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 Season 9 Top 16. RPG Superstar 7 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 3,308 posts (3,521 including aliases). 9 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,308 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Ah okay. So I misinterpreted you when you said, "My philosophy is that if a feat comes up in 1/4 of all fights, but is awesome when it does, it should cost less?"

Knight Magenta wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:


No one has ever in the history of the game stated that feats, classes, or any other sort of similar mechanics, would be equal or even razor edge close to it. And same feats will have a scale of value to different classes.
I'm not saying that every character must find every feat equally desirable. But for each feat there should be some build that wants that feat.

I believe that's only part of what she meant. I believe she also means that feats, classes, etc are "incomparables" (borrowing a term from Extra Credits). While we certainly want feats to have competitive value, you can't really compare them or assess them numerically with precision. Which is one of the reasons why using a point system for feats accomplishes very little.

Knight Magenta wrote:
And I do think classes should be equal. No one wants to play Robin while everyone else is playing Superman.

Again, classes are incomparables. In addition, while every class should feel meaningful, they don't have to be "equal." As long as a class is fun and not egregiously below or above the power curve, it's okay if they don't have the same power level as the next class. Really, power equality isn't as important as most people idolize on these forums. They put an undue amount of focus on it because it's one of the few aspects of game design they've been exposed to.

Tangent: Most of my friends (and myself) would totally rather play Teen Titans Robin than Superman. Heck, I'd rather play Robin from the Adam West show than Superman from the Man of Steel movie.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Skaeren wrote:
Cyrad wrote:


Also, just because a feat is situational doesn't mean it's underpowered or it should have a lower cost.

Ah, yes, it does, actually.

The more often a feat (or ability) can be used, with a beneficial effect, generally the weaker the effect needs to be or the more powerful the ability becomes.

A feat that is only going to be beneficial 1/10th of the time is, strictly, underpowered compared to a feat that you can benefit from 9/10ths of the time. So to compensate, you either allow mulitple of the first type of feat to be gained, or you make it powerful enough that that 1/10th of the time really matters.

In a 3 tier system, a feat that lets you regenerate limbs would still be in a lower tier than a feat that doubles the amount of hit points you recover when you sleep. While the regenerating limbs is potentially powerful, how often are you seriously likely to lose a limb? Now compare that with how often you sleep and recover hit points...

Balancing power and assigning numeric value thereof is more complicated than that. Especially in a game like Pathfinder where circumstances vary wildly depending on the campaign.

How often an ability comes into play is not the only factor in assessing power level. The power ceiling of the ability also plays a huge factor -- how powerful that ability is on its own merits. If the power ceiling combined with the circumstantial nature equates to the power ceiling of a reliable feat, then the two feats are likely equal in power level and therefore should have the same point cost.

This isn't what the OP suggests in his "balance philosophy." His philosophy suggests the circumstantial feat should have a lower price even if the power ceiling compensates for the circumstantial nature when the feat in question is balanced against a comparable reliable feat.

This is a flawed philosophy.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Knight Magenta wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
By your logic, a feat that lets you cast the wish spell once per month should be a 1-point feat because it will only come up once per adventure. That philosophy is flawed because each feat is an optional choice that varies in usefulness depending on the campaign. If you give a feat a very low cost because it's circumstantial, that feat becomes overpowered/underpriced in a campaign where the circumstance is common. As a result, you have to price based on the power ceiling, not how often it's useful. Just as Trogdar pointed out, a feat should be judged by what it's trying to accomplish.
Would you seriously take a feat that let you cast wish only once? Even at CL 20? That seems like a bad trade. You can't even wish for a awesome magic item like you could in 3.5. I'd price that feat as a feat that gives a +1 inherent bonus to an ability score. Maybe 3 or 4 points :) I guess you could use it as a CL20 cone of cold or something to win a combat...

You're dodging my point. Your philosophy on power balance is heavily flawed.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Knight Magenta wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

Yes, I know.

You want to keep it as small as possible so it's easier to categorize them. 3 might be a better number than 4. With three, you can choose one feat to be your base line. This feat has a cost of 2. Then, every feat that is stronger than that feat gets assigned 3 points and every feat weaker than that feat gets assigned 1 point.

Also, just because a feat is situational doesn't mean it's underpowered or it should have a lower cost.

My philosophy is that if a feat comes up in 1/4 of all fights, but is awesome when it does, it should cost less. This is because I want to encourage characters to take stuff like blind-fight and deflect arrows. They are good feats that are really strong at doing their thing but no one ever takes them.

When assigning point values I literally think: "How much extra stuff would I need to get to take this over a better feat."

By your logic, a feat that lets you cast the wish spell once per month should be a 1-point feat because it will only come up once per adventure. That philosophy is flawed because each feat is an optional choice that varies in usefulness depending on the campaign. If you give a feat a very low cost because it's circumstantial, that feat becomes overpowered/underpriced in a campaign where the circumstance is common. As a result, you have to price based on the power ceiling, not how often it's useful. Just as Trogdar pointed out, a feat should be judged by what it's trying to accomplish.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Yes, I know.

You want to keep it as small as possible so it's easier to categorize them. 3 might be a better number than 4. With three, you can choose one feat to be your base line. This feat has a cost of 2. Then, every feat that is stronger than that feat gets assigned 3 points and every feat weaker than that feat gets assigned 1 point.

Also, just because a feat is situational doesn't mean it's underpowered or it should have a lower cost.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Assigning a point value to every feat is such a daunting task that ultimately yields little benefit because it's difficult to judge the power of a feat on such a fine level. Especially a fine level where a whole feat equates to 8 points. This was one of the flaws with the race creation rules in ARG. You aren't going to have a more balanced system this way.

A better approach would be to have tiers for feats. For example, a character can choose one feat or two "minor feats" By making the values more discrete, it's much easier to figure out whether a feat is too powerful or too weak. With your system, it's much more challenging to figure out the power difference between a 4-point feat or a 5-point feat.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Swift actions are not a lesser version of move actions. Often, they're powerful effects that are restricted to once per round. Too many people equate them to minor actions from 4th Edition, but this is not the case. So changing a move action to a swift action is not really a downgrade. Characters also already have the option to use a move action in place of a standard action.

Having clerics choose domains or channel is not a fair choice. Domains don't scale very well. Their powers mostly exist to give the cleric something to do at low levels when they don't have many spell slots. The best perk of domains is the extra spell slot really. And not only that, you decide to buff the better option by giving a free channel feat.

The same goes for the druid. Wild Shape is usually a way better choice, especially when you get Natural Spell for free.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't place my order. Every time I do, it sends me back to choose a payment method, despite the fact I already have a valid one selected and the site doesn't say anything's wrong with my payment method. Sometimes, it doesn't even do anything.

Checkout has always been really buggy. It's ticking me off so much that I've bought stuff from other stores as a result.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I don't think you understand my first point. Combat is the entire point of being a brute, but the archetype forces you to transform back to your non-combat form after every single fight. This can be crippling or tedious when you're going to be having lots of fights one after another.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:

Nope, none of the above. You could stand up, or draw a weapon or sheathe one, but not drop it or shift your grip.

The FAQ is very, very silly. It actually made me laugh at the ridiculousness.

"Can someone please trip my fighter so he falls on his bed? He had way too much to drink, and now he can't lie down or let go of his mug."

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Letric wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

I don't follow the example situation you provided.

Ok. So if you save, you can see through it, know it's not real and can act as if it wasn't there.

If you attack it, touch it and fail your save? The wall is there, but you know you can pass through it, but since you can't see through it, your attacks will be penalized. Right?

Correct.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Can I drop prone while nauseated?
Can I drop a weapon while nauseated?
Can I speak while nauseated?
Can I take my hand off a two-handed weapon while nauseated?

Both the game and FAQs classify many trivial activities as free actions. According to this FAQ, I can't do any of these actions.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You have to hold your material components to expend them for a spell.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I don't follow the example situation you provided.

Silent Image allows you to create "an object, creature, or force" as per the spell description. If you use the spell to create an illusionary wall, it appears as a wall to anyone who sees it. However, if they interact with the wall in anyway that compromises its true nature (like touching it, studying it closely, or throwing something at it), the creature gets a Will save to disbelieve. If they disbelieve it, the illusion appears as a ghostly outline to that individual. If they fail to disbelieve it, they still believe it's a wall, though perhaps with special properties (in the case they do something obvious like throw something at it).

It's best to think of a figment (the type of illusion that Silent Image is) as a hologram.

Silent image is a really powerful spell that's limited only by your creativity.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm pointing out that the effects on par with stinking cloud are 3rd level spells. The effects that are slightly more powerful are 4th level spells and the effects slightly weaker are 2nd level spells. Hence, stinking cloud -- the most commonly used ability that inflicts the nauseated condition -- is balanced compared to other effects. Sure, stinking cloud takes you out of the fight, but it also protects you. The other comparable spells not only cripple your action economy, but also put you at serious danger. Even if the action economy debuff isn't as strong as nauseated, they usually

As for cacophonous call, what's my analysis? It's a second level Save or Suck spell. Only targets one creature. Ear-piercing scream is a level lower, deals damage, and dazes (though for one round). Hideous laughter is way more crippling (disabling actions AND knocking you prone) and can be gained by the bard one level lower. However, hideous laughter allows a save every round. Blindness/deafness can be obtained at the same level as cacophonous. Though it doesn't cripple the action economy as hard, it has a permanent duration and more vertasility. Cacophonous call is slightly stronger than spells of a lower level, has trade-offs when compared with comparable spells at the same level, and isn't as strong as spells on a level higher. Plus, the spell only appears on the bard list and won't be obtained until 8th level. As a result, my analysis points that cacophonous call is fairly balanced.

Conditions serve the abilities, not the other way around. Nerfing nauseated just nerfs those otherwise balanced abilities just because you believe nauseated is too powerful in a vaccum. That's my main problem with your argument to nerf nauseated. You mainly look at the condition by itself.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I studied the brute carefully and it honestly doesn't look as bad as most think. It's still a poorly designed archetype. However, you don't really address the major two issues I have with it:

1) The archetype prohibits you from using your social identity for combat. However, the brute also forces you to transform back to social after every fight. It's an antipattern. You can only do combat as your brute form, but it only lasts until the end of the fight. Then you have to waste time resting and then transforming back. This gets very tedious during a dungeoncrawl or a combat-heavy adventure. They should have designed it so that when you succeed your Will save to not pummel your allies, you can choose whether or not to change back or stay in the form.

2) You're super squishy as a brute. You have a d8 Hit Die. You take like...a -3 penalty to AC. You can't wear armor until later levels. And unlike a barbarian or an alchemist with mutagen, you don't get any natural armor or Constitution bonuses to boost your hit points.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Mrakvampire wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
For example, you can get access to deep slumber and slow at the same level as stinking cloud. You can get confusion, fear, and black tentacles at a level higher. Web and glitterdust a level lower. There's mass disables at every level and nauseated is one of the lesser of the effects. So you don't really accomplish anything by nerfing nauseated.

I'm still not convinced.

Let's compare conditions you've mentioned.

Slow vs nauseated.
In slow you can cast normally, you can make 1 attack per round, after all, you can act in combat.
In nauseated all you can do is retreat via 1 move action and watch as enemies kill you round after round.

Deep Slumber
Very niche spell, casting time 1 round, affect at level-appropriate level only 1-2 creatures, and can be negated by simple standard action that is available for every creature (doesn't require special abilities)

Confusion
Powerful effect but even this effect allows 25% chance per round to act normally plus you can effectively participate in combat if you are attacked.

Fear
Ok, you can be possibly removed from combat (forced to flee) but it's still more preferable than nauseated. In nauseated you are effectively also removed from combat but CAN'T effectively retreat.

Black Tentacles
CMB = CL + 5 is not that strong after all, this spell is overrated. Just check average CMD of monsters in Bestiaries.
Even then, grappled condition still allows you to act, you can cast non-somatic spells with concentration, you can after all activate magic items, etc.
If you are nauseated - that's it. You can't do anything at all.

Blinded
Not even remotely as bad as nauseated.
Basically you just have 50% concealment vs all enemies and have issues with AC, and that's all. But still you can act, you can cast spells, you can retreat, you can drink potions, with Blind Fight you can effectively fight in melee.
Spellcaster affected by blindness can possibly cast spell to remove this condition or mitigate it, if he is nauseated - he can't do...

I feel like you're mostly making excuses than arguments here. For some of them, you compare the conditions and not the effects while ignoring some of the most powerful aspects. For example, if you're blind, you have to use Perception to locate creatures, can only move at half speed, and can't use any ability that requires line of sight (like target spells). Black tentacles has a huge area, impedes movement, and can grapple foes every round and when they move through it. And confusion can make you attack your own allies and potentially kill them if they're also confused.

Stinking cloud is balanced against other effects at its level.

Are there any other effects that trouble you?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

All of the effects that cause nauseated are comparable to the power level of similar abilities at their level. If you nerf the nauseated condition, all you do is encourage the use of those other abilities, some of which are more crippling.

For example, you can get access to deep slumber and slow at the same level as stinking cloud. You can get confusion, fear, and black tentacles at a level higher. Web and glitterdust a level lower. There's mass disables at every level and nauseated is one of the lesser of the effects. So you don't really accomplish anything by nerfing nauseated.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Divinity in my campaign is not merely having a power level of nine thousand.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Actually, a full BAB and the unchained version of flurry of blows goes a long way towards making the monk better, particularly because it lets them immediately qualify for the staple martial feats like Power Attack. And they already get a +1 to unarmed damage every 4 levels via dice increases.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Weirdo wrote:
Eh, it's Ant Haul. Lasts 2 hours/level, and while it's a lot of fun increased carrying capacity isn't exactly a game-changer.

It still should be more than 2 RP. I don't understand why they have ant haul, anyway. Their strength is already represented with a +2 Strength bonus. Kangaroos aren't known for having arms capable of carrying a lot of stuff. And somehow this race can carry twice the load of a quadruped creature of their size?

It's not the case that it's too powerful. It just strikes me as a very baffling place to allocate part of their power budget when a designer could invest that power elsewhere in abilities that make sense and fit the race concept better.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Morlaf wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
Morlaf wrote:
so that you can tell me, in your opinion what compensates for a drop of BAB from 1 to 3/4?

You can't make up for it unless you give them spellcasting or something similar to spellcasting. This is the point everyone else is trying to make. This is a game design issue.

The BAB is why you want to play a martial. With rare exception, 3/4 BAB is reserved for 6-level arcane spellcasters or 9-level divine spellcasters. By lowering a barbarian's BAB, you only encourage players to prefer spellcasters over martials. Since magic is supposed to be rare in your campaign, this will create the exact opposite effect you're trying to accomplish.

If you're determined to lower the barbarian's and other martial's BAB to 3/4, your options are:

A) Ban 6-level and 9-level spellcasters.
B) Completely rework all martial classes from scratch with a complete suite of class features comparable to spellcasting. This would require an insane amount of work and be very difficult to balance.

thanks for that - I see where you are coming from.

Do you not believe that a power (lets call it Warp Spasm for now) that works like an enhanced Rage that grants them increased str/con, an area affect damage, an extra attack, nat. armour, dam. red., fast heal, reach, size increase etc can ever compensate?

Short Answer: Probably not.

Long Answer: Spellcasting is such a powerful, robust class feature that it has an entire chapter in the Core Rulebook dedicated to it. 6-level arcane spellcasters and 9-level spellcasters often receive many powerful class features and sometimes lots of skill points to supplement it in order to stay competitive with full casters and martials. It would be very difficult to have a single power stay competitive with the enormous suite of abilities that other 3/4 BAB classes have.

You're proposing having a single class feature do the job of an entire class-worth of abilities. In order to compensate, you'd have to make that ability so ridiculously powerful that it would be a nightmare to balance and design. Even professional game designers would consider this a significant challenge. D&D 3.5 and PF 3rd party books have plenty of examples of professional game designers completely screwing up attempts at a non-spellcasting 3/4 BAB class. Class design is very hard.

Even if you somehow succeeded in making this ability balanced enough, I think most players would still prefer a spellcasting class like the druid, magus, bard, or summoner. You still have the problem where playing a spellcaster or a superhuman with mutant powers is the only way to play a combat caveman in a low-magic caveman setting.

On another note, I don't know much about this warp spasm ability, but it sounds like it would make a pretty interesting bloodrager bloodline or archetype.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Magical pouch just comes off as a really cringe-worthy joke.

I'd completely remove the ability damage from the roo kick attack. I think it's too strong and just not necessary, especially when the race already has an advanced trait.

Speaking of which, I don't understand why you're listing RP costs when you're obviously not following ARG's race building rules. You're giving advanced traits to a standard race and the RP costs of your homebrew abilities are WAY out of whack. For example, giving a constant, at-will 1st level spell as a 2 RP ability.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Morlaf wrote:
so that you can tell me, in your opinion what compensates for a drop of BAB from 1 to 3/4?

You can't make up for it unless you give them spellcasting or something similar to spellcasting. This is the point everyone else is trying to make. This is a game design issue.

The BAB is why you want to play a martial. With rare exception, 3/4 BAB is reserved for 6-level arcane spellcasters or 9-level divine spellcasters. By lowering a barbarian's BAB, you only encourage players to prefer spellcasters over martials. Since magic is supposed to be rare in your campaign, this will create the exact opposite effect you're trying to accomplish.

If you're determined to lower the barbarian's and other martial's BAB to 3/4, your options are:

A) Ban 6-level and 9-level spellcasters.
B) Completely rework all martial classes from scratch with a complete suite of class features comparable to spellcasting. This would require an insane amount of work and be very difficult to balance.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Are there spellcasters in your campaign?

Like I said, I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

What exactly do you want to accomplish by changing the barbarian?

I honestly feel like the barbarian leans more on underpowered. They're absolutely amazing combatants early on, but stabbing things is pretty much the only thing they do. Nearly all of their class features are locked behind rage powers, most of them just providing passive buffs and making rage a little better. Even rage won't improve until 11th level, when most campaigns will wind to a close. As a result, there's very little incentive to play a straight barbarian and a straight barbarian quickly gets dull.

I had one crazy idea that might make them a little more interesting while not affecting their power ceiling too much. What if they could retrain all their rage powers at the start of the day?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Cap the level (E12)

Have the campaign end at level 12

Ban full spellcasters.

Cap spell level at level 6 or 7 and have all subsequent spell levels only be used for metamagic.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

It's already standard in published PF adventures and modules to award XP for winning non-combat encounters or resolving a combat non-violently. In rare cases, the party may not get XP at all if they choose the murderhobo route.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'm not a fan of the class at all. It falls into the common pitfalls at attempts of a "full BAB magus."

It not only gives the magus's arcane pool but also gives a WAAAAAAAAAAAY better, overpowered version of arcane pool. All the while ignoring the fact that the magus receives arcane pool as a restricted substitute for a full BAB.

Gets way too much power at 1st level compared to other martials.

It casually gives out the powerful core class features of the magus -- ya know, the things that an entire class centers around -- as talents you can pick up while strangely the class itself has almost no class features on its own.

It's basically just a bag of class features stolen from other classes.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

The stamina abilities are way too strong. Suddenly, you made the fighter more mobile than an unchained monk. And gave him bonus attacks that can be used when moving. That alone is ridiculously powerful, so much that it was grounds to make it a core mythic ability. You also gave them an at-will version of the investigator's inspiration, which is baffling. Each one of the stamina abilities would work as a higher level class feature on its own. You given the fighter TEN of them at 2nd level

Another big problem is that you give all the good stuff at low levels when it's around level 7-8 that fighters start to fall off hard. Fighters are already very strong at around 1-2th level. The only thing bad about them at those levels is that their class features are bland and uninteresting and don't give fighters much to do beyond stabbing things. Your fighter house rules don't accomplish that at all.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I think you should separate the size bonuses/penalties from the ability score adjustments or mention them under Size and say they've been factored into their adjustments.

Is Wild Change at-will?

The rules for how they hold items and move feels a bit awkward.

The biggest potential problem I see with such a concept is that you pretty much shoehorn the race into playing a wizard or a psychic

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I don't follow the logic of making a class that has no spellcasting have a base attack bonus equal to that of a 9-level spellcaster.

When the class is supposed to be good at fighting.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

It's hard to list them all, especially when the description is a giant wall of unformatted text. Put the content in a google doc or something!

But a good example are the casting and education tomes. The casting tome basically lets the wizard cast two spells per round. It doesn't matter if it's a once-per-day ability, that's insanely powerful to give at 1st level. Normal wizards can't do that until 9th level and it still costs a high level spell slot and a swift action to do. Even something as simple as letting the education tome read any writing they want is overpowered because that's giving the wizard an at-will comprehend languages.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

This is a pretty cool idea, but you made it way more complicated than it needs to be. You could honestly make the book just be like a bladebound magus's blackblade except it's not a weapon and doesn't have an arcane pool.

There's also big problems with the abilities on the book types.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Andre Roy wrote:

Guy could we drop it please.

If you wish to argue the value of the Race Builder please start a new thread as it is not helpful or constructive in my attempt to build a Gnoll PC race.

Thank you.

Sure thing.

For the Gnoll race, my suggestion above still stands.

When designing a race, lore is more important than the statistics. So what you want in the race description depends heavily on how gnolls are presented in the campaign setting. Are they fierce hunters? Are they scavengers? Do they possess some technical knack or affinity for building stuff? Heck, in Golarion, there's many gnolls that engage in black market deals and some who became rich business men by investing in the slave trade.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Advanced Races Compendium looks pretty good. I want to snag a copy of that sometime.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

I consider it incredibly foolish to completely throw out a useful tool just because you figured out a few flaws with it.

If it were only a few, I'd agree with you. But it's pervasive. Let's go by category (spoilered for space):

** spoiler omitted **

So...that's almost every category that has several mis-priced items. Often by vast amounts, in terms of actual utility. That's...not a usable system with a few flaws. It's a broken system that does more harm than good.

While I agree on some points and would argue against others (I could explain the costs of drawbacks in a PM), that doesn't indicate the entire system is worthless and/or unusual. The RP costs do not make up the entire system. The tiers are actually the most useful indicator of what abilities are appropriate for a player race. At the very least, the race builder makes a good racial trait catalog. But stamping the entire resource as worthless because one aspect of it is off strikes me as foolish.

And honestly, the worst I've ever seen come out of the race builder came from players/GMs who obviously never actually read the rules for how it works.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Allow me to rephrase:

The Race Builder's costs have no basis in how useful the things they buy are. It is thus utterly pointless, and indeed a bad system. Anyone with a scrap of system knowledge can eyeball the current races and build races that are at least equally balanced with those built using the race builder.

Therefore, why use it? It serves no purpose.

I consider it incredibly foolish to completely throw out a useful tool just because you figured out a few flaws with it.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Don't use advanced traits if you want a balanced race.

Just give them +2 Str, +2 Con, -2 Cha, +1 natural armor, low-light vision, Xenophobic, a bite attack, and maybe a skill bonus in something fitting.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Trying to build a Gnoll is exactly what convinced me the Race Builder wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.

Just use the stats you've got there (ie: the official Gnoll stats minus racial HD), and go to town without worrying about the Race Builder. the stats are fine and the Race Builder is worthless.

The race builder isn't bad. It's just not a substitute for good design skill.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Free Weapon Finesse to any character that can qualify for it.

Such a small change that opens up so many character concepts.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

As you said, it's best judged on a case-by-case basis and would mostly depend on the deity that the paladin serves.

Not really more complicated than that.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Weirdo wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
The glass shouldn't grant a +1 enhancement bonus to damage. Then a masterwork elf glass weapon has the same bonuses as a +1 weapon.

That was the idea, actually. I thought it might be balanced anyway because it can't bypass DR or incorporeal defenses like an actual magic weapon, which is a significant downside.

Do you think it would be fair to remove the damage bonus, but increase the crit confirmation bonus to +2?

Yeah, remove the damage bonus or change it to a different bonus type. +2 confirmation is fine.

Giving +1/+1 would be too much because you get the same statistics as a +1 weapon at 75% discount. It also treads on murky water because a +1 weapon is a magical weapon by definition and a +1 weapon by definition is a weapon with a +1 enhancement bonus to attack and damage.

Weirdo wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
How is it made?
Working explanation is "closely guarded magical and alchemical secrets" but I'd like to develop it a bit more. Maybe incorporating quartz sand collected from the elemental plane of earth?

In my opinion, flavor is the most important part of a special material. So figuring out the flavor is really important. Why are elves more able to travel the Plane of Earth to get this material and craft it into glassteel? Do they have a portal? Are they miners?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

There's a lot of different ways to improve the fighter. The question is "how?" Most homebrewers just give them boring passive or statistical buffs that don't really do anything to make them more fun. Or even more bonus feats. Or let them cheat feat prerequisites. Nothing that makes playing them more interesting.

The Weapon Master Handbook doesn't have a "patch" archetype, but it does introduce new option systems, like advanced weapon training and item mastery feats. The content in that book is pretty cool and interesting and the fighter gets easy access to it all.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Slashing Grace and Fencing Grace was already pretty sloppily designed. And now it's even more sloppily designed. They could have just used the same language as Dervish Dance.

As for preventing the magus from using it? Well, that's what happens when you have an arbitrary feat tax and give it for free to gish classes and not martial classes.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The glass shouldn't grant a +1 enhancement bonus to damage. Then a masterwork elf glass weapon has the same bonuses as a +1 weapon.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

GRANDMASTER HAN (pictured)
NG runari artiforged 10
A retired veteran honored enough to have several of his limbs replaced with magical devices, Grandmaster Han is a boisterous old man unafraid to look death in the eye. He serves as master-at-arms onboard the airship Harsh Words with his business partner Sylvia in their company Stalwart Investigators. He secretly hopes to one day find a means to resurrect his deceased daughter -- or die trying heroically to join her in the afterlife.

His companions include:
- Sylvia (raccoonfolk investigator), childhood friend of his daughter and business partner. He often sees her as a second daughter.
- Izzy (kitsune haunted oracle of the flames), a strangely stoic worshiper of Sarenrae "blessed" with a burning gaze he hides under a pair of goggles.
- Wysteria (lizardfolk cartomancer witch), a mild-mannered witch who worships a dragon goddess
- Trent (human ranger), a grounded though rugged fellow who acts as a grounded foil to Han's zeal

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

How is it made?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

This character would be a standard PC under the effects of greater mind swap except used between a fox and himself. He'd have the fox's physical ability scores, but keeps his mental ability scores, class levels, and everything else.

I'd personally give him a standard array of ability scores to allocate to his mental scores and let him use class abilities as normal. I'd consider house ruling that he can cast spells and talk as a fox, but can't wield weapons.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gronka wrote:

On Cyrad's point about fighters being bland-

There are a couple of things I have seen: despite fighters usually being decked out in full plate mail, they rarely use combat maneuvers unless they are specifically built for it (and when they are, they just do that one thing over and over). Some of this seems to just be not wanting to get hit, even though they have the AC to deal with it. But a lot of this is because combat maneuvers are just so difficult to pull off against the opponents you really need it to work on.

As an example, I remember in one scenario we were getting beaten up by a cleric who was channeling, and I had a raging barbarian. I was like I'll steal his holy symbol. I'm a strong guy; I should be able to. I rolled pretty high and couldn't do it. It was way easier to just hit the guy. Your basic fighter would have never been able to, probably even with improved steal. It felt really anti climactic to have a cool way to solve a problem and then just not be able to. And I feel like a fighter should have been able to pull off that feat where a barbarian couldn't. And stealing the holy symbol would not have totally disabled the guy; he still hit really really hard with his sword.

The risk vs reward of combat maneuvers really needs to be examined. Your basic monk has the same problem; they should be the kings of wrestling and disarming and things, but in practice they rarely can. Maybe giving both something like martial flexibility from level 1 would be a good idea. And maybe adding dexterity to CMB, as well? But then I don't want to see every fighter using every other action to blind their opponent with dirty trick, you know? but there should be some way to encourage fighters to be looking for opportunities like this.

I agree that the restriction of combat maneuvers is a contributing factor to many martials feeling like they lack tactical options.

But consider this perspective to that notion. If we focus on just buffing the fighter's damage, defenses, and giving them extra ways to bypass enemy defenses, that results in making damage always the best solution to different situations. Buffing a fighter's ability to run up and stab something does not give them incentives to do something other than running up and stabbing something.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Aelryinth wrote:

on google drive, there are three documents:

The first is the fighter philosophy document, which analyzes the fighter, conveys what I think a fighter should do, and my mindset when creating one.

Your proposed fixes do very little beyond just giving an insane amount of statistical buffs to the fighter and making him immune and resistant to a whole bunch of things. While I agree the fighter could use help in that department, this does not address what I perceive as the biggest problem with the fighter -- they're bland and uninteresting to play. Giving them free ability score bonuses and healing doesn't fix that.

Even your listed design goals don't address this issue.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

The value between spell levels is not 2-for-1. And as others point out, there's a lot of low level spells that are very useful at all levels of play, so being able to double, triple, or quntiple your amount of low level spell slots is not trivial. This would also be insanely powerful for abilities that require sacrificing spell slots.

At the very least, I think it's way too useful as a feat you can just get at 1st level.

1 to 50 of 3,308 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.