|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
(I did try a search to see if my questions have already been answered - I turned up nothing substantive along the lines of my query, so if I've missed the answers, please guide me in the right direction.)
I wish to design a variant construct race, as the one listed in the "Create A New Race" section (as referenced at d20pfsrd) is not suitable to me. So, I had the idea of simply removing the features I did not want and subtracting their RP from the listed 20, then add on features I did want and recalculate the RP cost. (I have looked at the Android race and am not interested in it, nor in the half-construct.)
The problem I ran into immediately - the majority of the construct race features are simply not listed in the section. Has this been dealt with elsewhere already or is it a case of, "Sorry, that's all we've got to work with"?
Which is as it should be!!
(having multiple reasons to go get a product makes it easier to justify getting the product... ;) )
New chapter, blank pages, open spaces... Can't wait to see what you get into next, sir! Best of luck on the move - those are, in my experience, always dicey affairs ... part treasure hunt, part tetris game, part rolling catastrophe (it has ALWAYS rained when I've moved!). And good luck to Jodi!
(and I hadn't realized I'm older than you...)
Hunh, ok. I was right in knowing where I was wrong. That's a consolation, at least. I'm still developing a handle on how combat maneuvers and multiple attacks from higher BABs work. My games usually stall before they get to that point, for some reason.
After doing more reading, it appears my group has been handling combat maneuvers incorrectly. I think this is one of the places where clear examples in the core book would improve things.
So once Jake hits 11th level, his BAB is +11/+6/+1 and Unload becomes a non-viable option for him. Right? Unless he wants to give up that third attack in order to (effectively) gain a +3 to his second attack?
Many thanks for the clarification, folks! I was pretty sure that was the way things worked, but wanted to be sure. So, a T/Rog1 can take Bravado's Blade edge ::IFF:: he also takes Sneak Attack as his talent.
*tap* "I could have gutted you just now, but I'll settle for a nick." (rolls Intimidate check "bought" with his only die of sneak attack damage) (Persuasive and Skill Focus [intimidate] are this guy's friends. He's likely the gang muscle, so Intimidating Prowess will jump in there, too...)
(Crap ... now I'm getting ideas for "Cheerful Charlie," another T/Rog NPC to go with the roof-running Hobbo. At this rate, I'll have an entire gang of thieves worked up!)
As I sit down and begin actively digging into this material, I have run into a few questions concerning gun-play. (Honestly, a lot of this may just be due to me not having a firm grasp on combat rules - I tend to play *WITH* the game a lot more than I actually PLAY the game.)
1 - On Bursts: If a character has a BAB high enough to allow multiple attacks, can they fire multiple bursts? (assuming the weapon holds enough ammo)
2 - On Unloads: As written, it appears the Unload maneuver is only available as long as the shooter makes a single attack (standard action). Jake Roncal, PI (AAEnf6) has a BAB of +6/+1 and is skilled enough to get off two shots on his turn, if he takes a full-round action. Since he has no move-action available, he can't take the unload action. Honestly, he stands a better chance of hitting by using the Unload maneuver - +6 on his standard attack & (6-2=)+4 on his Unload attack. This doesn't make sense to me, unless I'm missing something along the way. Unload looks like it is supposed to be a combat maneuver version of the Rapid Shot feat.
3 - Just being silly: Early in his career (1st level), Jake has grabbed up an Uzi from a newly-deceased evil cultist and fires a 5-round burst at another robed brother as a standard action. Since he hasn't moved, he decides to fire another single shot as an Unload maneuver at a third cultist. This appears to be perfectly legit.
4 - Rapid Shot + Burst: If Jake had spent his early feat-slots on Point-Blank Shot and Rapid Shot, then in the cultist example above, it seems he could fire two bursts, both at a -2 penalty. Not a bad deal, really.
5 - Rapid Shot + Unload: Can't happen, because Rapid Shot specifies making the attack as a full-round action, meaning - again - there's no move-action left to use for an Unload maneuver.
In working on a project, I find myself trying to distill/collate the Rogue Edges that are available to 1st-level characters. This has brought up a question about Bravado's Blade. BB requires a character to have the Sneak Attack Talent. Can a character take the Bravado's Blade Edge and the Sneak Attack Talent as her first Edge and Talent selections or is there a hierarchy of selection where Edges must be selected first, meaning Sneak Attack must be selected at first level and then Bravado's Blade can only be selected at a later level?
I've already seen two template names that will let me pull off some horror-themed stuff I've been wanting to try for ages. Plus, as I've been looking at the template names, evil, mean, rotten, and deliciously nasty ideas have been forming in my head based around "normal monsters" (can you even USE those two words together??) being perverted into new fell beasts (via templates) through exposure to magical forces gone wild. I can't wait!
I want to see you take on the Talented Casters, because I *think* I know how you'd approach it, after looking at Talented Rogue/Ninja. I love it when you prove to me that I know how you think.
I also want to see you tackle the Alchemist, because ... because. :) (Honestly, it could - imo - likely be worked into Talented Arcanist or Talented Gunslinger...but I definitely want to see a Talented Tinkerer, in some shape/form/fashion.)
Please don't do the huge5000000pagebookofTalentedClassUniversalAwesomeness because I can't go that long with no Owen Genius fix!!! But, whatever you do end up releasing, I'm buying it. ;)
Talented Sorcerer. Hmm. "Bloodline Transformation" could be handled like the Ki Pool in Talented Rogue - an option that can powerfully shape the very underpinnings of a character, provide some spice in her abilities, or not even be present. Now ... as to the exact mechanics ... I leave that to the Rogue Genius!
Christina Stiles wrote:
Yes. Yes, indeed.
-books of pregens/sample NPCs (NPC Codex-style) using these classes (including talented builds - any left fro playtests? Compile them and release them!)
So the NPC Codex is the preferred standard of presentation? I've got a Talented Rogue build that I'm looking to finish up and release into the wild at some point (7-day weeks being away from home 15hrs or more a day is getting OLD, I tell ya's...)
I keep seeing certain topics/titles popping up in these threads. Interesting. And encouraging.
I had an insane amount of fun playing a Scout/Warlock under 3.5 rules, both as a multiclass character concept and as a gestalt character concept. The whole "move and get extra damage on your ranged attack" was crazy cool and I was able to pay attention to developing other parts of my character beyond his ranged attack and his armor. I'd like to see that again, under Pathfinder, if it can be done in a way that remains balanced against other base classes.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
So if I (for an example) write a book that takes magic items and tweaks & reskins them as technological marvels, you'd jump all over it? I've seen *some* sci-fi stuff done with the gadgets feeling more like discrete pieces, rather than being part of an integrated system.
But what are the gadgets without a setting?
While using the T/rogue, I ran into what is likely just a misunderstanding on my part. The main question, boiled down, is - how do Ki Pool (edge) and High Jumper (talent) work together? A couple of quotes:
You have to have the Ki Pool edge to have the High Jumper talent, so they are obviously intended to work together. Does a T/Rog10 with the Ki Pool/Acrobatics Master/High Jumper chain reduce the DC of a high jump by 1/2 for Ki Pool and then by 1/2 again for High Jumper? (I'm seeing Luke coming out of the carbon-freezing chamber on Bespin, here!)
Thanks, folks! You've given me a *LOT* to think about and to discuss with my players. Mr. Fishy, your list is going to be very useful in helping my players narrow down what they are thinking of when they say "low magic" - thanks for the list of examples.
One of the first questions that came to my mind was did they want to play in a world that had once had a "full spectrum" of magic that disappeared (abruptly/slowly, partially/completely, recently/aeons past) or a world where magic has not yet fully developed. Roleplaying in a world that just underwent a "manaclypse" would be very different from playing in a world on the cusp of choosing between following magic or technology.
I'm getting the impression they want a not-fully-developed growth of magic, with alchemy and alchemists (and magesmith and tinkerer types) being far more common. So for this, I'm liking the concept of "monsters as loot" where you use their body-parts as part of the magic items. Ranger-types can make a great living procuring anatomical samples for study and use.
But knowledge of magic items would have to be...spotty. Arms & armor sure, because killing things is something we seem to know on a base level. Wondrous items because, wow, I need something to do X so I'll figure one out as I go. But because the "rules of magic" aren't yet understood, "stored spells" like wands & potions & such don't exist.
My main caster player loves the idea of having to be more creative with her spell-use, figuring out how to best apply meta-magic feats to her more limited spells in order to get the best use out of them.
I'm thinking a lot of supernatural creatures will not exist, focusing more on "realistic" animal/vermin types. Creatures that take a lot of damage to bring down will be far more common than creatures that need a lot of supernatural/magical assistance to take down.
(I more like the "magic faded/failed/was forgotten" approach, where ancient artifacts still work just fine, but few know anything about making or using them any more.)
As for casting classes, we were looking at two approaches - NO base caster classes at all & tweaking the Alchemist to more of the mad-scientist rather than the magical scientist *OR* capping caster classes at 3rd level spells with higher slots available for metamagicked spells. Hadn't thought about using a feat to gain access to higher level spells.
Master Craftsman makes an interesting approach to item crafting - only arms & armor and wondrous items, but available from non-casters. This would mainly help if we removed base casters.
We were looking at things like Ki Pools, Rogue magical talents, and the like to stand in for full spell-casting in place of base casters.
My group has routinely expressed interest in playing a low-magic fantasy campaign, but there isn't any solid consensus as to what, exactly, that entails. So, as I work some ideas from my side (as the uber-storyteller/GM), I thought I'd throw the general question out to the greater Paizo world ... In terms of game-mechanics, how do you see a low-magic fantasy world working? What trouble-spots do I need to pay attention to and plan for ahead of time to keep the game from derailing?
Something I tossed out as an off-the-cuff remark caught their attention and interest - setting the game in something like the Greek Isles around 50AD (ie: the eastern Med as depicted during the events in the New Testament), where there are civilizations, great civilizations, globe-spanning trade-routes, urban sprawls, and vast wilderness areas. No "New World frontiers," as such - plenty of wilderness in everyone's back yards yet. Maybe Bronze Age arms and armor from 3.5's A&EG.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
I mentioned some of the Talented Class goodness to my chief non-resident player and added this exchange. His response, "O.O now he's gonna seduce MY wallet!!" (He is eagerly looking forward to the Talented Gunslinger.)
So I thought perhaps I had designed the A-Team as an all-T/Rogue party. But it seems perhaps Col Smith is a T/Cavalier with some T/Rogue milticlass. Great. T/Cav was an iffy purchase earlier ... but I should have known better. It may be #4 on the list of Talented Classes to pick up, but I'll have to pick it up.
Picked mine up and read through it last night. I worked REALLY hard at not looking at it as an editor, but simply as a GM/player/end-user. Also picked up the More Talents companion.
These two products absolutely sold me on the other three talented classes, as well as any more that show up.
I've already had so many character ideas that I may have to create a "Talented Rogues Gallery" just so I can work with all the concepts.
K-K, thanks for your time. I believe both the questions you bring up could not only be worded better/more accurately, but likely could stand to be individual full-blown surveys in their own rights.
I have 47 responses so far, which I think is a rather astonishing accomplishment. My thanks to each one who took the time to provide answers. Since I'm so close, I would love to hit 50 responses, then wrap it up and provide the response-data. That's just three more people.
Just a quick post-GenCon nudge to this and a heartfelt "Thank you!" to the folks who have taken the time to respond to this survey, both in terms of answering the questions and in providing feedback. More surveys are on the way, likely later this week.