|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
I know of one! And a 6-part Adventure Campaign will be starting soon as well.
since James was answering questions here I was hoping he might chime in. I'm interested in the 3rd ed stuff as well as the SW and PF versions, but without their boards I don't know where to get info on the 3rd ed books (in the new format) release. I'll also try to answer any questions you may have about the ED Pathfinder and Savage World Editions!
My biggest point of feed back is that I greatly dislike how you've forced so many classes into only one adept way. Barbarian, Cavalier, and Bard have exactly 1 option. Please, reconsider that and open the ways up to various classes, options are always good. Thanks for the feedback! Quick note: Paladin will satisfy Cavalryman prereq in the coming update. Regarding clerics: Clerics waive all other prereq considerations for choosing a Discipline. We understand that right now the selection seems a bit limited and shoehorned, but we wanted to establish a baseline and leave room for specializations (which will be tackled in the Player’s Companion). So things like Bladesman or Spearmaster will be able to be a fighter with slightly different feat choices, and "Dashing Swordsman" type archetypes, or more barbaric Warriors. We also wanted to save some of the base classes for future Disciplines, such as the Monk Discipline in the Cathay Player’s Guide, the Shaman, and so on. The Game Master’s Companion (note, Companion, not Guide) will also offer advice for tweaking other classes (such as third-party classes) for existing Disciplines, because we can’t possibly cover them all. In the end, we want as much variability as possible, but for right now, we want to leave room for growth. Ideally, we would like the kind of variability within Disciplines that you see in ED, due to their wide talent selections. Right now, though, we want to focus on what we consider more core, and then expanding outward from there.
Yes, rounding up should always go up to the nearest whole number, even if it is .1. And Bull Rush should be per 5, like standard PF-- sorry about that!
Yeah, that's a pain in the ass--sorry for the hassle! But like James said, it's a good deal right now!
The content/metaplot won't diverge much, so you will be able to use ED3 material with no trouble. Most ED3 material, however, will eventually find its way into the Pathfinder & Savage Worlds game lines, too.
So spells are the part my group is really curious about.Are we still looking at several rounds to cast spells?Also in ed you could cast spells all day is that still the case?Will spell matrixes exist?How will metamagic work? Will boneshatter,Razor orb and onion skin retain their scariness?Will we have ed healing too?Or will we need to have a questor present like pf?Last but not least will this line or ed3 ever do any books about shosara or sereatha? Spells follow standard PF mechanics. New spells based on the ED versions will be available, but players are free to pick their old favorites. Questors will be explored in the upcoming Player's Companion (due out in early 2013), but clerics do not need to be Questors, and vice versa. Clerics will still have access to their standard spell list. An Elven Nations book is currently being developed for the core ED3 line, and we will likely convert it to the Pathfinder and Savage Worlds lines later. But sine we already have more than a dozen books in the pipe for each year up through 2014, we probably won't squeeze it into publication until sometime in 2015.
Basically character creation remains unaffected other than the bonus Discipline feat.
And we hoped that idea would cross. Being an Adept really is an add-on. By learning a Discipline, characters gain access to a wide variety of powers. Adept skills are truly powers, not just mundane abilities. I can really understand some people's disappointment with that direction, but I really do feel it helps highlight the difference between non- Adepts and Adepts, making the latter just a little "more than."
I understand where you're coming from, but I feel that the class skills and feat selection (along with the Adept fluff presented in the Player's Guide) goes a long way to making your vanilla fighter really *feel* like a Warrior Adept, or your wizard really feel like a Wizard Adept (or Illusionist Adept, Nethermancer Adept, etc.). YMMV, of course!
Yeah, so basically if you're a fighter and you choose as your bonus Discipline feat "Warrior Adept," then you will be granted several new class skills (called "Adept skills" that ED fans will recognize from the old talent lists), plus access to a wide variety of new Adept feats that have "Warrior Adept" as one of the prerequisites (such as Air Dance, Wood Skin, and so on). (And to note, all Adept Feats with Warrior Adept as a prerequisite are noted to be combat feats for purposes of being able to choose them with a fighter's bonus feats.) And then there's Versatility, a bonus skill provided to humans, which allows them to bypass these prerequisites (and even put ranks in Adept skills of other Disciplines), but that's another story...
Yes, the usual Pathfinder classes. So you would make a fighter, a bard, a monk, a rogue, or whatever, per normal. Healing will work as it normally does in Pathfinder. Try to think of Earthdawn as a Pathfinder game, rather than a game that is trying to bend Pathfinder rules to match a completely different game. We're approaching the game design as though we were building a brand-new campaign world within the rules set down by Pathfinder (just like the Dragonlance designers did with Krynn, for example).
I think James is working on a preview, but the core classes won't be reprinted in the Player's Guide. They are, however, available (any PF class, really). Character creation follows the same guidelines as the core Pathfinder Rulebook (with the exception of choosing a race and starting money/equipment), but with the addition of gaining a bonus feat--the Discipline feat, which have prerequisites. And since you asked, clerics are interesting, because the Discipline for which they satisfy the prerequisites depend wholly upon which Passion they worship. For example, a cleric of Jaspree can become a Beastmaster or Scout Adept, while a cleric of Chorrolis can become a Thief or Air Sailor Adept, and so on.
Glad to hear it! We wanted to make PF ED as accessible to PF fans as possible, and we felt that allowing them to choose the classes they are already familiar with and love would be one way to do that. We assume that most players will want to be an Adept, but there's nothing stopping someone from beginning play with just a core class and perhaps picking up a Discipline later through roleplaying.
I'm curious, will there be all new classes or will current classes be used? Current classes! However, Earthdawn characters begin play with a bonus Discipline feat, which grants several new class skills and--by way of prerequisite--many new abilities called Adept Feats (considered supernatural abilities in game terms). Once a Discipline feat is chosen, the character is then officially an Adept. Adepts also have access to the Adept feat Karma Ritual, which allows them to gain Karna Points. Choosing your bonus Discipline feat will be limited by your base class, as these feats, like all others, have prerequisites of their own.
When I designed the Cathay sourcebooks for Earthdawn Third Edition, I very carefully planted many easter eggs for SR fans and did my best to ensure continuity.
What levels are the adventure paths for? I take it that the classes will be new and unique from Pathfinder? Any hints on what the adventure is about? The first campaign is set in and around the city of Parlainth, with a base of operations out of Haven. I can't go into too many specifics right now, but the overall plot deals with competing goals among various factions of the ruined city. The three main contenders are Theran, Throalic, and the Unforgiveables under the great dragon Charcoalgrin. The PCs will have to decide which faction to support, and as the plot thickens, the PCs will go deeper and deeper into the Forgotten City, exploring its various sections while being drawn further and further into the web of intrigue. Each adventure will focus on a different section of the ruins, and a corresponding article featured in the book will explore that particular section in more depth. The Parlainth sourcebook will release 1 month before the Adventure Campaign begins (pre-orders available in May), which will also help GMs fill in any details and provide a very large sandbox as a backdrop to the adventures. Each Adventure Campaign will be designed to go from 1st level to around 14th to 16th. The titles for the Parlainth Adventure Campaign are as follows: 1. Relics of the Forgotten City
Books like Denizens won't have new fluff; most of our new fluff will be all-original books, such as the Adventure Campaigns and new creature/Horror books.
You bet! And as a heads up, two of the books in this year's pipeline include Denizens of Barsaive I (which details humans, elves, t'skrang, and windlings) and Denizens of Barsaive II (which details orks, trolls, dwarfs, and obsidimen). Each book deeply explores the cultures of the races, presents new racial subtypes, makes available new culturally specific equipment, and provides racial Disciplines.
A better fate than say, oh I don't know, Earthdawn Third Edition, which is still available and alive and well? Reactionary fears noted. But it should also be noted that GoO had other problems (hell, I'm still waiting for my free Game of Thrones D20 adventure!).
It should be noted that all Horrors I have statted so far have been chaotic evil. ;) And design-wise, they are outsiders with the new Horror subtype (described in the upcoming Game Master's Guide).
Ah, yeah, none of that going on here!
Yeah, there really aren't any stock bad guy humanoids. Orks were once a slave race and have developed a nomadic tribe system based on raiding (called Scorchers), but many also live in settlements. Some of the scorcher tribes work as mercenaries. In fact, one of the leading nations of Barsaive, the dwarf kingdom of Throal, employs a few as permanent auxiliaries (you might imagine that a dwarf nation would be hard pressed to develop a formidable cavalry unit on their own).
Hopefully the threaded magic items can translate well into standard PF campaigns. The design goal was to make Pathfinder Earthdawn for Pathfinder fans first, and Earthdawn fans second (and likewise, for Savage Earthdawn, the design goal was to design it for Savage Worlds fans first, and Earthdawn fans second). I like to think that Golarion characters could travel to Barsaive (and vice versa). Actually, that's why we chose Parlainth as our first main area to explore. Parlainth is an easy city to logically be able to plop down into any pre-existing campaign, erased as it was from the material plane, along with all memory of its existence, only to return as a Horror-haunted ruin centuries later--perfect! That way GMs who don't necessarily want to immerse themselves in the Earthdawn world can still get in on the action.
Player's definitely, but GM's Guide is recommended. GM's Guide will have monsters, threaded magic items, rules for blood magic, secret societies... Some other stuff...
Glad you like the idea! The Parlainth Adventure Campaign will accompany the Parlainth Sourcebook (for which pre-orders will be available in May; release in June). We plan to do a new one each year, with each Adventure Campaign complementing a major sourcebook. (Next year's will be the Sky Point & Vivane Adventure Campaign, taking PCs to the opposite corner of Barsaive.)
Yeah, I only had enough space to do a general idea in that article. Pathfinder ED thread weapons aren't going to be too dissimilar from standard ED, actually! Timeline starts over at 1506, so yes ( though no LRG stuff). There will also be new content, such as our Parlainth Adventure Campaign (re: "adventure path")...
Yeah, I only had enough space to do a general idea in that article. Pathfinder ED thread weapons aren't going to be too dissimilar from standard ED, actually!
RedBrick announced their latest fantasy campaign world, compatible with Pathfinder! Earthdawn: The Age of Legend!
That doesn't sound unreasonable. Another consideration might be adding a penalty to the unit equal to the difference between its current Power Rating and its starting Power Rating (but I perhaps would keep the DC 15 if using that approach). If you are using an excel spreadsheet, taking out the Mass Rating is fine. (When using the unit cards, we found that having a Mass Rating was useful for reducing the equation by one step.)
Hi! Glad you're checking out Warpath. And that's correct. In the case above, the ogres would deal 17 damage with each hit while the orcs would deal 21 damage. That works out to those extra 50 orcs killing 1 extra ogre per round. That sounds pretty reasonable to me! However, due to attrition, if each side hit the other each round, round after round, then by the beginning of round 5, their Power Ratings would both be identical (assuming no critical hits). After that, the ogres would gain a cumulative advantage, and the orcs would lose. Also I recommended for units to be limited to 100 each. Let's see what happens if 100 orcs (+4 vs. AC 17) squared off against 50 ogres (+7 vs. AC 13), assuming each side hits the other each turn and there are no crits and nobody routs: ROUND ONE: 100 orcs vs. 50 ogres ROUND TWO: 93 orcs vs. 48 ogres ROUND THREE: 86 orcs vs. 45 ogres ROUND FOUR: 79 orcs vs. 42 ogres ROUND FIVE: 72 orcs vs. 40 ogres ROUND SIX: 66 orcs vs. 38 ogres ROUND SEVEN: 60 orcs vs. 36 ogres ROUND EIGHT: 54 orcs vs. 34 ogres ROUND NINE: 48 orcs vs. 32 ogres ROUND TEN: 42 orcs vs. 31 ogres ROUND ELEVEN: 36 orcs vs. 29 ogres ROUND TWELVE: 31 orcs vs. 28 ogres ROUND THIRTEEN: 26 orcs vs. 27 ogres ROUND FOURTEEN: 21 orcs vs. 26 ogres ROUND FIFTEEN: 16 orcs vs. 25 ogres ROUND SIXTEEN: 11 orcs vs. 24 ogres ROUND SEVENTEEN: 6 orcs vs. 23 ogres ROUND EIGHTEEN: 1 orc vs. 23 ogres ROUND NINETEEN: 0 orcs vs. 22 ogres RESULT: 100 defeated orcs and 28 defeated ogres. Of course, this slow attrition is quickened quite a bit with the appropriate battlefield tactics to force the enemy to rout (hard to do with only 1 unit in each army, though!). It's also very unlikely the orcs would hit as often as the ogres, so the above results would probably be a little different (less casualties for the ogres, and quicker victory). But, maybe you're still dubious about 100 CR 1/3 creatures defeating over 50% of 50 CR 3 creatures? Well, let's take a step back from the macro and look at the micro: If we had 2 orcs vs. 1 ogre, and assuming the same parameters (no crits, everyone hits, and let's say the orcs have initiative for the sake of argument), and each creature dealt their average damage, then on round 1, the ogre would suffer 18 damage, and 1 orc would die. On round 2, the ogre would suffer 9 more damage, and the second orc would die. Result: 2 defeated orcs and 1 wounded ogre with 27 damage (out of 30 hit points--i.e., over 50% damage). But remember, the main theme behind Warpath is battlefield tactics and maneuvers, not attrition. =) I hope that helps!
One amendment to the rulesheet PDF: It currently reads that a holding can muster a number of units equal to 3 times its Influence Rating. I have changed that so it’s just equal to your Influence Rating. So for example, if the holding has an Influence Rating of 2, the maximum number of units that can be mustered there in a single turn is 2.
My friends and I are starting our new GoT Strategy Wargame via MapTools on Tuesday in celebration of A Dance with Dragons! We have all the positions filled up except House Tully. We have a player on the fence, depending on his schedule. The PDF of rules can be downloaded here: Should be epic! (We haven't played in 5 years, and this will be the first time with MapTools (a LOT of bookkeeping with the old system). Still PBeM, though, to avoid logistical problems.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
