|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Paizo Pathfinder® GameMastery® Planet Stories® Paizo Games | |||||||||||||||||||
| About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posts
 Recent Posts
Movement: 1-1-1-1 makes it more boardgame-like, don't want it, don't like it. 1-2-1-2 is far more geometrical correct on a square battlemap. Keep it that way, it is more realistic. Hey, did write it wrong or something? I am saying keep 1-2-1-2 Movement in PRPG. I have to take this as poor writing on my part because half the people got me wrong. The idea is the 'simple 4.0 version' is 1-1-1-1 Movement and square area effects. The 'complex PRGP version' is 1-2-1-2 Movement and rounded area of effects. And to reiterate; 'simple 4.0 version' is At-Will, Encounter and Daily Power. The 'complex PRPG version' is 9 level spell progression. Everyone so far seems to like the 'action streamling'. If we have copyright issues, why don't we just define the actions different. Use the 3.5 mechanic of Full Round, Standard Action, Movement Action and Free Action. Maybe say open door, draw weapon and quickened spells are free actions. Add Interrupt Actions as either Readied Actions or 'Immediate Actions'. (Did I remember that right? My bad memory is reason enough to change.) The 'simple 4.0 version' is Standard, Move & Minor Action. The 'complex PRPG version' is Full Round, Staged Round and Interrupting Actions. The proposed PRPG version is below: Full Round Action (including 5' step w/o AoO) - [I think we need Full Rd Action for reverse compatibility] or Staged Round Actions
and finally Interrrupting Actions
Well from one whore to another, I think you summarized the situation quite well. Welcome. Except for this, in additional to us mild mannered RPG whores, there are two camps at war. (Does that make us camp followers?) Anti-4.0 and Pro-4.0. Some, but not all, of the PRPG guys are Anti-4.0. So you just walked into the no man's zone and are about to be shot at. Just ignore personal attacks as some people are carrying emotional baggage. It can be fun to watch the fire works though.
I think one of the comments made by Paizo was that PRPG might be the version of D&D that 4th Edition players advance too. Linky? That information contradicts their previous statements that one of the reasons they're developing PfRPG is that the 3.x system worked best with the stories they wanted to tell. I don't know how to make linkys. http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/dnd/lisaStevenThought Exercise So why couldn't Paizo, IF we were to stay with 3.5, get a regular influx of younger gamers who got weaned into the industry by 4th edition, but got bored and started looking for a more complicated game, or perhaps heard about this amazing campaign setting called Pathfinder Chronicles? I don't really understand why everyone thinks that IF a company stuck with 3.5, that it was like they were stuck in a hermetically sealed room or something. To remember the context, this was months ago. A lot has changed and she did title this thing a "Thought Exercise" but I think we now know she was talking about PRPG. Anyways, I don't see conflict with their goals. I was talking about changing the stuff that doesn't affect what 'worked best with the stories they wanted to tell'. I was talking about changing stuff that is trivial. What difference does a free 5' step versus the 1 square shift have to do with story telling? Now whether the 5' shift (notice I did not say one square) is reverse compatible I am trying to get my hands around. I know the Paizo plate is full. I just wanted to bring it up again. And this is political as CHELIAX. If Paizo was forced to choose, make the 3.5 camp happy. But if you can prepare PRPG for a future market, I am in favor of it. Lisa & Jason, I would also love to help play test PRPG version Charlie; wink, wink, nudge, nudge. P.S. If anyone says that changing a 5' step to a 5' shift won't allow role playing in PRPG, I am going to summon Sebastian.
I want to keep 1-2-1-2. Just add rough terrain and Shift. I wish I could draw a spreadsheet. 3.500 1-2-1-2 Movement, Circle Bursts, Triangular Cones, 5'Step, No Rough Terrain, Run = Move times Y, Charge = Full Rd Action4.000 1-1-1 Movement, Square Bursts, Square Cones, Shift, Rough Terrain, Run = Move +2, Charge = Standard Move PRPG 1-2-1-2 Movement, Circle Bursts, Triangular Cones, Shift, Rough Terrain, Run = Move +2, Charge = Standard Move EDIT: Ok I added somethings. 3) Spells: You're pretty much stuck with this one. There are OGL products out that have alternate magic systems available. I'm sure someone could create an at-will/encounter/daily mechanic within OGL but not sure that's worth an effort. Certainly not for PFRPG. I don't want to change spells. PRPG uses the more complex 9 level spell progression. I would only want to make some feats that give options in combat so people moving up to PRG are not totally confused. 4) Healing: Adapting some sort of optional healing system is again more of a house rule option. I, personally, like the healing surges because it frees up the Cleric to do more happy-fun Cleric things and less fixing of other people's owies. But not something for base PFRPG. This one is probably too much. But a bunch of people seemed receptive to Monte's idea. Maybe test it in Beta?
I got you. I thought you were being totally serious. It was about a 50% chance. Although I agree it might be too much to make happen, I would also like to see PRPG 1.5. Not because of sigificant changes, but I would like to see it live past one publishing.
I think one of the comments made by Paizo was that PRPG might be the version of D&D that 4th Edition players advance too. Why not make this a formal design objective? This is not totally thought out, but it would go along this line. Try to see if a slight modification of PRPG could make transition easier.Some examples: 1- Actions - I don't see a huge difference between the standard action, movement action, free action of 3.5 and the standard action movement action, minor action from 4.0. Why not just adopt their new methods so it is easy to switch 'up' to PRPG. 2- Movement - 4.0 uses 1 square is always 5'. Rough terrain is always 2 squares. Bursts are always squares. PRPG seems to want to stay with 1-2-1-2 Diagonal movement. And likewise PRPG wants to keep cones and bursts as triangles and circles, not squares. Why not add rough terrain equalling 2 squares (10') to PRGP? Likewise, get rid of the the 5' step and make it a 5' shift. That way if people wish to move up, it is easy to learn the 'more realistic' PRPG rules. 3- Spells - 4.0 uses At-Will, Encounter and Daily powers. PRPG uses the 'more complex' multi-level spell system. But look for ways to make 4.0 system 'forward compatible' to PRPG so it is easy to switch later. Maybe make feats more encounter/at-will power like (as you started to with Combat Feats) so PRPG is seen as a step up. 4-- Likewise, adopt some of Monte's healing based on the character limits, not on the the spell caster ideas. Make the PRPG heaing system the step up from healing bursts, but similar. Finally, by making it easy to use PRPG with 4.0, it might keep some PRPG customers if they can 'steal what they want with House Rules from 4.0'. Everyone uses House Rules anyway. P.S. If WotC can steal the Adventure Path concept, we should be able to adopt some of their stuff. I know it is more complex than this, but you get the idea.
I did not see this posted but a sword and boarder also has the ability to add more AC from Magic Bonuses to the Shield. I admit an animated shield has the equivalent bonus but it should go into the equation somewhere. Perhaps a bonus similar to the armor training bonus. A professional fighter who uses a shield should get better with it?
First, I think it is silly that someone is still trying to get a complete set of foils. In character for most of us, but still silly. Second, I got a foil Staff 75/110 a few weeks ago and you can have it. It is the set with the little crossed swords symbol. Paizo sent it for free, so you should thank them. dclyborne@netscape.net
I agree but I am talking about a more 'elegant' solution. (I was planning on doing what you suggest but showed up late.) In terms of an elegant solution, I am thinking some type of Combat Pad that tracks effects and such. Something that reminds you during the proper time of the round to do something. I am going off of memory here but something like this: DUNCAN'S NOT SO ELEGANT COMBAT PAD-
I am also going to use Alea Tools Markers for Bloodied and Marked.
I also ran a D&D Game Day event today for 4.0. I will post here since we don't need multiple threads. First of all, D&D Game Day is not the best event to get to know the game. The game stores are frequently noisy and I had 6 players. Second, WotC should have given us better resources. No quick start rules for playing the game and no player primer like they had at D&D Experience. I was winging it more than I liked. Third, It went pretty well and I think the game will be well received. I think the scenario was well made for a demo. My 4.0 comments are below. Fourth, I am jealous about the Swag. I got my usual dice but the players got repainted figures. Now I need to go to eBay to get 'my' rightly deserved repaints. Spoiler:
I ran the event as follows. We had a fight with a Large White Dragon to start getting to know the rules and the character powers. Then we had a little adventure to explore an old tomb. The tomb had four encounter areas. White Dragon-
Tomb -
The second room was an entry with Hobgoblins serving as guards. The Hobgoblins never got to use their schtick monster power (Phalanx Soldier) but the traps went well. They were fun traps but 4th edition did not add much to them. I am warming up to At-Will powers. I think that players selecting each round what power to use was good. The rules for adding and replacing powers seems about right for giving choices but not confusing you with too many choices. We started getting confused by the powers vs Basic Attacks since we did not have a primer. I think when you charge you can only use you basic attack and not your At-Will powers. The third room was a cave that later became a trap. After a side encounter, the cave starts collapsing. This was nice but lead me to believe it would have been better suited for the Eberron (Indiana Jones) type of game. It was a good trap but I am trying to figure out whether this was better because of 4.0 rules or just a well written trap. It had different zones that were affected in different rounds. The trap was triggered by a side room that had prisoners in it. If the prisoners left a 'magic circle' it would start the cave-in. The Ritual rules seemed nice for this since it 'explained' how a spell could do that. I like rutuals but as I have written elsewhere, I think you should have house rules for using Rituals in combat. The fourth room was supposed to the BBG. It looked like a good scenario but I would think it could have included Minions according to Grim Cleavers idea. We never got to the room since we were running out of time and the cave-in made the team think it was time to flee. General Comments - It did have a different feel. This is potentially good to keep everyone involved in other players turns. I would actually encourage people to give each other suggestions. You want the players hanging over the combat zone watching what is happening. I think combat will be only slightly faster once you get to know you powers. I recommend you run it like a card game with powers on cards. Additionally, I think someone needs to figure out the how to show saving throw effects. We had no way to remember who was under the effect of slow (cold) or the acid arrow. Secondly, how do you remember that the cleric gave you a +3 bonus for a round? And we did not even get into radius effect powers. I think the combat interaction is both a Weal and Woe of 4.0.
The Compendium was supposed to be up yesteday. I got this based on the Gamer Zero interview with Chris Young the Editor-in-Chief . The Compendium is not functional. I think WotC is trying to turn me from a pro-PRPG guy to an anti-4.0 guy. I did not deserve this after I ran a 4.0 demo today for them. I should bycott the DDI website but they are making that insignificant.
Why do you guys need a Customer Service Representative? You got Linda [LISA] and everyone else working the boards? OK, maybe you want to sleep. Or was it our bad behavior on the boards and you need a baby sitter for us? Oops. I got LISA's name wrong. My apologies. I suck with names. I am a reclusive, geeky, afraid of girls type of guy. That is why I play D&D. P.S. If you have not seen the 'Fear of Girls' YouTube, you are missing something. P.S.S. Erik, stay away from MN. We replaced April snow with endless rain and thunderstorms. Hey, Rich Baker will be at Source Comics on Saturday June 7th. If you know him, you may want to visit. But he is running a WWDD demo of 4th Edition. Ohhhh...
And folks of you who aren't paizo.com employees... well... we're hiring! Why do you guys need a Customer Service Representative? You got Linda and everyone else working the boards? OK, maybe you want to sleep. Or was it our bad behavior on the boards and you need a baby sitter for us?
I have heard from a more than a few people here that Wizards has abandoned their fans with 4e. Maybe a different way of saying it is that WoC felt it was time to evaluate their market segments and design their product/strategy to meet different product segment needs. Since there are fundamental rule changes in 4.0 (like spell slots vs encounter powers, fluff changes, etc.) those of us in the the 'old' market segment feel the product is no longer right for us. We feel our product has been taken away. And to add insult to injury some of our favorites like Dragon Magazine (not eZine) are 'abandoned'. 4.0 might be 'better' but it is not 'my game' like the old one was. Or at least it is not 'my game' yet. ;p Anyways, WotC did move their product into a new market segment. The revolution was predictable. The only thing left is to see how things are when the dust settles. What was unpredictable was the acidic nature of the boards. But being a fence sitter it can be fun to watch!
With most things so combat focused, and rituals taking so long, it limits the way people can handle a situation. Thread Jack - There should be optional rules to include 'fast' rituals on scrolls or memorized as daily powers so it can be used in an encounter. The only example I could find is Knock which is a Ritual that uses a Healing Surge. I presume this is anticipated to be used during an encounter and the Healing Surge make it 'cost' something that requires resource management. -End Thread Jack
Passive Checks are 'taking 10' to notice something without actively doing something. The two most common ones are Perception and Insight. Perception is noticing something in the environment. An example would be if your Perception is 13 and someone ties to use Stealth to Hide. If they roll a modified 13 or lower, you see them even if you did not look for them. Insight is for social situations. An example would be if your Insight is 13 and someone tries to Bluff (lie). If they roll a modified 13 or lower, you would know they are lying even if you were not trying to discern a lie. I think it is so you don't need to spend the entire adventure searching and sensing motive. Players only have to bring it up when something special is going on. Edit. Antioch sounds more correct but I left mine for the examples.
A Second Wind is just one way of activating a Healing Surge. It is a Standard Action that is usable once per encounter. It also gives you +2 to your defenses for one round. I think it is unique because everyone can do it. Otherwise you need a potion or someone with a special power to activate a Healing Surge.
Don't forget "Babes of Pathfinder", "Babes of Pathfinder: Swimsuit Edition" and "Babes of Pathfinder: X rated edition" :D KaeYoss these comments are immature. P.S. Make sure the X rated Editon is the little half size calendar so I can hide it in my hobby room away from my wife.
Modified At-Will, Encounter and Daily abilities. So as not to copy, use Shadow Mage spell progression from Tome of Magic. Basically as you progess your low level spells become 3 times per day (Encounter). Then your mid-level spells become 3 times per day and low level spells are At-Will. Your 'highest' level spells always require the most resource management (analogous to Daily powers). The PRPG wizard specialization schools have a similar effect. I like resource management but I like always having something to do. 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. I also want iterative attacks to go but Over Hand chop might be the solution to that.
A few of the monsters also have intriguing abilities; ... Each monster seems to have a schtick. I got the Jack of Irons Ettin miniature the other day. It has a 'swat' ability that it can use when you take a five foot step (shift). Basically it is a AoO if you shift. I think it will be fun to spring new monster abilites on players. Just fun little abilites to keep everyone on their toes.
October and yeah you do kinda need to buy the core books or well what's the point? I think it depends on what you plan to do--I had players who didn't own any books at all. But they read the magazines and were regulars at the old WotC site. If you plan to DM, then it goes without saying you must have all three core books. I am the DM. My desire to not own the books is a lesson learned from 3.5. I make adventures and characters using DM Genie. I own practically every book yet I don't touch them since I use the PC Generators. Some peoples styles supports this. I am just hoping that I am in WotC's customer demographics. I will pay $100 per year for a subscription. But I will resist spending four times that on all the stupid books. I will still buy Dungeon Tiles, minis and adventures but I don't want the dead trees. I think because of limited time I like using the computer tools to prep for games. Hence, I hardly ever touch the books. Maybe I should start a D&D Players Eco-friendly group. Druid friendly D&D.
I think the Over Hand Chop and Double Strike are meant to simulate this. One is for single weapon users the other is for two weapon combatants. I may have the feat names wrong. This also allows a DM to create a simple house rule to remove iterative attacks by requiring people to use Over Hand Chop or the other one.
I agree that 4th Editions more restrictive. And it has the potential to be a good thing to fix the 'broken' multi-class system and munchkin builds. I think that is why WotC is doing it. To illustrate the reduced flexibility. Try building a Wizard level 2/Ranger level 2/Rogue level 2/Ranger level 2/Fighter level 2 character in 4th Edition. In addition, 4th Edition does take away certain actions in combat that are currently open to all classes. But they are working on a building a system that does allow a variety of different character builds. Just controlled builds. They seem to be allowing two per class at 1st level to start with. I am still learning the system, but after that I presume it your options grow with your level. I hope you don't have to wait for 11th level to branch off a bit. But I am also assuming it is controlled enough that you can not build 'something that is not intended.' My analogy here is that 3.O is like the basic Legos I grew up with. They were all blocks. You can build anything, but sometimes it does not meet your imagination. 4.0 is the new Legos. You can buy some neat shaped 'blocks'. And the box set can make neat spaceships. Sure if you only have that one set it is hard to build a car. But when you start getting more sets, you can build some really neat stuff! Time will tell if 4th Edition allows flexible builds that are still not broken. But I am still mad and think they could have made 4th Edition reasonably reverse compatible.
The Dungeon of Dread miniatures seem to have a lot of creatures with 'shadow' related powers. Judging from the title "Into the Shadowh[a]unt", I suspect the monsters they will give you will be enough. Well, I was totally wrong on this. I have only have read half the adventure but I don't see the connection to the 'Dungeons of Dread' shadow creatures. I now understand you comments about Minions. From your other posts, it finally got through to me that you wanted to highlite the new Minion rules. Let me know if you have other ideas. Maybe throw in some undead to show how Energy Channeling affects the living and the dead? Maybe highlite combat movement and how each monster has a schtick? They obviously wanted to remind people that it is not all combat. I see an interactive NPC in the adventure and a puzzle in another room. Maybe we have to kill someone just to show a DM can kill people (Sarcasm intended for the anti-4th Edition team.) I am still mad at WotC and luke warm to 4th Edition. I finally figured out the analogy to show how I feel. I feel like I have a DM that is railroading the plot.
I also don't use my rulebooks at the table. I just have my Piazo adventure and a PC. Also with the 'compact' format of powers and stat blocks, the digital inteface should work fine. In other words, most descriptions will fit in a window. My theory on why they should allow it is that I 'have' to continue to subscribe. Else my previous money is wasted. I become a customer for life unless I quit 4th Edition. I figure they should bank on some only buying books, some only buying DDI and some buying both. The problem is I want to know if they are going to give me 'core' rules only and I have to enter a book code to get the add-ons like PHBII or Magic Items. Ultimately, the answer I am hearing is nobody knows because it has not been announced. Sigh. P.S. I am really not cheap. I just want to become Super Subscriber.
I think the rules makes sense as written. Furthermore, there is a feat to allow you to 'miss' targets with your channelling. Kind of a shape meta-magic feat. But it might be a reasonable house rule to only have your team members healed. Or better yet, make it depend on what holy symbol your charater wears. So if a cleric of Pelor channels positive energy, it only positively affects people wearing the symbol of Pelor. That will force party unit. There are no Atheists in a foxhole!
Reference to Skill Challenges I try to think of it from several angles. How would this system work for new-young gamers, how would this work for experienced gamers, how would this work for modules and how would this work for 'role-playing'? My take on this follows: This would have helped me when I was 10 and trying to figure out what 'heroes' can do and how to resolve actions. It can tend to interfere with 'role-playing' if a young gamer think everything has to follow the dice rolls. An experienced gamer should be able to use this model to make up challenges on the fly. They can think up the general situation and mechanics (8 success or 4 failures) and then make up the difficulty based on the players ideas. A series of simple decisions (easy-Medium or Hard) should be easy to adjudicate. In reference to modules, it is very controllable for tournament play and giving DM's ideas for Skill Challenge scenarios. I could see a book of skill challenges. Finally, in terms of role-playing... I don't know. I could see a DM abusing the 'rolling' of skill challenges and loosing some fun. But I didn't get to PLAY this weekend! So what do you think?
I am a volunteer DM for D&D Game Day. I will read the quick start rules for Shadowfell and I presume they will give us something for the event.
For example:
well not getting into the chicken familar debate, did anyone ever really use familares in 3.5? I perfered 3.0, or a completly differnt system for familiers.I've never used familiars. They give you nothing except a chance to lose stuff every time it dies. Monte's Book of Experimental Might addresses this. I paraphrase him as saying, 'I don't have a problem with familiars per say, I have a problem with how they are used. Basically, everyone forgets they have them.' He proposed familiars be a spirit that can be summoned.
I wanted to bump this thread and add to it. I was in another thread talking about making special fighter feats and I mentioned this thread. You could expand your idea and make special feat powers that are usable once per day. I presume these would be more powerful and would be after prerequisite feats /feat trees.
If you like the ideas of giving Fighters a 'bonus' check out this thread (I can not 'linkify');
He does not limit the idea to Fighters only. He purposes that ALL feats give you an 'always on/at will' power and a 'per encounter' special power. You could take this idea and limit the 'per encounter' power to Fighters. Actually you could change it slightly and give 'daily' powers to certain feats and 'per encounter' powers to feat trees. Who needs fourth edition.
I think you are right that it is in 4th Edition. I think the Book of Experimental Might also has 'limited' amount of healing each day based on who is receiving the healing. Good ideas are frequently concurrently generated by several people. This would also help the original posters idea. You could keep Cure Minor Wounds but just limit how much you can use it on each PC. So Cure Minor Wounds would be how you 'pray' between encounters to heal people. You just need time.
I am personally keeping list of 4th Edition ideas I will consider house ruling. As suggested earlier, a high CR creature with minimum hit points should do the trick. High level characters tend to do a lot of damage so most 'Mooks' will drop quickly. From a PRPG perspective, I think the polite thing would be to leave 4th Edition ideas alone. Only go for ideas that are original, really broken, or 'totally obvious' (like elimating re-iterative attacks). P.S. I know re-iterative attacks stayed in PRPG.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
