Duncan Clyborne's page

Truly, I'd like to see multiple ways to get around action economy/ standard attack limitations,

as well, the introduction of 'free' 5' steps and the like scream out for greater cleave to work off of these as well...

Here, here to Pathfinders!

(Secretly pours off drink in case those damn Cheliax Factioners poisoned it.)

Think of the marketing campaign! The anti-4.0 crowd would love it.

Step up from 4.0! Play the real D&D! All Orcs are not meant to be the same! Mystra still lives!

KaeYoss can think of something dirty for us.

Let me preface by saying I don't think PRPG would 'cherrypick'. But I am assuming they are looking for areas that they may want to re-design to have a similar effect.

Seems to me that using parts of 4E kind of defeats the whole purpose. Pathfinder is supposed to support those who enjoy 3E and don't want to change.

I wish we could make combat more fluid. Not with people teleporting promiscuously but something that keeps people interested in other peoples actions. Maybe give up one of your iterative attacks for an exta 5' step between blows. Or attacks that cause people to retreat, shift position, etc. Or a successful attack helping an adjacent ally or intefering with an adjacent enemy. I don't like the 'charge' than stand still with full attack actions I always see in my games.

Krauser_Levyl wrote:

The differences, between recharge:
- Death Strike only affect orcs. Inspire Ferocity may affect any ally.
- Death Strike works when the Eye of Grummsh is knocked down. Inspire Ferocity works when any ally is knocked down.
- Death Strike works on all orc allies simultaneously. Inspire Ferocity works only in the ally who was knocked down.

Death Strike seems really better, on most situations. But remember that the Eye of Grummsh is a controler and the Chieftain is a brute. The first wields divine power granted by Grummsh himself; the second is only a big tough guy who inspires his allies with his great strenght and furious war cries.

Correction: now that I reread the ability, it seems that Death Strike works when the orc ally is knocked down, not when the Eye of Grummsh is knocked down. Err.. it's far more powerful than I initially thought!

Edit: I guess the Blood of the Enemy is his Leader ability. I was just obsessing with Inspire Ferocity for some reason.

In many campaigns there is no 'starting point' of a specific 'adventure'. The DM creates a world with locations and independent events and the PCs explore them freely.

Then there is clearly no reason for you to subscribe to Pathfinder if you detest 'adventures' so much.

I also don't understand why people are dropping subscriptions based on what version of D&D Pathfinder uses. Whether you eventually settle on 3.5, 3.Paizo or 4.0, Golarion gives you a rich, flavor-filled, and detailed setting. If you like the Paizo's work, I believe you should stay with Paizo while you see what these various versions have to offer. When this edition roller coaster is over, we still have a great campaign setting in Golarion. Maybe a year from now you will be looking for something that supports your edition, but now we only have 3.5 (no offense to Grognards).

Paizo offers you great value no matter what your decision on which edition to play or what style of play you prefer. This has been an unpaid endorsement.

In many campaigns there is no 'starting point' of a specific 'adventure'. The DM creates a world with locations and independent events and the PCs explore them freely.

Then there is clearly no reason for you to subscribe to Pathfinder if you detest 'adventures' so much.

David Jackson 60 wrote:

Somebody please explain this saving + duration thing for me with spells. This sounds like a dealbreaker to me in my hopes for 4th.

Your telling me that if a 20th level wizard casts charm person on a 2nd level fighter, he's got a 50% chance base to beat it???

Your telling me that the majority of spells will now probably not last more than a round or two before a save? Really even if the level comparison above doesn't fit and it's just some kind of misunderstanding, casting a spell now implies that it will be broken whenever cast within a round or two.

I suspect that a powerful mage will have ways of making low level NPCs just be dominated. In the end this should only come up as part of a plot point - during normal play, 20th level mages don't fight 2nd level fighters, they fight enemies that are of comparable power. So the real question here is "can the system handle a plot point where the evil archmage takes over the goblin tribe or were my archmage dominates commoners?".

The reality is if you have a 20th level mage in 3.5 you almost never actually play out an encounter with 10 normal Goblins as its a waste of time. So the combat mechanics don't have to address really heavily mismatched powers but their does have to be some kind of system that allows archmages, Ilithids and Aboleths to dominate lesser folk for extended periods of time.

The full statement says "you'll usually get to make a saving throw to remove the effect at the end of your turn." So maybe higher level spells do not let the spell effect to end so easily. Also I believe the goal is for encounters to last a few rounds. So a low level spell/prayer might reasonably only last for 2 or 3 rounds since it is most of the combat. Otherwise, if the goal is to have an encounter last 3 rounds of so, you might as well say 'effect ends at end of encounter.' I think they are trying to get rid of the 'your character is now out of play' effects.

Anyways, if it is out of balance or you want a grittier game, a simple house rule to increase the level of the 'saving throw' or some DDI errata can fix it.

I've recently gotten into getting the pre painted plastic minis from WOTC. I'm not necessarily into spending big bucks just to get a Rare (the ol' Pokemon approach to minis ...) but I do like having cool plastic figures to use in my games.

Also if you just want to substitute some wierd looking figures, buy old lots of WizKids Games MageKnight. I buy some just bacause they have some interesting 'monsters'.

This is not entirely surprising because, as the game grows older, WotC has to publish more and more overpowered feats/spells/Magic items to keep players interested…and buying.

To be honest, the last few games I've played in, I've restricted myself to PHB + DMG only for class/feats/etc. Kind of as a way to prove that there is still a lot of life in just that bit of game, and there is.

If I can control myself, I think a solution is to wait for the second printing and just buy the PHBI, MMI and DMGI. Then don't buy anything for a year, except Pathfinder and the DI! If you can fake Illusions and Summoning from previous additons, don't even buy PHBII. Convert monsters, since it is 'so easy', and don't buy anymore MM's. Pathfinder probably will have what you need for monsters. And keep your own fluff/cosmology. How hard can it be to modify Halfings to make them Gnomes and ignore the Tieflings tail?

Don't a lot of us buy new game systems just to see the rules? The problem is not the new edition, it is my obsessive complusive need to have everthing and the chaos it causes. If I can control my spending, it might be fun to see the game evolve. (Except they killed my magazines.)

And if the 4.0 rules are not play tested well and create new problems, I have a bookshelf full of years of fun with 3.5. Just add the House Rules you like from 4.0.

I fear of retalatory flame strike, let it be known that I am going to try and stay with Edition 3.5 since it has what I need and I want to save money. But I think this a good way are trying to improve the game...

I think what is being overlooked in all this ranting about power is that the only items that are expected to provide persistant enhancements are the core three slots: armor, weapon, neck.

I think most of us are experienced gamers and we are assuming we don't need help in maintaining a balanced game. When I was playing at 10 years old in the 70's, this would have been good way of handing magic. Now I know not to give away too much magic and not to make magic totally accessible, but I still screw up occasionally. And it is not just me. It is still a frequent thread topic about 'low magic' campaigns or rules sets such as Iron Heroes.

I feel this is a good example of a small step in the right direction to help improve the game. I also feel it is an example of a change they could have made to Edition 3.75 instead of revamping the whole system. For me, I am going to use this stuff as food for thougth for House Rules and how to maintain magic. And if I ever use 4th Edition, I can always allow Rings of Feather Fall useable at all levels. I mean does anyone not have House Rules?

And finally reference Low/Medium/High magic. In 4th Edition, if you only allow use of some slots you can now create a medium or even low level magic campaign. For example, in 4th Edition you only allow use of the three permanent item slots (Weapon, Armor and Neck) you have just made a Medium Level magic campaign.

Are not the Dragonborn the new 'strong' and therefore better at fighting race? If so, I suspect alot of the fighters role will be Dragonborn. Not necessarily out of desire, just out of practicality. But I also don't understand the advantages to being a Dwarf, so maybe Dwarves will fill the fighter role.

Duncan Clyborne wrote:

I like that the DDI will allow a seamless upgrade to the edition as improvements are identified. We will not need a Edition 4.5 or 5.0 since Edition 4.0 will smoothly evolve.

Never seen problems in software updates so far ? New to computers ?

Duncan Clyborne wrote:

And even the nay-sayers will be able to join down the line (with an extra helping of Sebastian's Humble Pie), because all future products will be easy to get electronically.

Assuming we want them to begin with.

I think it is also worth noting that magic weapons 'suffer'. The 'Flame' effect only adds to your damage if you critical. It is like 'Flaming' is gone and you can only go directly to 'Flaming Burst'. I presume this works with fewer magic items and added levels/abilities. You should still be doing more damage as you go up in level, but apparently it comes from different power sources. I would guess it also helps prevent 'Min-Maxing'. Probably a good overall idea, but will people find ways to circumvent the intent?

Basically 3.5 multi-classing, Magic Weapons and Crticals can be abused. But hopefully 4.0 level abilities, fewer 'multi-classing' options, modified magic weapons and modified critcials will prevent 4.0 game abuse. Time will tell.

But this is an intriguing point. I keep thinking of all these rule changes idividually. I like some of the changes, I am indifferent to some, and I dislike some. I worry they will combine in bad ways. But if it is done right, the overall effect may be good. Again, time will tell.

This topic might deserve a thread: What will the synergy of all these rule changes be? Do some build together to enrich the entire experience? Or will it be a train wreak?

It brings to mind a potential hybrid method: if you roll a 20 (or critical threat) then you do max damage if the roll us unconfirmed, or double (regular) damage if the threat is confirmed (with the caveat that you do at least regular max damage).

I am a negative person (I call myself a Realist) but I will try because I want the DDI so badly.

Although individually most of these changes might be good, I think they are trying to make too many changes at once with not enough playtesting. The synergy effect of these 'individually' good changes might be broken but...

I like that the DDI will allow a seamless upgrade to the edition as improvements are identified. We will not need a Edition 4.5 or 5.0 since Edition 4.0 will smoothly evolve.

And we will be able to customize software to permanently kill Gnomes if a DM wants to.

And even the nay-sayers will be able to join down the line (with an extra helping of Sebastian's Humble Pie), because all future products will be easy to get electronically.

There I tried.

I could not think of a 'fun' name and did not not see a reason I would want to create a new identity. (Some of you guys might know each other in 'real life' if you used your real names.)

Now if I could change my Forum Name, I would become 'Duncan & Dragons' (hence my Avatar). Either that or 'Fantasy Freaker' since that was my families nickname for me when I played too much D&D as a kid.

[I think James Keegan's comment about 'no one in their right mind would want to stalk me' is humorous. These boards are full of people not in their right mind. Or maybe he knew that and wants to be stalked.)

Ok im going to take a big risk now, a few says from now a severed orc head will be hanging on my front door, curtesy of the TLF (third edition liberation front).

I actually like that they have the guts to change things, ...

Ok take your best shot, ill take cover behind my more or less useless DMG.

Elves are based on Tolkien and Tolkien's Elves had obvious 'celestial' connections. Old D&D trying to make 'Wood Elves' more Fey only worked for half the players. The creation of numerous sub-races are peoples ways of satisfying everyone. This solution elimates sub-races and gives a solution that should satify most. (maybe)

Along this line, WotC has identified that the Warlock class is very popular and should be a core class. It makes sense to give each core class an iconic race and Tieflings make sense as the iconic Warlock.

Still along this line, is that Gnomes are just a type of Halfling, as are Hobbits, Kender, and all the other sub-races. I have a house rule that a 'Sword of Halfing Bane' hurts all these creatures equally since they are basically the same thing.

I don't mind these type of changes. They could have incorporated it into a backwards compatible edition. It is the 'other' changes that bother me.

Here goes my unpopular opinion on Power Attack and D&D math complexities in general:

...
2) D&D math IS overly complex. If you don’t believe me, you haven’t played in our power-gaming munchkinizing gaming group. Take my 12th level paladin for example:
Power Attack
Combat Expertise
Bulls Strength
Bears Endurance
Divine Favor
Magic Weapon
Smite Evil

These are just a few of the characters combat options/abilities; there are others I’m sure I’m forgetting. Add these up in your head during the course of a battle. Now get poisoned, level-drained, ability drained, penalties, and outside bonuses and figure out your abilities. At 2:00 a.m.

Playing this character without the benefit of Excel is not impossible, just impractical, and not fun at all.
...

I think this article is an example of why 4.0 was not necessary. This is a small improvement for edition 3.75 that could have been backwords compatible with 3.5. Instead I am getting a non-compatible edition.

I respect (and want) improvement and digitalization. Instead, I am getting a 'better' Power Attack at the cost of my prior investment. I wish I could agree with Sebastian, but I do not like the way WotC is doing this.

Readling between the line, you could set up something like 4th Edition might be. They seem to be making Savings Throws into Armor class. So as an example, you take your Reflex save bonus and add it to 10 to get a Reflex Armor Class. Then the spell caster rolls d20 and adds his ability modifier (maybe some other stuff also) and must achieve the Reflex Save Armor Class to hit when he casts a Reflex based spell. '20' does double damage. So the wizard does an attack roll to hit each round.

Also I am guessing Shadow Mage from Tome of Magic will model spell casting. Basically, you start with memorized spells. But when you reach 7th level, 1-3rd level spells you do 3 times per day but you still memorize higher level spells. When you reach, 13th level, 1-3rd level spells are 'at will' and 4-6th level spells are 3 times per day but you still memorize higher level spells. Eventually, I think even 4-6th level spells become 'at will'. Maybe you should make this more generic and say he can cast spells 3 levels before his highest 3 times per day. Spells 6 levels lower than his max spell level he can cast 'at will'.

Shadow Mage spells I think were a little more restricted into lists and you get more than Sorcerers but less than Wizards. But I like the flavor of spell lists.

(I want to throw in a little Arcana Unearthed also. Basically, spell casters can increase or decreas the power of spell by one level. But I don't know how to work it in.)

Anyways, you basically can have the wizard making attack rolls each round. He also would have to memorize his more powerfull spells (whatever high is for his level) but he can blast at will his low level spells.

This is all from memory and may have gross errors. It is also based on no 4th Edition threads I have read. And no play testing either. Heck, even reading this post might be dangerous.

I'll be quick, as I'm at work. Otherwise I'd give this the more indepth response it deserves.

I'll continue my GameMastery and Pathfinder subs (and continue buying supplemental material like Flip-Mats, Map Packs, Item Card, etc) as long as Paizo keeps on putting out consistent high quality products like you have over the last 3+ years.

If you go to 4th, I'll follow. If you stay 3.5, I'll keep on buying too.

And if you make a 3.75 version, I'd buy it too, as I would expect it to be high quality.

*And this deserves more of its own thread, but what would you "fix" in 3.5 if you made a new edition? Perhaps make gnome ninjas a core class? ;-)

This Flip Mat looks fantastic and may be more versitile than you imagined. Looking at your preview it looks like I can use my MapPack; Village-Market Place to overlay the central portion of the map and create different market layouts. (Preferably with the PC's chasing a thief through the market that is now different then they remember.) Was this intentional? (If it was not, somebody should take credit anyways.) You might want to think about making another Map pack with smaller size shops than your Map Pack: City that can fit on the Flip Mat:City Market. Then the whole thing can be customizable. (I might buy a second flip mat and a scissors and do it myself) Nice synergy between your products also.

Maybe you should reconsider your criteria. Bring only books for the players. Assume you will be re-kindling their spirit in gaming or they have never gamed. So bring the Complete series and Compendiums. Don't even bring your Core Rules.

Assume you and the players will use the SRD. I would assume you would use digital and you will need books to support your players. Although it is not perfect, I use DM Genie and then import the books into DM Genie. You need the original book to get the password, which I think you have. It is not perfect because you have to have to wait for others to input the data into DM Genie. But for the $30 it costs for DMGenie (or some similar product) you get access to most of your library.

And subscribe to Pathfinder so you get digital adventures. Your weight restrictions apply on the way home also! Send your Pathfinder hardcopy to your home of record. (I am old Army. I spent 18 months in Korea.)

Last post of the day. I must go to eBay now and complete my set...

I still don't know how to classify the "Heroes of .." books. (I am into sets.) And those Draconomicon, Liber Mortis, & Lords of Madness Rules Builder books. I can not believe I forgot all the monster manuals! Just too much on my shelf to take in all at once. I stopped at MM4. Or I said I would stop. Now that I know MM5 is last, I will get it. But wait, then I will need the Fiendish Codex's also. Must have everything....

Actually there is selfish little part of me that like 3.5 going away. It means I can, theoretically, complete my set someday.
Maybe I found my Avatar Name, 'Duncan Ketchum'. I wanted Duncan & Dragons, but the stupid server won't let me switch.

Check out eBay. People sell old figures all the time. It is not that hard to post an item for sale. I think you would get a better price. Good Luck!

Despite the sarcasm, it ain't a bad idea.

What else do we really need to play forever? Not your personal preferences to make something just like your home-brewed campaign. Or 'I want more psionics.' Or 'I want another campaign like Eberron.' But what else is really missing? Is there any real gap?

First, I don’t know if I will like 4th Edition but, either way, I probably won’t switch for awhile.

I was talking over 3.5 vs. 4.0 with a long distance friend. As usual the topic of ‘I have more 3.5 books and adventures than I can use before I die’ came up. Then the often heard, 'WotC has been putting out poor product, twice a month, for the past 18 months.’ I responded with something like, ‘WotC was probably distracted by 4.0 and wanted to finish everything up. At least they finished everything, although possibly at the expense of quality’ (P.S. I think we knock WotC overly much about quality).

We are all caught in the emotions of losing what we love and some of us are excited about what 4.0 might be. What more did we really want more from WotC? They have extended themselves to saturated the market and give us as much as possible for 3.5. They have created enough to keep us happy forever.

We have more than I would have imagined: Core Books, Optional Rules (PHB2, DMG2, Unearthed Arcana, Tome of Battle, & Tome of Magic), Compendiums, Splat Books (Complete Arcane, etc.), Race Series (Races of Destiny, etc.), Expeditions Series, Environment Series (Sandstorm, Dungeonscape, etc.), Game Aids- (Dungeon Tiles, Fantastic Locations & Miniatures), Several Campaigns (including a new one in Eberron), Modules and Dungeon to give us our monthly fix (Although they took the Dungeon name back, they indirectly created Pathfinder that can support us indefinitely), Allot of third party companies (indirectly created again), and last, and least, Software Support (I suspect they tried to re-group and then decided to do the D&D Insider thing.)

What else do we really need to play forever? Not your personal preferences to make something just like your home-brewed campaign. Or 'I want more psionics.' Or 'I want another campaign like Eberron.' But what else is really missing? Is there any real gap?

P.S. Let’s not make this a whine about quality. Experimentation sometimes breeds good and bad.

Death and resurrection imposes a negative level that's removed when the character achieves their next level.

Maybe you gain experience at double rate until your next level. Or maybe a special death related feat. +1 to Reflex Savings Throw against Fire spells if you die from a Fireball. -1 to attack and +1 Defensive bonus to AC if your Wizard dies in melee combat. Maybe select an Unearthed Arcana character trait that could be related to your death. (Character traits have both good and bad affects.)

I am perturbed by multiple attacks.

What exactly are your problems with multiple attacks? The way that you're building it up would cause larger amounts of damage, although it would only be on one die roll (thus causing more risk of missing for the whole round). ...
One easy way to reduce rolls (which may or may not be your problem with the system), is to have players roll multiple dice at once. Each of a different color and corresponding to a certain attack, of course.

When I played as a kid it was fun to watch someone else roll and see the results. We have lost the feeling of; "Yea! I rolled well." Now the play is; "I hit, I missed, I hit, I missed, what was the AC again, I hit, I missed, I missed, oh, I forgot about the Bless Spell,(pause), I still hit three times, and now for damage...." The feeling now is; "Hurry up and pre-roll and tell us the result."

The increased 'massive hit-total miss' problem can be overcome with the right math. And it can be viewed as exciting if done right. Maybe something like saving throws where it is half damage. (I don't like that idea. I am just thinking out loud.)

I did not think I was alone on this. I thought it was ID'd as a weakness for SW and 4th Edition. I asked for someone else's solution since I know mine was weak.

Enough on spells already.

I am perturbed by multiple attacks. It appears to me that high level and multi-weapon attacks could be done with one roll. Maybe something like 2H wpns do good damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1.5 x 1/2 BAB (Min 1)), Regular weapons do normal damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1/2 BAB (Min 1) and Multiple Weapons get -2 to hit and good damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1.5 x 1/2 BAB (Min 1)). You would also have to multiple incremental weapon damage (Flaming, Shock, etc) by 1/2 BAB (Min 1).

I have not thought this out statistically, but has some one figured a better way to do it? Someone out there must do statistics for fun.

If you watch this interview with Andy Collins (might be in part two) he pretty clearly states that 4.0 is a "clean break" in the system, and (in my words) that providing a conversion guide would be too complicated and the small booklet format (like the 3.0 to 3.5 guide) wouldn't be adequate to truly provide a full guide for converting everything. He recommends starting from scratch and giving the new system a good look to see how much it's improved.

grrtiger
Now that announcement makes me happy.

It's better to build a new one than patch up an old broken one. This is the most well-known RPG on the market and it should have the most well-thought out rules. Right now, 3.5 embarrasses me.

God help them if they disappoint.