^^^So, Paizo killed Dave Arneson?  

Just trying to "unpack" what you meant

Degrees of success/failure in some form have been around a while.  If nothing else, one could have viewed  a hit as a success and a critical hit as a great success.  Same for miss and critical miss.  So four degrees right there.  Paizo is not exploring new design space here, just doing some greeble work.

They're making every single die role a 2-step process. It adds granularity where none is needed, or, as I'm sure we're about to find, wanted. No doubt that now that everything must have a minimum four effects, they're going to really screw it up in a few places.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1032344They're making every single die role a 2-step process. It adds granularity where none is needed, or, as I'm sure we're about to find, wanted. No doubt that now that everything must have a minimum four effects, they're going to really screw it up in a few places.

Yeah, I feel like this is going to slow down the game when you have to do it for every step.

The comments posted to the article are, for the most part, quite approving.  In general, do Pathfinder players like this amount of minutiae (a better word for it than "crunch", IMO)

Quote from: Franky;1032352The comments posted to the article are, for the most part, quite approving.  In general, do Pathfinder players like this amount of minutiae (a better word for it than "crunch", IMO)

Yes.  Pathfinder players live on minutiae.  A few friends of mine play it exactly for this reason, as they find D&D 5E "too simple."

Quote from: Franky;1032352The comments posted to the article are, for the most part, quite approving.  In general, do Pathfinder players like this amount of minutiae (a better word for it than "crunch", IMO)

Yes.

Also, it's not that hard to figure once you get in the habit of calculating it. In GURPS we state what we made it by or what we failed it by. Becomes habit.

Also, it does allow for some granularity in results. So, for example, save or suck can be reduced to critical fail and suck, otherwise, just a little suck.

Some people like a little crunch. I do (medium crunch if I can find it). So far, it sounds like some things are getting tuned up, which could be cool.

Quote from: Franky;1032352The comments posted to the article are, for the most part, quite approving.  In general, do Pathfinder players like this amount of minutiae (a better word for it than "crunch", IMO)

Yes. The minutia creates a game-in-a-game that lets them "play" while they are away from the table. It makes a game of skill, like chess, where you can suss out the best options and create the "best" character. It also gives them a way to represent their character's tendencies with additional specificity.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1032171New blog post up:

http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkod?Critical-Hits-and-Critical-Failures

TL;DR -

Critical hits and failures are officially part of every d20 roll now. Because this is Paizo, of course it's complicated:

Nat 1: Crit fail if below DC, fail if not
Miss, not nat 1: Crit fail if miss by 10, fail if not
Hit, not nat 20: Crit success if beat by 10, success if not
Hit, nat 20: crit success if above DC, success if not

Some spells will have 4 different possible effects depending on which thing you roll. Fireball will be able to critical hit now, just like in 4e! Wheeeeeeeee.

I actually like this idea, varying spell effects, I mean. Reminds me of DCC's variable spell effects depending on what you roll. Less predictable spell results are good in my view. Not sure about the mechanics exactly, but the basic concept is good.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1032344No doubt that now that everything must have a minimum four effects, they're going to really screw it up in a few places.

Fortunately it looks pretty clear that not everything needs a minimum of four effects.   Making sharp things go through soft things that scream and bleed still starts out with three, miss, hit, critical, just like before. Now you done need the extra confirmation roll, though.  There is just a circumstancial slot open for number four.

A lot of spells have more gradients, which I'm happier about than the binary save-or-suck bit.

The whole picture might still come out poor, but I'm still having a half full glass at the moment.

Class blogs are lame and vague though, I wonder what lame and vague one we'll get today.

Quote from: Manic Modron;1032476Fortunately it looks pretty clear that not everything needs a minimum of four effects.   Making sharp things go through soft things that scream and bleed still starts out with three, miss, hit, critical, just like before. Now you done need the extra confirmation roll, though.  There is just a circumstancial slot open for number four.

Well, sure. But that's the easy one. Guarantee you that, this being Paizo, they are going to screw up Charm Person or Confusion or something that crit fails are practically game breaking and the wizard can take feats such that the enemies nearly always crit fail.

I think it is more likely that those feats will attach an affect onto successful saves, rather than force critical failures.  There is a Mystic style in Starfinder, Overmind or something like that.  It inflicts a small amount of damage on a target that saves vs compulsion spells.

Whether that is evidence for the defense or the prosecution is a different matter!

As a PF fan, I'm not liking the sound of 2e. Crunch for the sake of crunch and boring crunch on top of that is not what PF fans actually like.

They previewed the rogue getting a "cool" ability to spend a reaction to add plus 2 to her AC vs one attack.

Or in layman's terms, "The rogue can do something useless"

Quote from: Manic Modron;1032531I think it is more likely that those feats will attach an affect onto successful saves, rather than force critical failures.

Fail DC by 10 = crit fail
Feat to increase your save DC = increased likelihood on crit fail

If they can successfully avoid the temptation to let casters min/max their DCs to the moon, well, that'd be something. But if they're not careful or don't exercise restraint, they could easily end up in a place where the high-level game is beset with monsters crit-failing left and right and the game really suffering for it.

Here's what Pathfinder needs to do for 2e to be more successful:

1) focus on compatibility and consistency in 3PP materials which will make...
2) More fun awesome 3PP products that builds hype. RPG nerds are also NERD consumers. And we like a steady robust release schedule chock full of sexy useful stuff.

How to achieve #1?

Break down the system into a point buy framework. Everything balanced to Paizo's desire against every other thing. Attributes, skills, attacks, powers, spells, feats, special abilities, monster abilities, magical abilities, doohickies, and other traits. If it's in the game and has a game effect - it has a point cost.

Then, rebuild PF2 up using the framework. DO NOT include the framework. Just the game.

Create a series of online tools with the framework, so publishers, tinkerers, setting grognards, builders and creative types can create oodles of PF2 stuff to taste. Using the consistent framework that makes it all compatible. Without a need to oversight or checking. People that know the framework simply punch in your thing and verify it's legal.

Release the framework as a free SRD under the OGL.

Rebuild Starfinder on the framework.

Next, create a modern-genre game build on the framework.

Wash - rinse - repeat. Profit.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1032540Fail DC by 10 = crit fail
Feat to increase your save DC = increased likelihood on crit fail

While true and worth worrying about, what those numbers really look like isn't completely clear yet.  We know that saves are using the proficiency bonus that hoveres nearby a characters current level, but have spell DCs been revealed yet?  I'm pretty sure that spells aren't going to auto scale anymore and have to be slotted into the level of casting instead of the actual spell level.  That could affect what save DCs wind up looking like.

I do think you are bringing up good points and holding these pictures up to PF1 shows a concerning picture.  When August hits I hope Paizo is open to criticism like yours.