   Only 3.5 months to go.

Very much agreed and seconded.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1035279Dear Paizo,

Please stop.  It's apparent that your strength is bad thought out, regressive characters, not game mechanics.  Might I suggest stealing 5e's basic mechanics?  They're open and it's clearly your forte.

Thank you,
-Someone who doesn't want your Pathfinder line of books to go under.

Again agreed and seconded. They are known for not listening and doing their own thing even if it is detrimental to their rpg and by extension their rpg imo. Almost no liked the gun rules as they were written before the book they were in went to print. They left them in anyway and made guns so much more better than bows and crossbows as they target Touch AC. Fans asked for less reprinted material and less sub-par options in terms of feats and archetypes you guessed it they did the opposite. I hope some of the elements in the previews are revised before they go to print as I'm not sure how well it will do once the core goes to print. They also ruined Ogres as a iconic monster. They now act like a cross between the mutants from the Hills have eyes with a hefty dose of the hillbillies from deliverance mixed in and not in a good way.  I do hope they come up with a good in game reason for Goblins not only being core yet suddenly being socially accepted by the average person on Golarion as how they are written as a race it makes no sense imo. Saying "well their was always a secret sect of good aligned Goblins hidden away in some secret corner" is bullshit. I get they want to capitalize on WOW popularity yet their own racial write-up for Goblins makes it hard to do imo.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1035290Their strong point is paying Wayne Reynolds to draw spikes on things to overcompensate for how busy his backgrounds are.

Wayne Reynolds is imo a decent artist they do need more than one artist drawing their stuff imo. WR style gets old and stale really fast imo. It's also not helped that they occasionally chose some really terrible art pieces. There is a picture of the iconic Bard that seems to be singing to a room full of people and they are all busy vomiting. I think it was supposed to showcasing their mass cacophonous call spell. I want to see adventurers facing danger and attacking enemies. Not a bunch of people throwing up in my art. They also need to redo their art for Goblins in the new edition especially if they are now to be considered a core race because it says anything but good aligned adventurer imo.

On thing I want to see removed or codified like PB does is the alignments. Too often their are too many dick DMs who screw players over with alignment especially with the Paladin class. The same applies to players who play Chaotic Neutrals as complete wackos or Lawful Good as Lawful Stupid.