Caedwyr's page

Odraude wrote:

And I disagree, especially since beyond those levels, you get into magic equipment that your fighter uses to be more than just a mortal. You are essentially being Iron Man or Justice League Batman, with gadgets and armor to keep up with everyone and not be the Aquaman.

Then all those gadgets and armor and stuff should be class features, not economy-based. Because if you are mortal man + X gp worth of gear, and your wizard friend is mortal man + godlike magic + X gp of magic gear, then he's still ahead of you by a margin of exactly godlike magic.

A far more balanced system would be that the fighter is a mortal man + Y gp worth of minor gear + godlike magic in the form of armor and stuff that no one else has access to, and a wizard is a mortal man + Y gp worth of minor gear + godlike magic in the form of spells. But I don't see anyone arguing for that.

Something cool I saw suggested way back in the beta, was to allow more mundane martial characters to be able to get more from magical items/weapons/armor via class features than the more magic-based classes.

ciretose wrote:

People would actually pay money for Kirth's product. And people actually have.

No. No one has ever paid me so much as a penny for any game stuff I've written. I won't allow it.

I think ciretose's post was a reference to some people saying that they had Kirthfinder printed out at Kinkos or similar locations.

I still say torture is not evil in of itself.

You talk about the kids and I don't think that's a fair argument.

Let's say a person has those children in a hidden place somewhere and is planning on killing them if his demands aren't met.

You have his accomplice who helped him get those children in custody.

Do you ask nicely, and offer him doughnuts and leniency? Or do you actually do your job and get the info out by any means necessary?

It's not evil if you torture that guy into spilling the beans and saving this kids. I'd argue that doing nothing, or placating the person is more in line with evil then breaking out the thumb screws.

There is plenty of other scenarios where torture will 'save the day' and without it the bad guys win.

Playing hardball doesn't make you evil.

Want to know why information gained through torture is typically not considered reliable? People tend to say whatever they need to say and try to be as believeable as possible in order to get the torture to stop. Historically, this has been true, no matter what popular media likes to say about it.

Ashiel wrote:

EldonG wrote:

It's not a game about math. I think that needs to be said. And repeated. Maybe in bold.

But it is a game OF math which is to be bolded just as frequently. Virtually everything beyond dialog that goes on in the game is governed and influenced by numbers, modifiers, penalties, conditions, and variables. If you get cold there is math that determines the effects on your character. If you feel heat, there is math explaining if it affects you or not. When you lock blades with an orc marauder, players are matching their numbers against those of the orc's. When a warrior gains a level and becomes better at fighting he does so because his numbers rise which give him a higher mathematical chance to succeed at tasks (including the task of "not die"). When a wizard conjures fire and hurls it at a swarm of angry wasps, he is hurling math at them against their math.

Mathematics permeates every facet of this game in some form or another (much as it does our own reality). It also serves as a tool for testing and describing things we see in our own games other than just giving anecdotal information.

Is the game solely about the math? Nope. But everything that is done is done through math (and if it's not it sticks out like a rotting thumb). But back when I watched a 20th level fighter in 3.0 get torn to pieces in a single round by a monster much lower on the CR scale than himself, I might have known what was going to happen if I had acknowledged the math for it.

Have fun playing math.

I like Pathfinder.

What does this contribute to the discussion? I can just as easily say

"Have fun playing Mother-May-I?

I like Pathfinder."

If you don't agree with the poster's argument, then address it. Don't just throw tautologies and invective around. I understand from your posting that you believe the math part of the game to be relatively minor, and I'm interested in your reasons why.

I was trying to stick to the Pathfinder structure as much as possible, even though it seemed fairly illogical, because I didn't want to reprint all the other rules and end up with something even more unmanageable than the monstrosity I produced!

Yeah, I could see that. It's kind of funny, because the layout within certain sections is fairly orderly and logical, but the overall structure isn't. It was one of the reasons I guessed that you were following the Pathfinder structure.

I appreciated the Avionia info near the starting, it was a good way to get a light introduction to some of the new rules, and is fairly well written. It does a good job of pointing out minor differences like the civilized and uncivilized subtypes.

Gotcha. Which brings me back to my original comment, that the organization (and that of Pathfinder, which appears to be what you copied the general structure from) is really not all that logical. Still works for a set of houserules. Thanks for the quick response.

Reading through the pdf, I've noticed multiple references to the Concentration skill, however, I haven't found anywhere in the rules that mention how this skill works, or even that it is being brought back. It might be in the later pages, but a rule change like that should probably be up in the front of the book before it gets mentioned in racial and class write ups.

In another thread, it sounds like the Print on Demand version is currently in the works and will be available in about a month if everything goes smoothly from RPGNow (Paizo doesn't offer Print on Demand).

Also, you might want to look at d20pfsrd.com instead of d20srd.com if you are interested in the Pathfinder version of psionics.

Sadly, the limitation on the Bookbonded Arcanist ability 'Dear Spellbook' has no little to no actual effect on gameplay.

Quote:

Dear Spellbook, (Su): ... When used to cast your bonus spell for the day, however, the bonus spell must be one inscribed within the bonded spellbook itself and not, say, a separate spellbook looted off of an elf a few weeks back..."

See, there are no rules for casting spells from someone else's spellbook. All spells have to be scribed into your own spellbook. So, unless you're using house rules, this is only a limitation if you have more than one personal spellbook (a travelling spellbook perhaps).

Edit: Forgot to close quote brackets... :(

Unless I'm mistaken it appears that this ability is saying that the bonus spell has to be inscribed in the bonded spellbook and not another spellbook. The example of a spellbook looted off a corpse, would be a second spellbook of the wizard in question, just a different source. As you said, it's a limitation to one personal spellbook, which is the usual issue of putting all your eggs in one basket. Fine if your GM doesn't target it, but a potential weakness if you do (see bonded object).

Saying it has little to no effect on gameplay is like saying the Arcane Bond object drawbacks have little to no effect on gameplay. Only if your GM is limiting his targets.

Another thought.

Whoever they've gotten to do their bestiary has done an incredible job. I haven't spotted a creature that feels like filler yet, and this is across pretty much all the Cerulean Seas books. Having one or two creatures at the high level of quality is impressive, but going that many books without an obvious dud is almost unheard of.

King_Of_The_Crossroads wrote:

Bloodlines. Probably the best thing paizo did for sorcerers was add bloodlines to the class. They add a much needed boost to a class that was (and sometimes, still is) considered the wizard's weaker sibling.

That being said, I often has a hard time dealing with the fluff associated with the bloodlines; it seems every sorcerer gets their power from some supernatural creature fornicating with an ancestor. And that's fine, I guess, but it gets kind of boring.

So if you've ever played a sorcerer, what was the background fluff for his power? Did you go with the supernatural ancestor, or was there something more unique about how you got your mojo?

Mitochondrial hyper-evolution that generates intense bio-energy that is harnessed and channeled into bizarre effects called magic. At the latter stages of this hyperevolution the mitochondrial cells can overtake and become one with the nucleus and this state of fusion allows complete control over the body.

Actually, nevermind, I don't think sorcerer does this very well. XD

What'd be cool is a class modeled after Ms. Brea's abilities and other abilities shown to be possible in the first game. I really liked how the ability set was mostly not just a magical system (see the elemental system from the second game), but also kept thematically appropriate for the story.

I've had a chance to start looking at this, and as always with Cerulean Seas products, I'm liking what I see. A few thoughts as I go through:

• Angler class fills an interesting niche that doesn't get much attention very often. Potentially very powerful if given time to prepare, but then again so are most classes.
  
• Myxinmave prestige class is disgusting, but also interesting. It offers something that you can't really do with any of the existing classes. Nicely done.
  
• The Races are as always interesting, and new and interesting things are done with old racial standbys.
  
• There doesn't appear to be a note that the weapons are aquadynamic (no penalties for using underwater).
  
• The Dark Trinity concept is interesting. The writing isn't as convincing as it could be, but it sets up a good setting to allow all sorts of adventures.

More when I have time to read further.

Dabbler wrote:

No, by RAW:

1. Any user of ki, WITH the Still Mind class feature which tey lose to gain the Vow.
2. There is no 2. No Still Mind to lose, no Vow.

Otherwise, can someone explain to me why monks must lose a feature and other ki users don't?

RAW states "monk vows, which ANY user of ki can take to increase his ki pool."

This statement followed, by several more confused and counter wording statements in the section talk over each other. (i.e. following vows is a new archetype) It also states that a monk can take vows without (i.e. BEFORE) gaining the still mind ability, but when you would normally gain this ability, you lose it instead. Also, rogues give up a rogue talent (there are far more useful rogue talents than ki pool). As this book was written before Ultimate Combat, the ninja apparently takes no penalty other than that of the vow.

I would say it's up to each GM to decide for themselves.

EDIT: Until an official ruling is made on the subject.

I knew there was something I was forgetting. My reasoning back when I first looked at this, was since monks could take this without having the still mind feature, and only lost the feature when they would otherwise gain the feature, then it would follow that since there was a statement that other classes could take it, a similar process would be true for those classes as well. On reflection, there's lots of ambiguity here, and you'd need to check with your individual GM. It'd be interesting to hear how this works in Pathfinder Society.

I saw this over on Endzeitgeist.com and was impressed with the product from your review. The first three focused schools in particular seemed inspired and did things that in hindsight seemed obvious things to do.

I'm confused now. At no point have I been making a "GM please let this fly argument". It's always been a "look at this mechanical oddity of how the rules have been written" and a "be careful with this, since things don't appear to be internally consistent". Your follow-up statements appear to agree with this.

My big questions have always centered around how do we figure out in a manner that works consistently whether normal spells from the core rulebook, or spells built on the fly using the Words of Power system what is the duration and persistence of the effects? That's all I am asking. One method that I can apply equally when reading the text that works for both, or some sort of clarification, backed up by the written rules showing an exception for Words of Power.

Your statements about Inference seem to be saying "As a GM, it would be silly if the rules worked as they have been explicitly written, so I'm guessing they were meant to work in an alternate way". And I agree, that it's a reasonable GM interpretation. The wrench is, that looking at the rules logically in the build-your-own spells part of Words of Power, you end up having the instantaneous duration cause lasting effects some of the time, but not in others, and there is no real reason on a mechanical level for them to be interpreted differently. You can make some rulings as to how you are going to interpret things, but then you get corner cases like being unable to reproduce things like Metal to Wood, Flesh to Stone, Awaken, Wall of Stone and a number of other iconic spells from the core rulebook. Or, you end up with complete craziness of an whole whack of additional persistent effects.

You'll notice I've never been trying to argue RAI, just pointing out a funny quirk of the RAW.

Cheese. Really old and smelly cheese.

I had a big response to this, but the boards ate it and stopped showing it some time after it appeared to post.

To your first assertion, that enhancement bonuses cannot be persistent because they are inherently magical, I'd like to point you to Masterwork Weapons which have an enhancement bonus that is persistent and non-magical.

To your second assertion, I'd suggest looking at the flavour text of spells like Bull's Strength "The subject becomes stronger." or Resist Energy "This abjuration grants a creature limited protection from damage of whichever one of five energy types you select: acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic.". Both of these then go on to describe their mechanical effects. Compare this to Awaken "You awaken a tree or animal to human-like sentience."

None of these spells talk about persistence or duration in their spell descriptions. The information is all included in the spell header on the Duration line. My question to you, is if duration is not a mechanical property of the spell, and the properties of the spell are given in the spell description, then why do none of these spells mention persistence, duration of effect or anything related to that matter in their spell descriptions?

I look forward to your response with rules citations. I'd be happy to be proven wrong due to having overlooked some sort of rule I was unfamiliar with. I started playing 3.x with PFRPG and only played a bit of 1e and a smattering of 2e beforehand, so I'm coming at this somewhat fresh and often miss things in the rules.

But if I cast an instantaneous enhancement buff (transmutation most likely), can't I just as easily argue that the spell makes an alteration to the creature's physique that leaves it with increased strength (tougher muscle fibers, more muscles for strength; stronger bones and a boost to the general haleness due to an exercise-like effect for increased constitution, etc) with a persistent consequence? The thing about the words of power system, is it mostly just describes the mechanical effects, leaving the flavour of how they are implemented up to the player/GM. If you are arguing a flavour reason for why some instantaneous durations are different than others, then in a system where there aren't many flavour explanations given you are going to run into problems like this.

I mean, can't I just as easily say that a Healing effect Word + Change Effect word causes a persistent change to the target's body leaving it with an altered physique. The magic has come and gone and wrought persistent changes, but does not need to stay to grant any of the alterations. In other words, congratulations, you now have a claw and it is actually part of your body. This isn't an unheard of trope in fantasy literature, where magic is capable of causing all sorts of strange mutations that persist after the magic is gone.

I guess what my question is, is how do we know how duration is handled works differently between Words of Power and normal Vanacian spellcasting?

Also

Duration doesn't change what spells ... how lasting their effects are.

Then what does Duration do? Why include it?

Also, I'd appreciate it if you'd provide a rules cite for why enhancement effects cannot be made permanent.

Does building a self-made gun in your garage make gun laws obsolete (see zip guns)? This isn't the first time it's been possible to build your own gun.

It sounds like what you are saying is that the Duration given in the spell header is not what you should be paying attention to for figuring out a spell's duration. The thing is, with the Words of Power system, there's no other way of figuring out a spell's duration and the rule you've suggested above isn't included in either the core rulebook or in Ultimate Magic with the Words of Power system.

How does awaken work? How does energy drain work? How does Wall of Stone work? All are instantaneous, but have long lasting effects that include buffs or debuffs (increase to intelligence or extra negative levels). Energy drain has a secondary system of temporary negative levels having a chance to become permanent after 24 hours, but being an instantaneous effect, the temporary negative levels (a debuff) can't be removed with a dispel magic.

Regardless, of the timing arguments, I'm glad to hear you've got a system that works. I was actually pretty excited about the Words of Power system when it was first announced, but ended up being pretty disappointed with the mechanical implementation.

It seems like there's been several 3pp classes you've reviewed in the last couple of months that have been getting fairly high praise. It's nice to see another one added to the list.

Enhancement bonuses don't cause permanent effects.

That would explain why I was getting confused before. Do you have a rules cite for that so I can check it out and make sure I understand how it interacts with other rules?

It still leaves an issue for things like Selected Soaring Lesser Cure

Selected Soaring Lesser Cure

School conjuration (healing), transmutation; Level Witch 4

Cast Time 1 Standard Action
Components V, S, M
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)

The target is cured of 1d6 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5) and gains a fly speed of 60 feet with average maneuverability (40 feet if encumbered or wearing medium or heavy armor). The target also receives an insight bonus on Fly skill checks equal to 1/2 the caster's level.

Undead are damaged by this spell instead, but can attempt a Will save for no damage and spell resistance as normal.

This is behaving a bit more like awaken, energy drain, stone to flesh, or Transmute Metal to Wood in that it is causing a permanent change in capability or nature in an instant and is not dispellable like PERMANENT effects normally are.

Another one that is kinda cool

Barrier Fire Blast Stone Wall

A stone wall is conjured in a blast of flame, harming those close to it when it appears, and then remaining as a normal stone wall.

I guess my message here, is that if you are going to play around with the Words of Power system and you have any players that like to get clever or inventful with the system, the GM is going to have to nail down some fairly strict guidelines as to what will be allowed and what won't. I'm sure there's some other problems with the system, but I stopped looking. Endzeitgeist had a similar reaction here.

Okay. I offered those spells from the Core Rulebook to show how some non-damaging/non-healing spells can interact with the instantaneous duration.

Words of Power lets me do something like this:

Enhance Form (1 round/level) + Moderate Cure (instantaneous)

For a permanent, non-dispellable

One-time cure of 1d6 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5).
A +4 enhancement bonus to either Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution (caster's choice).

This is available to an Alchemist for a 4th level spell slot. I'm sure that one could find other fun combinations. This would let the Alchemist to quickly get at +4 enhancement bonus to their Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution after 3 castings.

Last time this was raised I got called a bunch of names by people who insisted that it didn't work this way because.

Link to the thread. Feel free to look through the arguments on both sides, and if you spot any sort of reason why I might be wrong about the RAW I'd love to hear the reasoning why.

And yes, this is mostly a sidetrack to the main topic of this thread, so feel free to just ignore this sidetrack, since I doubt most GMs would let this fly in their games.

Multiple Effect Words and Duration: If a wordspell has more than one effect word, the shortest of all the effect words' durations is used for all of the effect words.

Duration

A spell's duration entry tells you how long the magical energy of the spell lasts.

Instantaneous: The spell energy comes and goes the instant the spell is cast, though the consequences might be long-lasting.

Basically, the rules on spell duration interacts in a way that may not have been intended to hilarious results, or the way the Words of Power system works is inconsistent with the way spell timing works in the core rules, or elsewhere in the Words of Power system.

Examples of how spell timing can work in the core rules:

Example 1:
Awaken

School transmutation; Level druid 5

Casting Time 24 hours

Components V, S, M (herbs and oils worth 2,000 gp), DF

Range touch

Target animal or tree touched

Duration instantaneous

Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes

You awaken a tree or animal to human-like sentience. To succeed, you must make a Will save (DC 10 + the animal's current HD, or the HD the tree will have once awakened). The awakened animal or tree is friendly toward you. You have no special empathy or connection with a creature you awaken, although it serves you in specific tasks or endeavors if you communicate your desires to it. If you cast awaken again, any previously awakened creatures remain friendly to you, but they no longer undertake tasks for you unless it is in their best interests.

An awakened tree has characteristics as if it were an animated object, except that it gains the plant type and its Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores are each 3d6. An awakened plant gains the ability to move its limbs, roots, vines, creepers, and so forth, and it has senses similar to a human's.

An awakened animal gets 3d6 Intelligence, +1d3 Charisma, and +2 HD. Its type becomes magical beast (augmented animal). An awakened animal can't serve as an animal companion, familiar, or special mount.

An awakened tree or animal can speak one language that you know, plus one additional language that you know per point of Intelligence bonus (if any). This spell does not function on an animal or plant with an Intelligence greater than 2.

Example 2:

School transmutation; Level druid 7

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S, DF

Range long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)

Area all metal objects within a 40-ft.-radius burst

Duration instantaneous

Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes (object; see text)

This spell enables you to change all metal objects within its area to wood. Weapons, armor, and other metal objects carried by creatures are affected as well. A magic object made of metal effectively has spell resistance equal to 20 + its caster level against this spell. Artifacts cannot be transmuted. Weapons converted from metal to wood take a –2 penalty on attack and damage rolls. The armor bonus of any armor converted from metal to wood is reduced by 2. Weapons changed by this spell splinter and break on any natural attack roll of 1 or 2, and armor changed by this spell loses an additional point of armor bonus every time it is struck with a natural attack roll of 19 or 20.

Only limited wish, miracle, wish, or similar magic can restore a transmuted object to its metallic state.

Example 3

Flesh to Stone

School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S, M (lime, water, and earth)

Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)

Target one creature

Duration instantaneous

Saving Throw Fortitude negates; Spell Resistance yes

The subject, along with all its carried gear, turns into a mindless, inert statue. If the statue resulting from this spell is broken or damaged, the subject (if ever returned to its original state) has similar damage or deformities. The creature is not dead, but it does not seem to be alive either when viewed with spells such as deathwatch.

Only creatures made of flesh are affected by this spell.

You've also got all sorts of damaging spells heal spells, cure spells, and other spells like contagion with instantaneous duration but long-lasting effects.

So, for the words of power system, to bestow a long-lasting effect with an instantaneous duration, you combine a damaging spell effect or healing spell effect with a debuffing or buffing effect. If you go and day "this is all stupid, it can't work this way", you can do it, but then it becomes more of a game of "mother, may I?" for replicating non healing/non damaging effects (which typically get a pass) like the Stone to X, Wall of Z, or other more complex spells from the Core Rulebook.

Something you can also consider a balancing effect of the Words of Power system, is how it makes MAD classes much less so, and makes characters much less gear dependent. If you are GMing with the system, you'll probably want to put some sort of cost in, but if you run it RAW you can have all sorts of hilarious effects.

That's very high praise. I'll have to check this one out.

RAW would say

1. Any user of ki.
2. If the monk has the still mind class feature, this gets replaced.

Otherwise, the "Any user of Ki" does not actually do anything.

"Schrodinger's Wizard" has only one weakness.

Opening the box and having it appear.

Which is why serious discussions need builds, not theorycraft.

A wizard can do everything, but not at the same time. Each choice means a choice you didn't take isn't available. And when people have lots of empty slots, that shows they play with the kind of GM who has nice quiet places for wizards to study in the middle of dungeons...

Wizards can be all win or all fail depending on if they guessed right about 1) What they will need for the day 2) When they will need it 3) How long the day is.

"Schrodinger's Wizard", "Schrodinger's Fighter", "Schrodinger's" anything really is a function of people trying to show how right they are rather than trying to prove how right they are.

Posting a build leaves you vulnerable to being wrong...heaven forbid...

As the person, who I believe coined the term Schrodinger's Wizard on these forums, Ciretose's summary is correct. The high level paranoid wizard is pretty cool, and you can get closer with heavy use of scrolls, but there are always opportunity costs, action costs, and missing pieces of information that prevent the wizard from utilizing a perfect answer to every situation.

As far as the naming goes, Chan-ona isn't that bad in pseudo-Japanese, although its actually closer to a pseudo Chinese name than pseudo Japanese. The suffix chan would be probelmatic, but as the prefix it's not going to cause any big problems. Ona isn't all that bad either since there are many different possible ways to write it in Japanese, and Mikan isn't actually Japan so you have some leeway in naming. Still, it's a good idea to keep in mind what names might mean in other languages. I seem to remember a couple Paizo NPCs having rather hilarious names in other languages and it is always a good idea to try to at least google a name.

I'm considering at a class for a PC who will be there all the time.

So if by "sparingly" you mean only this PC has the class and it's never available to more PCs or to multiclassing or to NPCs (unless the DM wants to drop in an extremely rare visitor from another world), then yes, it would be used very sparingly indeed.

Yes to the second part. By sparingly, I mean not making this a common thing, otherwise it ends up becoming normal. Unless you like that type of game (See Amethyst Renaissance for a pretty cool take on this). One of the fun parts of playing this type of character is the fish-out-of-water antics you can get up to.

Also, use the SGG gun rules, not the Paizo gun rules, as the Paizo gun rules will cause all sorts of problems, and the SGG gun rules, especially for the enforcer end up being a lot more balanced. There's some good stuff on how to handle the different technology levels in the Enforcer pdf, and the GM should probably take a look at it to help avoid some easy pitfalls.

Given the latest adventure path, I'd say the class is thematically appropriate provided it is used very sparingly.

Right. Inside the shelter, everything pretty much goes into stasis (time stops for them). Outside, of the shelter, 6 hours pass before the things in the shelter are ejected.

For discussion purposes:

Shelter Out of Time

School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 3

CASTING

Casting Time 10 minutes
Components V, S, M (multicolored sand)

EFFECT

Range touch
Target one 5 ft. cube of space
Duration 6 hours/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION

During the spell, you inscribe runes around a single square of space. All creatures and objects within that square at the conclusion of the casting of this spell are instantly transferred to a temporary extradimensional space in which time does not pass. Creatures or objects that are only partially within the space are not transferred. Once the spell ends, the extradimensional space disappears, and any creatures or objects in the extradimensional space appear in the nearest unoccupied space to the original square exactly the same as when they left. You cannot dismiss this spell once it has been cast.

Since time does not pass within the space, then I'd say it is pretty clear that the 6 hour duration is from outside the shelter.

ciretose wrote:

Abjurant Champion. Nearly every Wizard Prestige Class. Druids and Wizards with the spells from the Spell Compendium...

Abjurant Champion? Really? Too powerful? Never had a problem with in any games I have played in. Heck even ported it over to Pathfinder and still have no problems with it.

Nearly Every Wizard Prestige Class? Um...none are more powerful than Archmage.

Name a spell from the Spell Compendium that could break the game more than Gate? Shapechange? Wish/Miracle? (Not equaly...is that would not be a increase in power.)

Sure not every option will be equal in power level to everything in Core...but I think you are kinda of missing the point...not everything is equal within Core.

Also sure some of the later prcs, feats, spells were just stupidly designed...and there is issues with combos( which I think it is different from the issue of 'power creep').

Still waiting for a Class that was more powerful than wizard, cleric or druid? You gaved me some PrCs.

Planar Shepard (Prestige Class, I know)

So, I've had a chance to look this over, and in my opinion it is one of the best put together house rule documents I've ever seen. The consolidation of similar mechanics is a very good move and the various rock/paper/scissors balancing seems to work out very well. If you were to do a more formal publishing of these rules, you'd want to do some serious re-organization of the document and add the various rules that you allude to in the main system and that have not been included in this document. Also, bookmarks would be needed as well with the length of the volume.

I look forward to trying these rules out if I can convince my group to give them a shot.

1) Tagging the backlog is something I'm hoping for, as there's a number of older reviews I'd like to look up, but haven't been able to find. I'm not sure if it is because they lack tags, or if they aren't on the site (e.g. the original Cerulean Seas). Tags I find useful are the seal of approval, publisher name, author name, product name. Other tags like class, feats, spells, settings, etc. are also very useful.

2) I enjoy seeing you review whatever you choose to review. One of the big benefits of your reviews is that you look at things that many others would pass over, and its a great way of finding hidden gems.

3) Facebook: don't use it, don't care.

4) I've clicked on links. Something that may help, is to put a message in the comments section on the product thread on paizo.com saying that you've reviewed the item: link here, and that the review will be going up on paizo within X days.

5) Endzeitgeist.com and paizo.com. D20pfsrd.com reviews are blocked by some work filters for whatever reason.

Rite Publishing wrote:

If the author of TSoRA is willing and able I am willing and able to publish it :)

I do believe said author is actually willing and able. ;)

Well guys and 3PP, if you want archetypes for specific classes, I think it's time to throw your requests and suggestions in my general direction.

=> @GM Elton: Challenge accepted (again) !

@ShadowcatX: Glad you loved it ! I wrote the news on my official thread when the finished supplement was put on Paizo, but it can be easy to miss among the monthly updates I usually post.

@Oliver Volland: Great suggestions there, especially for the two 3PP we haven't done yet... I'm putting these three on the list. You may keep suggesting things if you have others in mind. No promises, we'll see how the final list turns out. ;)

Going through Endzeitgeist's Seal of Approval list on Endzeitgeist.com (I know there's actually quite a few missing), I've come up with the following classes:

Swordmaster by Dreadfox Games
Spellwarden from Headless Hydra's Mor Alderann Setting Guide
Vanguard (Revised) by Super Genius Games
Time Warden by Super Genius Games
Luckbringer from Rite Publishing's Secrets of the Luckbringer
Divine Channeler from Rite Publishing's Secrets of Divine Channeling

Well, I took the initiative in having Caedwyr load up some of Rite Publishing's Kaidan setting of Japanese horror into d20pfsrd.com - including the archetypes, traits, feats, prestige classes of both Way of the Samurai and Way of the Yakuza, plus we're now getting Kaidan's races there with traits, archetypes, feats and racial paragon classes from In the Company of Tengu and In the Company of Henge. The content from In the Company of Kappa is in the queue, but not loaded yet.

As more material is released, we will add more content to d20pfsrd.com

I feel bad for not getting In the Company of Kappa onto the site, but after a huge amount of updates lasts fall, I burnt out somewhat and have been taking a break. I don't know how John manages to keep on updating the site on a day-to-day basis, and I really respect and admire his work and persistence.

That's great news. I'd love to see a copy of the finished rules

<myusername> at gmail period com

Archetype tables have been updated.

kevin_video wrote:

My suggestions would be the White Necromancer from Open Design/Kobold Quarterly 19, a LN and CG Paladin, the Wolf Shifter from Wayfinder 5, the Guttermage from Urban Adventures: The Great City Player's Guide (0one Games), and a racial archetype for gnome barbarians (Rawr).

+@ ShadowcatX: Both the Death Mage and White Nechromancer are eligible as they are under Open Design...

Actually, I think the Death Mage is a Super Genius Games product, and is completely open content.

This is very cool. Thanks for getting this up on the site, and thank you very much Radiance House for making this available. I hope lots of people take a look and pick up the Pact Magic books.

kevin_video wrote:

My suggestions would be the White Necromancer from Open Design/Kobold Quarterly 19

An excellent idea!!! Although, you might want to wait until Kobold Press releases the Expanded White Necromancer in a month or so :)

Wasn't that a closed content class, or am I getting it confused with another of the Kobald Press Expanded classes?

Also, with regards to the rogue, according to Endzeitgeist's review of Drop Dead Studio's Rogue Glory, there is already a product out there that appears to do exactly what people seem to be asking for in this thread.

Linked:

Endzeitgeist.com

That looks interesting. Any reviews you could link as to the quality of the Invoker? I'd love to have a good Warlock substitute/update I can point people towards rather than the incomplete Tome of Secrets warlock.

"Caedwyr wrote:

What happens to character's loads/the weight of what they are carrying when using item kits should be adjudicated by the GM as there is no method to do so following the rules.

...when removing an item (such as consumables) should we deduct the actual weight of the item(s) from the kit weight ....
or should we then calculate total weight from indivual weights as they aren't a "kit" anymore?

If you remove 1 item, the collection no longer meets the definition of a kit. There are rules for calculating weight of all the individual items. Use them. This isn't a thread for posting all your random rules questions and expecting an answer. Start one if you want to.

You might want to take another look at my earlier post to see what was actually being communicated (hint, there was no question being asked).