Pathfinder 2E Mark Seifter wants to set the record straight: Feats and Improvisation in Pathfinder 2e (Video)
- Thread starter The-Magic-Sword
- Start date
I think I figured out why feats bother me in PF2. When they're discussing Group Coercion, it should be that you get a bonus to coerce attempts if you have the feat. Not that you can't try if you don't have the feat - or take penalties.
There are too many feats to remember to apply penalties to those who don't have them. Instead, the design should've been the opposite: it's the responsibility of the player who invested in the feat to remember to apply the bonus.
It's like most feats exist to reduce penalties.
There are too many feats to remember to apply penalties to those who don't have them. Instead, the design should've been the opposite: it's the responsibility of the player who invested in the feat to remember to apply the bonus.
It's like most feats exist to reduce penalties.
The-Magic-Sword
Small Ball Archmage
It kinda makes sense though, by definition trying to intimidate a group of people at once is harder than intimidating one person, if you do it the way you're describing someone would become better at intimidating groups than they are at individuals because the feat doesn't pertain to individuals, just groups.
But if you start from the perspective that coerce exists and is usually single target it makes sense you'd make it harder for a group regardless of if there was a feat.
It's not like "it's harder to coerce a group of people to do what you want than it is to coerce a single person to do what you want" is a controversial statement, so what's the alternative?
Pedantic
Legend
I would appreciate this a lot more if it was modular design laid out as a menu of settings, instead of yet more "don't worry, you can just do the game design yourself on the fly" advice. The point about Treat Wounds is great, and an actual toggle setting that laid out the impact and the aesthetic reason to make one choice or another is a great idea in a toolbox game.
Ok. So create a DC to Coerce somebody. Probably their Will DC. If they're in a group, use the highest DC of the group. Give a bonus to the Will DC if they outnumber the party, have other advantages, or are just generally jerks.
Then create a feat and call it "Good at Coerce." Give a scaling bonus to all coercion checks, based on the Proficiency level.
Put the responsibility of the feat on the players.
The-Magic-Sword
Small Ball Archmage
The base action is Coerce. It has clear rules, it targets 1 creature and does what it says it does. If someone tries to get it to do more, like apply to multiple people, you apply an adjustment using the general rules for applying an adjustment because they're trying to do something harder than usual that sounds reasonable to try.
Nothing different happens until the player informs you that they have a feat that asks you to do something different, so it's already on the player side because they have to invoke / remind you of the feat, you hear the feat and then say "got it" and you do what the feat says, which is compare it to the will dc (as opposed to an adjusted dc, in this instance.)
Exactly. The rules work well as they are, as long as players know them.
