Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Wishcraft caster

Cyrad's page

RPG Superstar 2014 Star Voter, 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,994 posts (2,179 including aliases). 8 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,994 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Good to hear. Give them something fun and unique!

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
But be aware that I really Don't Care about the Brawler and the SLayer. They are subsets of the Fighter and the Rogue. BOth of the primary classes should be designed so that Brawler, slayer and swashbuckler are simply Not Necessary.
Perhaps...but they (with the exception of Swashbuckler) actually work mechanically and are enjoyed by people. Brawler and Slayer are thus a good benchmark of whether something purely non-magical is 'too good' since things that invalidate them will upset people and is just generally poor design unless you intend to get rid of them entirely. Which would be a valid goal...but doesn't seem to be the goal of this particular Fighter variant.

It's worth mentioning that the Slayer and Brawler were designed by Sean K. Reynolds during a period where he became particularly disenchanted with the fighter/wizard disparity. I feel this makes the brawler and slayer very decent benchmarks for a non-spellcasting martials. As Deadmanwalking says, don't write off these classes so easily.

SKR noted that prepared spellcasters essentially have the ability to rebuild their character on a daily basis. He illustrated this in a rather hilarious quote during an interview.

Sean K. Reynolds wrote:

If you're a fire wizard, you're like, "I got tons of fire spells. I love fire. I got my fire shield, my fireball and fire bolt and fire eyes and fire butt and fire feet! Oh crap, we're going to fight some fire giants? Okay, um, magic missile and blink and haste." Your character is now entirely different.

But if you're the fighter, then "Okay, I got Weapon Focus (longsword), Weapon Specialization (longsword). I got Power Attack, I got Cleave, and this and that. Oh, I'm fighting swarms. This is gonna be a dungeon full of swarms or a dungeon full of things resistant to slashing damage. I'm screwed and going to be ineffective for the rest of the time we're in this dungeon."

This observation led to the design of Martial Flexibility. My first point is that the brawler and slayer very decent benchmarks for a non-spellcasting martials. They were both designed as fun, effective, and balanced non-spellcasting classes in a game dominated by magic. My second point is that it takes more than giving bonus feats and defensive buffs to make a fun martial in this game.

If you think about it, even the Ranger's combat styles fit SKR's description of making an effective martial class. Combat styles allow you to dip in multiple branches in the feat tree, essentially allowing you to have a secondary build. Even Treatmonk's Guide to the Ranger recommends using the archery style to grab ranged feats while using your normal feats on melee-related stuff. This is why I scratched my head at the idea of giving fighters both martial flexibility and combat styles. They accomplish similar things: give the class more combat versatility.


Aelryinth wrote:

Neither the Bard nor the Inquisitor really deserve six points a level, since they are full caster level, 6 level casters. This is particularly biased because they have spells and class features that also stack upon the spells that they DO know.

The bard effectively ends up with more skills then the Rogue. The Inquisitor is better with skills then a Rogue will EVER be, and then gets skill boosting spells on top.

I'd debate you on that. I spent a lot of time analyzing classes and their frameworks for my design work. The bard and inquisitor were designed specifically with skills as a strength. They have several skill-based class features. They do make trade offs for this power. Classes with 6+Int skills generally have fewer and less powerful class features compared to ones with fewer skill points. You also overvalue their spellcasting: both the inquisitor and the bard are 6-level spontaneous casters with limited spell lists. They pay for this by having a 3/4 BAB. Finally, it's completely and utterly unfair to make any comparison with the rogue. The rogue is the most poorly designed class in the entire game.

I do agree the fighter should have 4+Int skills. That's standard for most martials. Redesigning the fighter as a skill focused martial could work, but the entire class's design should reflect that. It shouldn't be something tacked on.

I honestly think the ranger is the most balanced martial in the game. They're good, fun, and about on par with most other classes in the game. I'd prefer if classes weaker than the ranger be brought up rather than insisting that something below them as the gold standard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Volume of class features DOES equate to power...

master_marshmallow wrote:

I'm not very receptive because a lot of the criticism is not constructive.

And when I do explain it, I get ignored. .. "it's too good" is not constructing advice, it's a complaint.

Ignored? We gave many rebutals to your explanations. What kind of feedback are you looking for? Criticism involves pointing out flaws. so you can make a decision to improve it. I'm not throwing out insults. I explained the reasoning behind my criticism and what could be done to improve the class.

master_marshmallow wrote:
Also how does this fix make them just do more damage? I guess they get one more thanks to weapon training. Those are the kinds of statements that I ignore because you either didn't read it or didn't appreciate the work I did put into it.

You explicitly said earlier in this thread that you intended this fix to make the fighter "the best at fighting" with increases in offense and defense. You decided to accomplish this by giving them more bonus feat access through martial flexibility and combat styles.

Also, you're talking to a guy who draws pictures for his homebrew material and spent months working on his class design. I do appreciate the work that goes behind designing classes. If I didn't care about your work or the topic at hand, I never would have responded to this thread in the first place.


I pretty much agree with everything deadmanwalking says.

1) The fighter fix is overpowered compared to other good martials because they get a much higher volume of bonus feats, class features, and skill points -- most at faster rates, too.

2) The fighter fix is not cool because it steals signature class features from the ranger and brawler while deliberately avoiding the few unique mechanics about the fighter (weapon groups) that many players would love to see expanded. The fighter fix has these for, more or less, the reason of "Well, it worked for those classes. It'll work for the fighter and make them better, too!" I still don't understand why they get the same amount of skill points as a skill focused class when they don't have a lot of class skills and have only one major skill ability: a bonus to Profession (soldier). The 6+Int skill points just feels tacked on.

3) The design goals of the fighter fix feel completely misguided and ultimately don't fix the fighter's design issues. The fix was meant to make them do more damage and have more feats when these were things the fighter already excelled at.

4) The only interesting aspect of the fighter fix are the spell sundering abilities, which feel out of place as static features on the fighter.

5) Finally, you seem rather unreceptive to much of the criticism and concerns about the document here.


I agree with Ciaran. The premise is interesting, but some of the mechanics need work.

I don't like that the archetype replaces trapfinding, trapsense, and improved uncanny dodge. You're losing a skill ability and two defensive abilities to get three strong offensive abilities. That's too good of a trade. I know the rogue doesn't have many abilities to work with. It might be better to create an archetype for the unchained rogue when Pathfinder Unchained comes out.

There already exists rogue talents that give you bombs and bomb discoveries. It might be better to turn prank pocket into a rogue talent instead of making this an archetype. I'd recommend turning it into a Steal maneuver where the opponent must oppose your CMB check with a Perception check to notice you put the bomb in their pants. The Greater Steal feat would allow you to do so without allowing a Perception check to notice it.


scary harpy wrote:


Would a hoverboard be significantly different than a flying carpet?

Flying carpets hover perfectly and move by voice command. Hoverboards need be pushed to go forward


Your rules look okay, but my players would be offput by having to read an article to see how they work--when the article actually doesn't have many rules involved.

I'd honestly just make a board with a constant air step spell except it follows the rules for flying (but you can slow down if you have contact with the ground). It even has rules about using it over water. Then maybe provide a list of "tricks" you can do with a successful Fly or Acrobatics check.


I never liked suggestions for making a "blind monk" character because nearly all of them give him blindsight or something like that. If he's blind, but has a sense that's just as good or better, then he's not really disadvantaged in any way. It's one reason I never liked that Daredevil movie -- the guy's blind, but he has awesome reflexes and a sense that's even better than normal sight.

I'd honestly look to see someone with the testicular fortitude to play a character with a real disability without using magic or anything to totally offset it. Blindsense is okay because it doesn't really let you do anything a normal blind person couldn't do. In addition, it simply makes running the game easier because you don't have to pester your GM with Perception checks every round.


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
In the same vein however, I wanted to also suggest that you could create upgrades that are available only to artiforged with the right power source. For example, the unlife source could have an upgrade similar to the deflection barrier that instead creates a barrier made of force that grants a bonus to AC against incorporeal touch attacks.

One of my first drafts of power source worked like that. Instead of giving special abilities as you leveled up, it expanded the list of available upgrades that only artiforged with that power source could select. I ultimately decided against it because most of the upgrade ideas I had could work for any source with only a minor tweak to flavor. With your idea, that's probably how I want to do it -- list the upgrades under the power source. I wouldn't want to put them in the normal list when not all artiforged can select them. Alternatively, I could introduced highly specialized archetypes centered around a power source. This would let me do things that go beyond the scope of what a normal power source would do. For example, an archetype centered around the Arcane Source could replace integrated armor with something that works exactly like a scaling mage armor. What do you think?

That specific example you gave might go well with the Soul Source I got lined up as well. (Maybe I should list all the source ideas I got and see what people think or have suggestions for).


I really like the condensed Tarrasque.

The capacity system seems a bit awkward at first and kind of go against the idea of having your character's power come naturally from their power than their weapon when they still have to buy a better weapon to take advantage of it. However, I do like that it ultimately makes it cheaper to have magical weapons with special abilities. This system basically makes enhancement bonuses cheaper at the cost of putting a level requirement on them.

While awkward, making special abilities more accesible is a huge plus. My players and I have more interest in giving weapons magical abilities than giving them numbers.


RETRAINING UPGRADES
Upgrades work more like any other talent pool. I might consider letting you swap an existing upgrade when you level up. One of my early drafts let you know and prepare upgrades like wizard spells and feats from Five Moons RPG. However, I didn't want to make the class too complicated and add more book keeping.

RELOADING INTEGRATED RANGED WEAPONS & QUICK DRAW
Integrated ranged weapons don't have a magazine. If it uses projectile ammunition, you use the same action to reload them as you would a non-integrated version of that weapon. The only difference is that it has an internal storage that "caches" loaded ammunition. The launcher option works differently because the text says you use the draw weapon action to reload it. As a result, Quick Draw applies to the launcher, but not a standard integrated ranged weapon.

TOOLKITS AND REMOVING TENSION
1) If you do your daily maintenance with your toolkit, your tension drops to 0 upon a full night's rest.
2) The maintenance time is fairly negigible. You don't need an hour.
3) The flavor with removing all tension and doing maintenance is that you're composed of both flesh and artifice. You must ensure both sides of yourself rest and are well kept. And because you can only fully refresh your flesh on a daily basis, you can only a full removal of tension once per day.

I may consider reworking all this so that you need the toolkit available whenever you remove tension, and that a full night's rest removes all tension. Or I might just remove the full night's rest thing entirely so that characters simply must remove 1 tension each hour to refresh.

INTEGRATED WEAPONS AND HANDEDNESS
Short answer:
1) You do not need to specify what limbs (if any) you installed your integrated weapon into. Your GM might ask you for flavor and other reasons.
2) You can have as many weapons as feasibly possible integrated into a limb.
3) Since there does not exist a mechanical limitation on where on your body you integrated your weapon, you could possibly manifest it anywhere. However, you might have to explain to your GM why your arm cannon is suddenly on your butt.
4) You can put an integrated weapon anywhere on your body. This is intentional. If you want to wield blades on your feet, a hand crossbow in your chest, or spit shurikens out of your mouth, then go right ahead.

Long answer: In early drafts, integrated weapons were simply weapons you transformed your hands or arms into. When transformed, you couldn't wield another weapon or carry objects in your hand. Ultimately, I wasn't happy with this draft. You basically had a class feature that did nothing but give you a free weapon that can't be disarmed. That's boring and denied cool ideas like having a crossbow hidden in your leg.

As a result, the next draft simply never required you to integrate the weapon into a limb. You can have it anywhere on your body. This not only enables more character concepts, but also makes the class feature much simpler. I see nothing wrong with the handedness benefits because:
1) I deliberately wanted the artiforged to be good with switch-hit builds. Their signature class feature should reinforce that.
2) You can't two-hand your integrated weapon.
3) Juggling around weapons carries opportunity costs, anyway. Most of your class features only work on integrated weapons and getting extra integrated weapons requires spending feats or upgrades.
4) I don't see it as a major balance issue. Pathfinder already has weapons that don't use up your hands or allow you to attack when carrying an item in the same hand.

ARMOR CONFIGURATIONS
The text says "he may install an additional configuration when he customizes his armor." So when you spend an hour to configure you armor, you can install two or more configurations. The text also says you can't select the same one more than once unless it says so. And no, you can't disable a configuration until you configure it again, but you can suppress its effects by retracting your armor.

Quote:
I learned from an old gaming buddy that when writing rules it is best to assume people will try to exploit them and to have a min/maxer/powergamer editer to catch loopholes before they go into play, which is why I am asking so many questions hehe.

I learned from one of Pathfinder's game designers that while writing unambiguous rules is important, it's good to assume everyone at the table has some degree of common sense and got together to have fun as a group. Designing around mixmaxers and powergamers will not lead to fruitful design and ultimately not stop them. People who exploit the rules to the break the game will break the game regardless. The only true way to stop a powergamer is not inviting them to your table, for the same reason you would not invite a competitive prick to a casual game of Settlers of Catan.

As a result, I try to focus on writing clear rules that are easy to read and understand, rather than super comprehensive rules that cover every corner case.


If you really wanna be technical, then they revert to normal. The spell says "one creature." When the creature dies, they depart to the afterlife and leave their body behind. A non-animated dead body is an object. Since the body is no longer part of the creature and the spell does not target objects, their body reverts to normal. Consequently, polymorph effects only work on corporeal creatures, so the spell would end anyway.


Gilfalas wrote:

Interesting read. A few suggestions:

...

These are good questions/suggestions. I spent the last couple of hours going through them all!

1) That's a brilliant way to simplify channel energy's benefit to tension. *Jots that down on his "Changes to make on the next draft" list*

2) That seems reasonable as some kind of upgrade.

3) You gain all two or three upgrades at once. I might consider changing it so you raise 1 tension per upgrade gained.

4) That's a typo. (Just fixed it now, thanks!)

5) That's a good point. Maybe I'll do that or make the Augmented Prowess advanced upgrade attractive in other ways.

6) I tend to avoid ability score boosts in my design to keep the math simpler and not entangle myself with the annoying rules about temporary ability score increases. I might do that for some Power Source surges. I'll think about it.

7) I have mixed feelings about that since the class already grants a free Rapid Shot and such. But that's not a bad suggestion. I'll ponder on that. I am considering reworking the ability since I spotted a corner case where you can two-hand a normal weapon and follow it up with an integrated weapon attack. I should examine this ability more carefully, even though I do like the idea of being able to chain a normal weapon with it.

8) Expanded ammunition capacity might be a pretty cool upgrade.

9) You can retrain upgrades like you can with pretty much any class feature. I needed to add the replacement rules for integrated armor and weapons because those involve investing wealth into. I might add some retraining rules to the book or let you swap upgrades every few levels.

10) Having you pay a percentage of the cost might be a good idea. I am also leaning towards having it work like the gunslinger where you have to pay the 300 gp to masterwork it. Masterworking is where nearly all of the wealth goes into a mundane weapon since most weapons cost 20gp to 50gp. That would only leave firearms an issue, which would require special GM permission or an archetype anyway.

11) You can kind of already wield a repeating crossbow integrated weapon. I gave the class hand crossbow proficiency and integrated ranged weapons gain a 4 ammo capacity.

12) Breaking your bonds would be better as a Strength check, which power surge already grants you a 1d6 bonus for! Escape Artist is a silly skill.

13) Flavor-wise, that strikes me as a little odd but that sounds like a good idea regardless.

14) Maybe, but if you have proficiency in a melee weapon that has a range increment, it's no longer an improvised weapon when you throw it. I don't think the upgrade would mislead people into believing otherwise.

15) Good catch! That should be the "sheathe weapon action." Drawing is a free action, retracting is a move action by performing the sheathe weapon action.

16) That's a typo. Though, I originally intended it to give a maximum DR 5/adamantine. I think a DR 6 might be okay since it's not as strong as DR 5/-.

17) A jump upgrade sounds cool enough to be its own upgrade.

18) I think you gave this suggestion in #8! I agree that there should be more ranged upgrades.

19) You reload ranged integrated weapons normally 1 piece of ammunition at a time, but they fire their from internal ammunition storage. Maybe I should clarify this?

20) They kind of work like double barreled pistols or a pepperbox.

21) It should be appropriate for your size, but I should specify that.

22) That's kind of one of the vague aspects of daily abilities in 3rd Edition. I envisioned you need to perform upkeep either before you sleep or after you wake up to relieve all your tension. For mechanical purposes, you remove all tension when you wake up and must have the kit available when you do so.

23) Ugh! I tried to make that clear, but apparently not! When an ability says "you must be capable of raising your tension by 1," you do not actually raise your tension, but you must be able to do so. In other words, you must be at your maximum tension or lower. The text refers to the Power Source class feature, which says "If the artiforged raises his tension any further [than his maximum tension], he becomes fatigued and cannot use any abilities that raise tension unless his tension reduces to the maximum or lower."

24) I like that better. Thank you! I'll go ahead and make the appropriate change.

25) The Unlife Source's Negative Discharge still raises your tension when you use it as an immediate action. I'll add a "instead of a swift action" at the end of that line to better clarify that this is an action economy benefit.


The Elemental Source is an odd case where I have so many ideas for abilities with it that I can't decide them. It will obviously add energy damage to your attacks during a power surge. Some ability ideas I had were:
- throw your element as a thrown weapon attack dealing energy damage
- make a single attack deal an additional die of energy damage for each extra attack from BAB and other sources
- a movement buff during power surge
- moving leaves behind a trail of energy that has special properties
- blast attack
- energy aura


Charging is insanely good as is. I've never heard of players having no incentive to use it, even at high levels. The only non-incentive is that high level monsters tend to have reach such that charging provokes an attack of opportunity.


That's an interesting idea. I'm not so sure about making the power source more complicated. I'll ponder on this. I do, however, want to remove Escape Artist from the list.

*Goes back to work on stuff today*


The fighter is already really good at fighting and defense. That's not his problem. One of the reasons he feels really lackluster is because he does not gain any special attacks or abilities other than bonuses to armor and damage. I also don't understand why you're against shoehorning the fighter to a weapon group, but you wanted to give them combat styles for the explicit reason of shoehorning them to a build.

I'm having trouble following your train of logic here. Something about "I want to fix the fighter by giving them more bonus feats" doesn't make much sense to me.


At the time of writing that, I think I was imagining using your surge to quickly snatch something or pull a maneuver like Bishop's knife trick from Aliens. I might remove Escape Artist. Escape Artist always seems like the black sheep of the skills Having each power source expand that list sounds like a neat idea. I thought about doing that for source class skills, but that felt odd, and I didn't want to steal too much of the investigator's thunder.


This fix feels rather unfocused. While the premise might seem sound, I feel like you're not tackling the heart of the fighter's problems. Instead, you're taking good things from other classes and hoping it works.

My vision of a fighter fix is probably much different. However, if I wanted to rework the fighter using the brawler as a base, I'd basically think of it as a brawler archetype that makes the appropriate swaps and go from there. Instead of granting all the unarmed strike stuff, they'd get Weapon Focus in one weapon group at 1st level. Instead of brawler's flurry, they'd get a special attack that depends on the fighter group chosen at 1st level.


Your fix is basically steal a bunch of ideas from other classes (ranger combat styles, martial flexibility from brawler, etc), make weapon training earlier, slap a few spellbreaker feats, and call it a day? I'm not a big fan of it.


A bump update.

I got a list of ideas (some of them suggested by you). I'm now going through it, implementing them one by one. I recently focused on power sources, though I've been stumped on a few mechanics. I'm currently working on two power sources called the Blighted Source and Solar Source.

My friend's game started recently, and I'm playtesting this class as a runari artiforged with the Arcane Source. I consider myself lucky that the group has a ranger fulfilling a very similar role and build as a switch-hitter. I've been very concerned about the class's power, but I have a bad habit of stifling my design by keeping things too conservative. However, the ranger and I look roughly on par with one another. I do seem to have a wealth advantage since I get my primary weapons and armor for free, masterworked, and receive a discount on enhancements.


It looks okay for the most part, but I do not like any of the abilities that replace maneuver training 2, 3, 4, and 5. Maneuver mastery is already pretty much maneuver training on steroids, so it doesn't feel like a fair trade, even with the loss of the AC bonus. You basically get 5 powerful abilities at the price of 1.


broken link


I can't get the thought of a class idea out of my head. A fighter class that takes Martial Flexibility and Sean K Reynolds's articles about making fighters more versatile and absolutely runs with it in a flavorful way.


GM_Beernorg wrote:
Of topic question, but is the Harrow Handbook worth having IYO? I like the harrow deck, and own one, and I do actually use it to do harrowing on my players from time to time. If there is enough good crunch and what not in that book, may be worth having. But would like to hear others thoughts before I spend the cash, as that is not infinite.

If you have a harrow deck and use it, I can't see much of a reason to NOT get Harrow Handbook. It has great archetypes and new ways of doing harrowing.


I don't really see what it would add to the game to warrant the needless complication. In the end, ranged fighters would have an even greater advantage.

That setup works in X-Wing because it helps simulate a dog fight and the only thing units can do is move and shoot.


Congrats on getting it published!


kemmotar_veon wrote:
I have been trying to fix the broken (destroyed?, devastated?, utterly wrong?) Spellsling wizard archetype, and I haven't been able, anyone has an Idea about this one?

Start by removing Mage Bullets and have School of the Gun alter arcane school rather than replace it.

Mage Bullets is actually stronger than most think (basically lets you sacrifice a spell to add its level to your spell DCs for a few minutes), but I've never seen anyone say they liked it. Losing cantrips to gain an ability they could have done without was just too much. School of the Gun is nothing more than a kick in the shins. It doubles the drawback of arcane school while also taking away all of arcane school's perks. You get stuck with four opposition schools, lose school powers, and lose a spell slot.


I made one last sweep of revisions. I do not intend make any further major revisions to the class and existing power sources until I obtain some significant playtest data. I now want to focus on writing new content

Changes:

  • Integrated melee weapons no longer have the "extendo" ability unless you take the extending mechanism upgrade.
  • You can draw integrated weapons as a free action again (that got lost during one of the revisions).
  • The shattering charge upgrade now works on any object that obstructs a charge and can grant cover. Its advanced upgrade has an increased break bonus.
  • The nimble armor configuration (now called maneuverable) can be set for any Strength-based or Dexterity-based skill check.
  • Advanced deflection barrier to grants bonuses to allies instead of a 50% miss chance to the artiforged. As Ciaran made me realize, a 50% miss chance seemed strange because it's somewhat of an anti-pattern, and unnecessary when deflection barrier is already really good. Plus, I really favor team-oriented abilities.
  • Reworded Efficient Upgrade.

    kemmotar_veon wrote:

    just dropping an Idea... after checking the whole class I think the Numerian Super Technology would give some kind of ideas for the Power source and of course the Integrated weapons...

    I don't have the time right now to work on it but I would like to see what you think about it, maybe later this week I will give it a little time and come out with something

    There's a lot of cool stuff there for inspiration.

    In the early stages of design, I made the decision in how this class will operate with respect to Numeria and the Technology Guide. I decided that the class would neither require nor invalidate the Technology Guide. While I don't want the class to rely on mechanics in the Technology Guide, most of the Numerian content should still work. You can still use the rules in the Technology Guide to get implants and a laser pistol arm. However, I do want to create a power source or an archetype that would work perfectly for a Numeria campaign.

    I'm also considering adding an equipment section to the book that will open up some new choices for integrated weapons. For example, perhaps a one-handed version of the ripsaw glaive.


  • I think it's okay for some classes, particularly strong ones like 9-level arcane spellcasters and strong gish classes. One-save is a good conscious choice to give a little weakness to a class in favor of making them strong elsewhere.

    However, I do agree that two-saves should be standard for full BAB classes. At high levels, a weak save results in an almost instant failure. Unlike gishes and full spellcasters, full BAB classes often don't have an answer for the powerful effects you can expect from a high level monster.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    I'm a protestant Christian and I see the logic behind putting deities in your campaign even if you do not believe in the existence in real deities. Some of the greatest stories come from religious texts and mythology, and Pathfinder deities are really interesting characters.

    Besides, it might make players uncomfortable if their GM has an atheist agenda just as if I made a setting where the Christian God was the only true God.


    Yes, but I still think that might be a bit much to select any Strength or Dex skill. Hrm, I'll think about it.


    I made an experimental change to Integrated Weapon that breaks down the types of integrated weapons you can select. At Ciaran's suggestion, I changed Climbing Implements to a 20 foot speed but then created a new advanced upgrade. Integrated Shield can now be a light or heavy shield.

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:

    Armor Upgrade

    I suggest changing this to proficiency in heavy armor, and the ability to pick a heavy armor as an integrated armor. Then make a separate upgrade that causes his integrated armor to count as one category lighter (heavy to med, med to light).

    I have mixed feelings about this when I now allowed the artiforged to have mithril integrated armor.

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:

    Deflection Barrier

    This one is a bonus to AC, while the advanced one is a full miss chance. Why not make this one a 20% miss chance?

    I used a mixture of benchmarks that ran in a similar format than that. I found miss chance isn't as fun as AC bonuses for a variety of reasons. They feel too binary whereas with an AC bonus, you can see how close and effective your AC bonus is, even if the enemy still hits you. Miss chance doesn't feel as good until it gets high (50%). In other words: 20% doesn't feel as fun as an AC bonus, but 50% does feel better. I can totally see where you're coming from. That does seem strange to go from an AC bonus to miss chance. Perhaps I should change Advanced Deflection Barrier such that it allows the artiforged to extend their bonuses to adjacent allies? Or something similar?

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:

    Nimble

    I suggest renaming this to something more all-encompassing and allowing the bonus to apply to literally any Str or Dex based skill. I am imagining little tools and attachments built in based on the skill that is selected. Claws for a climb bonus, picks, saws, drills, etc for disable device, specialized grips on the legs and hands for riding, making the armor more aerodynamic for flying or acrobatics, fins and slippers for swim, etc.

    I'd think for all might be a bit much. That would be cool to create tools. I always wanted to make an upgrade that basically makes you Inspector Gadget where you have a tool for almost any skill, but I haven't thought of a way to make it interesting enough to be an upgrade but not too powerful. It might be a good choice for some kind of investigator archetype.

    Amanuensis wrote:
    However, if I'm interested in this a option, in most cases, I'm probably better of throwing my 'melee weapon with a ranged increment'. Even if I take this version for my integrated weapon, it wouldn't be my first choice (I'd choose a melee weapon first and use the extra integrated weapon upgrade to get this). I would suggest making a 'launcher' upgrade that boosts thrown weapons so they can gain the benefits of integrated weapons and increased range

    I have mixed feelings about increasing ranged increments on projectile integrated weapons. However, I agree that simply getting a melee weapon with a ranged increment seems like a better choice. I think it seems too strong of a choice now. I'm considering moving that over to the Extending upgrade instead.

    And yes. Pathfinder drives me up the wall with how it defines weapons, especially when so many abilities differ depending on the type of weapon.


    A rework of magic item creation has my interest.


    Sounds pretty cool.


    I cleaned up the positions of the images and added the class table directly to the document. Images might still look funky on mobile devices, but it should look much better than before.

    I changed Shattering Charge upgrade so it also works on any obstacle, not just ones granting cover. I added two new advanced upgrades: Inhuman Reflexes (increase number of AoO) and Advanced Impulse Weaponry (impulse weaponry can bull rush larger targets, knocks them back further, and knocks them prone if they collide with an obstacle).


    kamenhero25 wrote:
    Ciaran Barnes wrote:
    I... think I get that. Maybe. But there's gotta be an simpler way to express it.

    Easier way to say it:

    Give all martials the Vital Strike feats as an alternate form of attack instead of requiring them to use feats on it or decrease the penalty of each iterative, their choice.

    I said "on a full-attack action." But Vital Strike or more options for single-attacks would be nice.


    I finished reworking integrated armor. It now allows you to choose any light or medium armor. In addition, you can change the type with 1 hour of work. The rework also provides rules for replacing destroyed armor, allowing you to use special materials, clarification about retracting the armor, and what happens to the old armor if you replaced it with a new one.

    I updated the extending mechanism and armor upgrade upgrades to reflect the changes to integrated weapon and integrated armor.


    That's probably not going to be doable. Flying items are expensive because flight is one of the most useful abilities in the game. Winged boots are your best bet, but even they are 17k. Even if you find a balanced item at 7k, a 5th level character has a wealth of 10,500 gp. You can't spend more than 25% of your wealth on a single item.


    What level is your character?


    People don't like iteratives because it adds more complication to the math and time at the table. Having characters use up multiple slots in initiative just makes things more complicated.

    I'd prefer maybe something like this.

    When a character has a +6 BAB, they can make a single attack that deals double damage when making a full-attack action. They can alternatively make two attacks at a -2 penalty. At +11 BAB and +16, they can perform multiple attacks with penalties or a single attack with increased damage in a similar fashion.
    +0 attack
    +6 attack (x2 dmg) or 2 attacks -2
    +11 [attack (x3 dmg)] or [attack (x2 dmg), attack -2] or [3 attacks -4]
    +16 [attack (x4 dmg)] [attack (x3 dmg), attack -2] or [attack (x2 dmg), attack (x2 dmg)] [attack (x2 dmg), 2 attacks -2] or [4 attacks -4]


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Amanuensis wrote:
    Gear Dependent: Though an artiforged can be raised or resurrected normally, when his body becomes lost or destroyed, he loses access to all artiforged class features except for artiforging and proficiencies in armor, shields, and weapons.[...]

    Thank you! I still want to call that section "Ex-Artiforged" because that's pretty standard for any class where a circumstance could remove class features or make it impossible to take further levels, such as the barbarian. It also makes sense because you're not physically an artiforged anymore without the augmentations, even though you have all of the experience and know-how to use them and put them back.

    Amanuensis wrote:
    Another thing I noticed is that there is no mentioning of replacing integrated weapons/armor (only in the case they are destroyed). If I find a better weapon, can I take it as my integrated weapon and sell the one I'm currently using? Can I screw the fighter's sword into my forearm, enhance it and give it back to him?

    That's a good question. So good that I reworked integrated weapon this morning to answer all those questions, clarify thrown melee weapons (you can now eject them hookshot-style!), and give specifics about having an integrated ranged weapon that fires thrown weapons as ammo.

    I still need to work out integrated armor today.


    I'd think low level Pokemon (up to level 10) would be roughly as dangerous as a dog or wolf. After that, many of them start getting deadly abilities and then around the 20s and 30s, they get dangerous supernatural abilities.

    chbgraphicarts wrote:
    kestral287 wrote:
    stuff

    The Pokemon anime can go to hell.

    It's resemblance to the games ends at the name and character designs of the mons.

    Dragonball Evolution was more accurate to Dragonball than the Pokemon anime is accurate to the games. Also, better-written; seriously, post-Johto (maybe even post Orange Islands, which was by far the best arc), the series became utter repetitive crap.

    As much as I enjoy tearing down the Pokemon anime, I could totally debate you on the accuracy of Dragon Ball Evolution. However, both are "special" in that they take pride in getting some details right, but completely screwing up major points. Like including goku's spiky hair and great ape heritage, but making him an awkward school boy that only cares about getting a date with a high school crush. Or spouting off game mechanic trivia about Solar Beam during sunny days, but then show a Steel-type get one-shot by a Poison-type move that they should have been immune to it...all in the same episode.

    But I digress.


    I made some changes suggested by Amanuensis to thrusters, flurry assault, turning apparatus, and spike armor. I'll see if I can do a rewrite of integrated armor today.

    Amanuensis wrote:
    Ex-artiforged: I would start that section with a sentence that they can be raised normally. Also, the term ex-artiforged doesn't really fit (it's usually reserved for cases when a class relies on a specific believe, code and/or behaviour).

    I have mixed feelings about that. I'm not sure if that's necessary because the class does not change your creature type, and I'd prefer not to bloat that section more. Maybe I could create a side-bar? I'll ponder on this.

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:
    During our previous conversations on the armor, I assumed that it could be changed. Hope you don't mind that I keep on imagining Iron Man when thinknig about this class. :)

    Where'd you ever get that crazy idea?. A crossbow-related upgrade might be a good idea. I honestly want to make more ranged weapon upgrades since nearly all of them are only useful for a melee fighter. I really wanted the class to have a crossbow arm as a staple option, which is why I gave them hand crossbow proficiency. I did give them whips so you can become that laser whip guy from Johnny Nmemonic, but that might be better off as an archetype or upgrade something.

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:
    It seems to me that an ammunition rated thrown weapon such as shuriken (always drawn as free action) would have a greater limit than 4 before reloading. Maybe 10 per arm? You might have to include language on integrating a launcher of some kind, to be used for shurikens, daggers, javelins, darts, etc. The max number loaded would depend on the "size" of the ammunition/weapon.

    A bunch of perks for ranged weapons to choose from might be worth doing. On the other hand, I could possibly introduce upgrades that give powerful versions of otherwise weak choices for integrated weapons. For example, an upgrade that gives you a shuriken launcher and allows your shurikens to explode by raising tension.

    Dang it, now I'm gonna have to make a cyborg ninja archetype!


    Both. Alignment is something that exists in the game world. However, your character doesn't necessarily know their alignment at any given moment. Paladins and clerics likely do sense when they might stray off the path as they radiate a powerful alignment aura and many gods give subtle signs of their displeasure. Many characters may not know what an alignment is if they do not have any religious or planar knowledge.


    Google docs is a bit weird because it wants to layout everything as if a printable document, but many viewers display documents as one continuous page with no margins. I'll have to play with the positioning of the icons to get it to look right on mobile devices.

    You can see the class table here. There's also a link to it at the top of the page. I gotten into the habit of putting tables in spreadsheets because tables in Google Docs are not export friendly and annoying to work with for especially large tables. Maybe I should put a table in this doc anyway?

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:

    Integrated Weapon

    Sounds like I can add my Strength modifier to damage rolls with a hand crossbow. Is that intentional? The wording for thrown weapons is clumsy.

    Yes, that's intentional. You can add your Strength modifier to damage rolls with a hand crossbow. I'll try to work on clarifying how thrown weapon integrated weapons work. It also raises the question of melee weapons that have range increments, like a dagger (though that is a fun visual of shooting your dagger arm out). I'll work on that.

    Ciaran Barnes wrote:

    Integrated Armor

    Does this cost any money? What if I want to integrate an armor made of a special material? You may want to define what happens when the armor is deployed or retracted. Can I go back and forth between my armors or am I restricted to one?

    Those are good questions. I intended you can't get special materials. However, it might be better to rework the ability such that you can destroy an existing armor to graft it to your body, similar to integrated weapons. That would enable you to get an armor with special materials and clarify that the one you get at 3rd level is free but not made of any special materials unless you pay for it. I've honestly never considered the idea that you could have more than one integrated armor. That intrigues me. I'll ponder on that!

    Edit: I just made the change so that Artiforging grants actually grants Craft Magic Arms and Armor with the restriction that you can only use it on integrated weapons and armor.


    Any kind of spellcaster with conjuring abilities would work for an Elric concept. Alchemy in FMA is basically prepared magic in Pathfinder with a strong emphasis on conjuration, transmutation, and evocation. Since Elric has the special ability of spontaneously performing FMA alchemy, he'd work well for any gish class with spontaneous spellcasting.

    The runeblade from Collected Book of Experimental Might would also fit well.


    The central idea behind the Pokemon setting lies with the easy domestication of magical beasts. So people need something that will enable them to do so, such as a special type of magic or technology. The Pokemon anime mentions that ancient pokeballs were basically magical artifacts.

    I guess what I'm saying is: figure out how pokeballs exist in the setting, and then go from there.


    Amanuensis wrote:
    Interestingly, the whole tension mechanic turned out to be more traditional than I expected at the beginning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I see it, tension is essentially a reversed pool mechanic.

    Yes, it's a dynamic engine akin to grit or panache, but reversed with a different replenishment condition.

    Amanuensis wrote:

    And you could avoid some clumsy sentences like the following:

    Power Surge wrote:
    Consecutive rounds count as the same power surge with an extended duration.

    Wording that drove me crazy when the idea is really simple.

    Alex Cunningham wrote:
    May I playtest this in one of my current campaigns, Cyrad?

    Yes! By all means. I'm quite interested in hearing the results of any playtest.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    The artiforged is a martial class centered around literally forging yourself into the perfect warrior. I designed it as “setting neutral” with a class feature that determines the flavor of your bodily enhancements. Fitting your artiforged to a setting is simply a matter of choosing the right power source. You could be a steam knight, a clockwork soldier, a guy with a bunch of magical devices installed in his body, a warrioress augmenting herself with symbiotic plants or perhaps a man who Frankensteins himself with undead limbs.

    [LINK]

    The artiforged is a full BAB martial with no spellcasting. He gains no bonus feat progression, but is a feature rich class. Some class features include the following.

    • Integrated Weapon: Gain a special weapon attached to your body that can be deployed quickly.
    • Power Source: Gain a “bloodline” that determines the nature of your augmentations. The power source also acts as a resource pool with special abilities increasing “tension." Time and healing spells reduce tension.
    • Power Surge: Raise tension to gain +1/+1 to integrated weapon attacks for 1 round. Damage scales with level. Every power source augments power surge in some way.
    • Flurry Assault: At 2nd level, gain a bonus integrated weapon attack when full-attacking.
    • Upgrades: At every even level, customize yourself with a new special ability. Some require raising tension to use.
    • Integrated Armor: At 3rd level, gain armor grafted to your body that can be deployed or retracted. At later levels, you can configure the armor to gain situational perks.

    I intend to publish this class in a book that will include many more upgrades, power sources, archetypes, NPCs of all CRs, and an Eldritch Heritage-like feat. I’d like some thoughts and feedback before I finalize a draft for an upcoming playtest.

    Special thanks to Ciaran Barnes, Goddity, Goth Guru and others for their feedback during the development of this class. They were a big help during the months I spent working on this.

    1 to 50 of 1,994 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

    ©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.