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. 3,489 posts (3,702 including aliases). 9 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,489 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

My characters would want to clear the stains of evil from the world that heroes of lower caliber would have no chance against.

- Journey to the Isle of Terror, explore the Wizard-King Pit, undo the trap set by Tar-Baphon, and close off the portal to the Negative Energy Plane inside of the Well of Sorrows. I was disappointed City of Golden Death wasn't an epic adventure as plundering the treasure vault of the Inner Sea's most infamous necromancer should have been a high level adventure.

- Adventure to Sevenarches and journey into the portals to find a cure for the plague that could wipe out the elven race

- Nautical adventure through the Sightless Sea

- Search through the heart of the Eye of Abendego

- Explore Tangle Briar and face the Treerazer

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

rainzax wrote:

Unchained Ninja

** spoiler omitted **...

I like it, but Still Mind, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, and Timeless Body feel totally out of place. Also, does the ki pool work like the ninja's ki pool or the monk's ki pool? They have different default abilities.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Theliah Strongarm wrote:

Lots of great stuff...

for your game.
But i wouldn't use this.

This thread is like 7 years old.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

The problem is that turning into animals is not a 1st level ability (despite the existance of a couple of obscure ways to accomplish). So there would need to be a compromise until you reach the appropriate level. Several game options try to accomplish this by letting you become like a humanoid animal, like with skinwalkers and the feralhunter hunter archetype.

I agree with Alexander that the concept of a shapeshifter is broad and interesting enough to warrant an entire class. Heck, I even have one baking in my design oven. However, I don't think homebrewing a whole class is a good idea. Classes are really big projects that need a lot of content and work to tweak and balance.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

An easy way to fix that is either make the Improved Finesse feat have a +1 BAB requirement and/or apply any penalties you have to Strength on damage rolls. Either or both of those would prevent a squirrel from becoming deadly enough to slaughter a child with a single bite.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A ninja-themed kineticist archetype would be kind of cool. But I'd envision a ninja class follow more closely to the classic or historic ninja tropes than ones from anime.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
Can you explain to me how this is evidence? You're making the argument that blasting spells are underpowered. Your evidence is an entry under spell design in Ultimate Magic where cone of cold is described as an underpowered spell. However, the entry itself does not say cone of cold is underpowered because it's a blast spell. It says that cone of cold is underpowered compared to other blasting spells.
1) You don't count my substantial personal experience, that not even my noob players willingly use lightning bolt (I don't think I've ever seen cold of cold used by a player,either, now that I think about it).

This doesn't support your claim for two reasons. First off, player experiences and preferences vary wildly from game to game. I'm currently running a campaign that has gone for 4 years with a variety of character types and blasting is the party's favorite spell type. Even the martials found ways to blast because they love blasting. Secondly, just because your players believe lightning bolt or cone of cold is weak doesn't mean they think that all blast spells are weak. Maybe they just don't like lightning bolt because it's an awkward area effect that's not as convenient as fireball? Your players not liking lightning bolt is no evidence that all blast spells aren't worth using.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
2) You don't count community consensus that blast spells are underpowered and generally a waste of a wizard's time.

My perception of the community consensus differs from yours where many consider blasting a good though non-optimal playstyle. And even that isn't necessarily a consensus -- it's not a consensus if it's heavily debated. Even if I agree with your version of the community consensus, it still provides very little evidence because what most players consider "underpowered" tends to vary wildly. Some believe that any strategy that isn't as powerful as the optimal strategy is underpowered despite the fact that's not how game balance works.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
3) You don't count Ultimate Magic's weakest 5th level spell award as legit.

Because the text you reference in Ultimate Magic completely fails to support your argument. You're suggesting Ultimate Magic says blasting is underpowered because cone of cold is underpowered. However, Ultimate Magic explains that cone of cold is underpowered because it's weaker than other blasting spells and emphasizes this point by comparing it with fireball. Using this text to support your argument is a total non sequitur.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
OK, fine here is a 4th. From Treantmonk's guide to being a wizard (the gold standard of guides);

Treatmonk's guide is a good guide, but it's also heavily flawed. It's not only outdated, but also so infamous for insisting God Wizard as the only viable way to play a wizard that other guides became popular for mocking it.

Even if I ignore these flaws and find a 7-year-old player-made guide as perfectly acceptable evidence, Treatmonk's guide still does little to support your argument because it's a guide that teaches you how to play a specific playstyle of wizard. Obviously, it will rate spells that don't fit that playstyle lower than normal.

Even the text you reference feels really off. You will rarely fight creatures with evasion or significant amounts of fire resistance at 5th level. Most creatures you fight at 5th level will have about 20-30 hit points, so even a weak 10 damage fireball is not an insignificant contribution.

Finally, the debate whether blast spells are too weak feels rather pointless because the OP's spell effect houserules would buff all spells that apply, not just spells that primarily deal damage.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'm okay with high level magic fixing major conditions. It gives lower level characters something to strive for.

I have a character whose longterm goal is to get a resurrection for his diseased daughter. So he's slowly gathering funds and social influence to secure one.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I rule that heal and similar magic can only cure insanities caused by brief actions or brief traumatic events. More serious afflictions like PTSD caused by years of service in the war require longterm care and/or more complicated applications of magic gradually applied over a period of time. A single spellcast doesn't cut it.

In my campaign, there's psychic mages that specialize in treatment of the mind. Some of them even dive into a mindscape of the patient in a manner not unlike the game Psychonauts. However, there's also a breed of psychic mages that use similar techniques for nefarious purposes where they can rewrirte or alter a person's mind through long, sustained applications of magic. People call them "mindscrapers" because they can rip apart a person's mind so it becomes a blank slate for them to rebuild as they see fit, leaving almost nothing left of the person's original identity and personality.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

LINK
Ooo, shiny blog. I'll let you know what I think. Keep in mind that I can be a harsh critic. While it's obvious you put a lot of work into this, designing classes is really hard.

MY THOUGHTS

Spoiler:

1) The saving throw progressions are all wrong. There are only two types of saving throw progressions in the game: Good and Bad. This is some pretty fundamental math stuff with the game that you don't want to deviate from.

Good = FLOOR(2 + L/2)
Bad = FLOOR(L/3)

2) The Jump ability's mechanics are waaaaaaaay too complicated. I read it three times and still feel fuzzy on how it works. Just keep it simple and make it work like a special charge attack that lets you fly upwards at later levels.

3) Getting a flying mount is a really powerful ability to receive at 1st level. Generally, longterm flight is inaccessible until 8th or 9th level. So the class basically gets an 8th level ability at 1st level. On top of it, the mount is a powerful combatant that gets a great Teamwork feat for free and a powerful blast attack that has no daily limit.

4) Why all the extra rules for how the wyvern acts and attacks when you do? You don't need to rewrite the rules for having creature under your control.

5) The rules for summoning the wyvern feel incomplete and don't make any sense. Why does the wyvern come from another plane? How long does the wyvern remain summoned? How do you un-summon them? Why does the wyvern die when summoned monsters don't die when reduced to negative hit points? Why does this have a spell level when it's neither a spell nor a spell-like ability? It looks like you borrowed a bunch of text from the paladin's divine bond and left a bunch of mechanics that either don't apply or don't make any sense. You might have been better off just using animal companion rules or something like the cavalier's mount. There ARE rules for monstrous mounts.

6) The stat block for the wyvern is a complete mess. It doesn't mention the wyvern's size category (absolutely vital for using it as a mount). It has a base attack bonus that doesn't scale and yet its natural attack damage dice totally break all the rules for how natural attack damage works and has absurd scaling. You should have just used animal companion rules.

7) I like the healing breath ability. Even though it doesn't make any sense for the wyvern to have this ability since this doesn't strike me as a divine class.

8) Variation: Hard to comment on these abilities since the Jump class feature is kind of a mess. I really don't like distracting jump -- it's basically a compulsion effect. And high jump seems really really powerful.

9) Spirit Surge seems ridiculously strong for an ability that doesn't have any uses per day.

10) How long odes Steady Wing last? It doesn't give units.

11) Ancient Circle's damage reduction is useless against most breath weapons since breath weapons typically deal energy damage, which bypasses damage reduction.

12) Is accuracy bonus really needed? Dragoons seem to have so many abilities that add bonuses to jump attack rolls.

13) I really don't like Leap Proficiency. It's generally bad form to just have a class feature give out free ability scores. The Acrobatics scaling feels rather odd, too.

14) What's the duration on Angon? Another ability without a duration.

15) Dragon Breaker: Don't they already Angon? Another ability that lowers an enemy's stats?

16) There's no capstone ability?


OVERALL
I've seen a lot of homebrew dragoon classes. This is probably one of the better ones and it's obvious you put a lot of work into it. However, I see a lot of issues with the class. The main problem is that the class's primary class features are mechanically a mess. In addition, many of the secondary features either miss critical information (like duration) or are redundant. For example, there's multiple abilities that add attack and damage roll bonuses and multiple abilities that shred enemy defenses. If you looked at the math of them, they'd probably be way out of line.

If I were to write another draft of this class, I'd do the following:

1) Simplify Jump into a special charge attack that lets you use Acrobatics checks to leap over obstacles without obstructing the charge. At later levels, it could let you fly during a charge X times per day and deals bonus damage.

2) Rework the wyvern mount to actually function like the cavalier's mount and then give them Monstrous Mount as a bonus feat

3) Consolidate the secondary class features so you end up with a small set of powerful features that scale well.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

_Ozy_ wrote:
The 'light rays' from lantern archons do not inflict fire damage.

Archon lantern light ray attacks are not lasers.

Boomerang Nebula wrote:

@ Cyrad

You might be interested to know that in the real world collisions between ordinary objects is also the province of the same electromagnetic force. So if you were going to classify lasers as fire damage you should also classify sword blows as fire damage to maintain consistency.

Sword attacks don't cause damage by burning. Electromagnetic radiation (which isn't the same as electromagnetic force) tends to cause damage through burns.

Boomerang Nebula wrote:
As for arguments on heat metal and hot rooms, you are now contradicting your initial position and I cannot be bothered discussing this further.

It might seem like that because you're taking my heat metal comment out of the context of my main argument against the OP's rules. There's a big difference between:

A) Things catching fire from hot metal and heated air never happen in real life.

B) This rule is ridiculous because you don't always have a ~50% of immediately bursting into flames every time you sustain an injury through burning.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Boomerang Nebula wrote:

@ Cyrad

Fire is simply super heated air. All that is required to start a fire is heat, oxygen and fuel to combust. A fire will start spontaneously in a room if the room is hot enough. Some laboratories have high temperature ovens (well over 1,000 deg C) and you have to be careful about what materials you put in there because they tend to spontaneously combust. Your claim that hot metal can't start a fire is also false for the same reason.

Again, I never said a hot metal causing a fire cannot happen. I just said that the hot metal spell or any other effect that causes fire damage shouldn't always risk setting someone or something on fire.

Boomerang Nebula wrote:
Your claim that light cannot inflict damage is contradicted by the existence of high powered lasers.

I never said light cannot hurt. It's just ridiculous that, with these rules, all light effects can hurt you.

Also, lasers cause damage by inflicting burns through transmission of electromagnetic radiation. As a result, it's more fitting to classify damaged caused by lasers and other intense emissions of light as fire damage. Which is actually the type of damage caused by laser weapons in Pathfinder. Electricity is also a good alternative since it causes electromagnetic radiation.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

My drunken barbarian / alchemist is a brewmaster who wields a cask of grog as an improvised weapon. The Rough and Ready trait, rage, and alchemist bombs (flavored as exploding bottles of ale) go a long way to keeping him relevant.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Harleequin wrote:

Part of my reasoning for wanting to do a D6 (but 3/4 BAB) ninja was so as to quite heavily incorporate Kuji-in - the fabled 'ninja magic', into the design. This could be used to mitigate the loss of HP but also to provide an excellent template for archetype design, something that the current ninja sorely lacks. The combination of sources of power and mystic hand signs could be great.

It could still be done with a D8 HD but you wouldnt be able to get as much mileage out of it.

It would be flavourtastic!

Crippling a class for flavor is almost always a bad idea. I wouldn't be surprised that was a reason why the core rogue ended up so broken. "They shouldn't be as good fighters as the fighter, so let's give them a 3/4 BAB! But making them a spellcaster doesn't fit the class's flavor, so let's give them crappy talents instead. Oh, other 3/4 BAB classes have 9-level spellcasting and better proficiencies? Oops."

That being said, I think the ki idea is pretty cool, but that sounds like it should be a ninja trick.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
Heat Metal + Burning Spell does, in fact, set you on fire.

Saying a spell can set you on fire if-and-only-if you modify it with a Metamagic feat is not evidence that the spell sets you on fire without any modification. Nor does it bolster any argument that the spell in question should always set you on fire without modification.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
And other energy types do attack your body in various ways. Thats why they are dealing damage.

So? My point is that not all fire damage actually uses fire. Not all of it has a chance to set you on fire because there's tons of ways to get seriously injured through heat.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
I feel like damaging spells that use saving throws are generally underpowered. .. Thats why you hear so often on these boards Conjurer, Diviner, or GTFO.

Blasting isn't the optimal choice, but it's still a good choice. And it's fun. Plus, several Metamagics can make blasting have crowd control effects, too.

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
Even in Ultimate Magic, under spell creation rules, they list Cone of Cold as too weak, and I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone bother with lightning bolt since 3.5 (not a single time that I can recall).

Can you explain to me how this is evidence? You're making the argument that blasting spells are underpowered. Your evidence is an entry under spell design in Ultimate Magic where cone of cold is described as an underpowered spell. However, the entry itself does not say cone of cold is underpowered because it's a blast spell. It says that cone of cold is underpowered compared to other blasting spells.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

swoosh wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

Much better, but I see a few issues.

1) It's technically impossible for a most hulu to summon demons since the summon monster spell has an alignment restriction.

Only relevant for clerics though. And druids if they can somehow learn summon monster.

The spell description for summon monster specifically says the creature's subtype and alignment depends on YOUR own alignment. If you're good, you can't summon demons.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Atarlost wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
keeping an unchained ninja from stealing too many goodies from the unchained rogue.

It's not stealing. The ninja literally is a rogue archetype printed in a more verbose format. This is why alternate classes can take base class archetypes that they have the trade out abilities for. The unchained rogue is allowed to take rogue archetypes, therefore ninja in groups using unchained rogues get any unchained rogue addons that aren't on abilities they trade out.

They just need their ninja talents brought up to the quality level of unchained rogue talents.

Regardless the fact that the ninja is a rogue alternate class, it's best for both classes that they each possess unique abilities to set them apart.

Also, nearly all of the ninja tricks are better than the unchained rogue's talents. Yet, the rogue has limited capability to take ninja tricks while the ninja can select any rogue talent they want. This is one of the reasons it's a bad idea to just give all of the rogue's new class features to the ninja and call it a day.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Much better, but I see a few issues.

1) It's technically impossible for a most hulu to summon demons since the summon monster spell has an alignment restriction.

2) There needs to be more information about whispering magic's spell-like abilities. Spell-like abilities from races generally require the character to meet the minimum casting requirements for those spells. This is why you usually see a line like "Elves with a Charisma of 11 or higher may cast the following spell-like abilities." The necessary ability score for calculating DCs is also important.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

For an unchained ninja, I recommend either using this from a discussion about this topic a year ago. Alternatively, go with Everyman Gaming's unchained ninja, which is actually pretty well done and does a good job keeping an unchained ninja from stealing too many goodies from the unchained rogue.

Also, making the ninja have a D6 Hit Die is a really bad idea for many complicated game design reasons. It's a common fallacy I see in amateur designers thinking that lowering a combat-oriented class's Hit Die is a good approach to making them less defense-focused when that's actually not the case. I long suspected that Paizo tied HD to BAB as a way to help prevent terrible design decisions like giving the bard a d6 HD.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You have to treat the vehicle/siege weapon and its crew as an encounter and then treat the troop as a single unit with a CR equal to the encounter's CR in a macromanaged war scenario. The best way to figure out the CR is to take the hit points and damage output of the troop as a unit and compare them to the big table under the monster creation guidelines.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Kaisoku wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

If they all work the same, then you haven't accomplished anything.

..

But for adding bonus effects to existing spells, it's a giant mess of game mechanics, balance, and fluff.

While I don't think it's as bad as you say (mage armor isn't a damage spell, it won't do anything), I agree that it's a lot of fiddly rules. It could stand to be streamlined and fit more into existing rules.

The OP suggests that the spells don't have to deal damage for these effects apply. Otherwise, the disease and curse bonus effects would likely never apply because spells with those descriptors rarely deal hit point damage.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Kaisoku wrote:

In all honesty, I find that this:

relativemass wrote:
In the rules as written, there is no significant difference between energy types (fire, cold, etc.) and no reason to use one energy type over another unless you are fighting something with vulnerabilities or resistances.

.. is far more damaging to my sense of reality in the game than a couple corner cases (like heat might not ignite someone on fire).

Having every damage type be functionally the same in 95% of cases, makes for poor immersion (doesn't feel right), and poor gameplay (feels boring).

That's precisely why having a blanket effect that applies to all abilities that deal certain types of damage actually goes against the design goal of changing up the abilities. If they all work the same, then you haven't accomplished anything. It should be up to the fire spell itself whether or not it sets people on fire. It should be up to the force effect whether or not it bull rushes or trips someone (fun fact: With these rules, mage armor now causes you to bull rush or trip yourself!).

Again, this could be kind of cool as a class feature for some kind of magic class that prefers to combo general magic effects instead of casting spells with preset effects. Like a Spheres of Power type of mage. But for adding bonus effects to existing spells, it's a giant mess of game mechanics, balance, and fluff.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You can still make a paladin of Pharasma. Unlike a cleric, paladins don't have a deity restriction. That's just a PFS houserule.

If you don't want to be a paladin, then choosing Deific Obedience is a good way to add religious flavor to your character.

A warpriest of Pharasma would actually make a really good dagger wielder. Sacred weapon would increase the damage die and Deific Obedience gives you a +2 attack roll bonus.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Again, you're missing or dodging my points here.

The problem is that you're linking blanket effects to the type of damage when they should be linked to how a spell or ability delivers the damage. For example, there's plenty of ways to hurt someone by heat without setting them on fire and if light damages by burning, then it should be fire damage not a new type. This creates an additional disconnect between mechanics and game-world, which is the exact opposite of what you say you're trying to accomplish with these rules.

In addition, as I pointed out earlier, there's a plethora of major mechanical problems with your rules.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You need to remember that as a golden rule with race design, a player race must have abilities appropriate for a 1st level character. Letting them summon demons and cast 3rd level spells is not appropriate for a 1st level character.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You'd have to give specifics.

Also, that sounds more like an alpha test than a beta test. If the content is experimental and running through the main design iteration loop, then that sounds like an alpha test. I'm a software engineer that moonlights as a game designer.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Designing a class is really, really hard. You might be better off just making an archetype or using an existing class.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
relativemass wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

I'm not a fan of it because it turns energy types into something out of a video game (simplest way I can describe it).

1) Attaching extra effects to ALL energy damage types doesn't make any sense because you're assuming the damage occurs uniformly. For example, not all fire damage actually involves fire. Fire damage covers anything damaged by heat. So it makes no sense that someone would burst into flame because they got burnt by heat metal or they entered a scorching hot room. The same goes for the other energy types. There's a lot of creatures where getting cold wouldn't hinder their movements.

2) I'm not a fan of turning the game into Pokemon with a damage type for every single effect in the game. Half of them don't actually deal hit point damage and others just don't make sense as a damage type (how the heck does light hurt me?). The game already has a list of effect types with rules for how each one works. You don't need to add more.

3) This would require rewriting a lot of rules and creatures in a really bad way that doesn't really add anything to the game. For example, reclassifying all weapon damage as energy damage screws up a lot of rules.

4) The effects are too powerful. Would be better as some kind of spellcasting option rather than an overhaul of how energy types work.

1) I wrote basic rules for energy types. The effects can just be modified appropriately for unusual sources (such as hot steam, boiling oil, napalm, hellfire, spontaneous human combustion, etc.). Also, hot metal definitely does catch things on fire, that is how electrical appliance fires start.

2) I don't play Pokemon or know much about it so I can't say how my effects compare to their effects. Could you post a link to the list of energy effects you mentioned that Paizo published?

3) I admit that 5 out of 18 energy types do not deal hit point damage, but there are many offensive spells and abilities in Pathfinder that don't deal hit point damage, so I don't see this as a problem.

4) I never mentioned reclassifying weapons, but you could make a Fireball type spell that deals kinetic damage rather than fire damage.

5) If the effects are too strong/weak then the numbers can be adjusted appropriately.

Added bullet points for ease.

1) You missed my point. Your rules assume the energy damage occurs from a particular source in a particular way. With your rules, taking 1 point of fire damage from holding heated metal would immediately cause you to burst into flame. It's ludicrous. Whether or not an ability sets things on fire should depend on the ability itself, not a blanket rule.

2) Pokemon heavily abstracts combat by having a comprehensive list of "element types" that each have strengths and weaknesses. I brought this up because your rule suggestions divorces how an ability works lore-wise from its game mechanics by creating a blanket bonus effect that applies to all applicable abilities regardless of how those abilities work.

3) There's a difference between effect descriptors and energy types. Also, if it doesn't deal hit point damage, then it shouldn't be an energy type.

4) You redefined weapon damage under kinetic energy. By definition, slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning are all types of weapon damage. However, your "kinetic" defines its damage as slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning. Speaking of redefinition, you also totally redefine force damage as bludgeoning damage. The whole thing is a complicated mess.

5) Honestly, you can't adjust the numbers to balance this. No matter how you scale the numbers, it functions as a massive buff to all spells that can apply these effects.

Overall, I don't think these rules really add anything to the game. Like I said earlier, it might be better as some kind of spellcasting option or a class feature.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1) I'd probably redesign the rogue as a combatant that excels before combat and during the surprise round. Most martials focus on dealing consistent damage or focusing on a single target throughout the fight. My rogue would focus on crippling a single target during the surprise round and then either finish them off or slink away into the shadows.

2) I'd remove rogue talents and replace them with another class feature that works similar to vigilante specialities in the vigilante playtest where you can have spellcasting, make yourself a better fighter, a ki pool, etc. I honestly think rogue talents doesn't have enough design space to make interesting abilities.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

There's already a 3.5e Pokemon homebrew I believe. Statting Pokemon, however, would take a lot of work.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'm not a fan of it because it turns energy types into something out of a video game (simplest way I can describe it).

1) Attaching extra effects to ALL energy damage types doesn't make any sense because you're assuming the damage occurs uniformly. For example, not all fire damage actually involves fire. Fire damage covers anything damaged by heat. So it makes no sense that someone would burst into flame because they got burnt by heat metal or they entered a scorching hot room. The same goes for the other energy types. There's a lot of creatures where getting cold wouldn't hinder their movements.

2) I'm not a fan of turning the game into Pokemon with a damage type for every single effect in the game. Half of them don't actually deal hit point damage and others just don't make sense as a damage type (how the heck does light hurt me?). The game already has a list of effect types with rules for how each one works. You don't need to add more.

3) This would require rewriting a lot of rules and creatures in a really bad way that doesn't really add anything to the game. For example, reclassifying all weapon damage as energy damage screws up a lot of rules.

4) The effects are too powerful. Would be better as some kind of spellcasting option rather than an overhaul of how energy types work.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'd personally go monk and consider startoss style. If I wanted to be a spellcaster, then maybe card caster kensai magus with a star knife (which is basically like a giant shuriken that you can wield as a knife).

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I mean, a GM could just slow XP gains so that his campaign stays in the "tier" everyone wants to play in.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

The kensai is already pretty darn good and the magus has tons of ways to boost damage. I don't see why we need to steal the fighter's shiny toys.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I don't understand what you're asking.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Creating an entire class is a big project. Depending on what you want, it could be accomplished with a character build with existing content, an archetype, or an extra system like Spheres of Power. It also heavily depends on what setting you want this class for. Jedi are obviously a setting-specific thing.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Yeah, just make a new race that has shape change turn you into a full fox instead of a human.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jondd19 wrote:
Course not lol, the very first episode of the original dragon ball goku thought bullets stung a little. This is a recreation of the abilities, rather than the power level.

It's not just power level. Super Saiyan is a legendary transformation passed down through Saiyan lore from generation to generation. It's supposed to signify the messiah of the Saiyan race. That would be more akin to a capstone than an ability you get at 3rd level. You can't even fly at 3rd level.

As for the class itself, I'm not sure what to say about it. It's a bit of a mess. Designing classes is really, REALLY hard to do. It might be better if you create an archetype instead.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

It's kind of lame and I'm not fond of racial traits whose only purpose is to qualify for feat prerequisites.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In terms of being faithful to the material, there's no way Super Saiyan would be a 3rd level ability.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'm mostly concerned about Dex-based martials. I don't think it's cool to gimp Dex-based martials at low levels when they already make several fair trade-offs for the build. Even a twinked out character that starts with a 20 Dexterity will do less damage than a fighter with 16 Strength.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Gratz wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
You can make Deadly Agility available while leaving rogue finesse unchanged. Unlike Deadly Agility, rogue finesse allows you to gain damage bonus when two-handing finesse weapons. This was a deliberate benefit of the class feature designed to give rogues a little bit of an edge despite their medium BAB. With Finesse Mastery, it feels pretty silly to make Dex-based martials have a crappy early game in order to protect the rogue.
I have to disagree with you here, because there are like 3 finesse weapons, which you can wield twohanded, so basically a nonexistant factor.

Why does it matter that there's a limited selection of finesse two-handed weapons when you only need one to make it a really useful class feature? Elven curveblade builds are really popular with the unchained rogue. I personally built a two-handed rogue with a katana in a campaign that turned katanas into finesse weapons.

If you're so worried about the rogue getting shafted with Deadly Agility being available, then let rogues get the feat for free at 1st level. Since you given Weapon Finesse for free in your campaign, the unchained rogue's 1st level kind of sucks anyway. I already thought the unchained rogue felt kind of lame at 1st level since other 3/4 BAB classes begin play with spellcasting and way better class features than they do.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You need Familiar Bond for Improved Familiar Bond.

If you already have a familiar and have Familiar Bond, you either use your class level (in the class that granted you the familiar) or your character level to determine your effective wizard level. However, if you do the latter, you don't gain any special abilities.

With Improved Familiar Bond, you treat your character level as your wizard level and gain all of the special abilities.

That being said, I think most GMs wouldn't mind letting you take Improved Familiar Bond as an Eldritch Knight. The familiar's special abilities aren't worth losing two feats for.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

They made a better designed spellblade called the Mindblade in Occult Adventures. It doesn't replace spellstrike, but it's way more playable than Spellblade. Even if spellstrike doesn't float your boat, it's still pretty useful to have. I suppose you could replace it with the ability to throw the mindblade or transform it into a blast attack?

Brief tangent: Adding a regeneration mechanic into arcane pool is a really bad idea. As I explain in this article, grit and arcane pool have very different economies. You especially don't want to screw with that in a class that can spend points to regain spells.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Gratz wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

I recommend Deadly Agility instead of your "Finesse Mastery" feat. It's the most balanced Dex-to-damage feat. It keeps it out of the hands of classes that shouldn't get it early while also making it easy for martials to get it early.

I am running a 4-year campaign with a mixture of Dex characters, gishes, and Strength characters at 15th level. Dex-to-damage is balanced as long as it never reaps the two-handed weapon benefits that Strength get. The biggest issue I saw in my campaign was that Dex-to-damage is really good for gish classes like the magus because it offsets the MAD that balances the classes and allows them to fight almost as well as a martial class at 1st level. Since Deadly Agility ha s +1 BAB requirement, gishes can't get it right away while martials can (as they should).

I took my inspiration for Finesse Mastery from the unchained Rogue. Changing it to "Deadly agility" would, in my mind at least, undermine the rogue again, because it would mean other martial classes could get it before the rogue. I'll stick with my level 3 prerequisite, but I'll add the two handed caviat to the feat. I agree with you that that should be reserved for strength based characters.

You can make Deadly Agility available while leaving rogue finesse unchanged. Unlike Deadly Agility, rogue finesse allows you to gain damage bonus when two-handing finesse weapons. This was a deliberate benefit of the class feature designed to give rogues a little bit of an edge despite their medium BAB. With Finesse Mastery, it feels pretty silly to make Dex-based martials have a crappy early game in order to protect the rogue.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I recommend Deadly Agility instead of your "Finesse Mastery" feat. It's the most balanced Dex-to-damage feat. It keeps it out of the hands of classes that shouldn't get it early while also making it easy for martials to get it early.

I am running a 4-year campaign with a mixture of Dex characters, gishes, and Strength characters at 15th level. Dex-to-damage is balanced as long as it never reaps the two-handed weapon benefits that Strength get. The biggest issue I saw in my campaign was that Dex-to-damage is really good for gish classes like the magus because it offsets the MAD that balances the classes and allows them to fight almost as well as a martial class at 1st level. Since Deadly Agility ha s +1 BAB requirement, gishes can't get it right away while martials can (as they should).

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Elegos wrote:

I did mean Eldritch Archer, sorry. I have an Urban Ranger in my Hells Rebels campaign, got the two Archetypes conflated in my head.

Apparently its not PFS legal according to that list though, which is a pity. Wonder why not? (I don't PFS myself, so theres probably a good reason-ish)

Probably because being able to full-attack with longbows and cast spells at the same time was considered too powerful. This was balanced with melee attacks because spellcasting in melee combat is risky and forces you to engage an opponent. Letting you use a longbow throws that balance factor out the window.

There was a pretty huge debate about this on the PFS forums with valid points on both sides, but the decision remains firm.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You could acheive a lot of that just by increasing the availability of firearms, but make alchemical cartridges unavailable.

For #2, I'm not so sure that's something you should worry about. Guns are pretty expensive and heavy. People did carry multiple guns like that.

A lot of this doesn't really make guns more realistic.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Brew Bird wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
That's a bit of an awkward issue because technically creatures without souls shouldn't be able to have feats, skills, or gain class levels.
Pathfinder's kinda iffy on who exactly has souls. But they're certainly not needed for feats, skills, or class levels. Anything that can learn can pick those up. The numerous intelligent (and allegedly soulless) robots and AIs of Numeria can attest to that.

Hey, you're quite right about that.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

That's a bit of an awkward issue because technically creatures without souls shouldn't be able to have feats, skills, or gain class levels.

Disregarding that fluff, I recommend making the race a humanoid or monstrous humanoid with the android's Constructed trait. Alternatively, make them a construct, but remove some of the stupidly powerful aspects of being a construct (like total immunity to effects that grant Fortitude saves and mind-affecting effects) with some kind of justification why they're affected normally (maybe magic in your world works on robots?)

1 to 50 of 3,489 << 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.