Jal Dorak's page

"Dire" template - would give DMs a much bigger resource of monsters.

Also, could I beg someone to return the Hydra back into the indestructible foe it was in mythology?

It just feels odd that a bunch of 4th level fighters can just stab a hydra to death with spears. The 3.5 Hydra is not intimidating anymore.

What edition of D&D do you currently expect to be playing at the end of 2008?

(Note: You may change your vote at any time!)

As a DM I have almost all the 3rd Edition books. Honestly, when I bought them I expected to be using them for years to come, that is why I invested in them. So I will keep using them.

I will try 4th, but even if it is great I will not give up 3rd until someone offers me fair value for my current library.

Wicht wrote:

My players have always looked forward to getting their iterative attacks and the math has never seemed that difficult.

I completely agree. It's never been that hard to do the math, and neither for crits, which seems to be another "too hard to calculate"-problem for pro-4E people (the funny thing is that most of the 4E "powers" seem to inflict 3 X die + modifiers damage anyway, so the formula for 3E crits is still used in the system).

I like that you get iterative attacks for choosing to use full-attack option. The combat mights be slightly faster and "mobile" in nature without them, but I still wouldn't want to get rid of them.

Funny thing is that despite wanting a change to iteratives, it has nothing to do with math. I mean really, every attack you subtract 5 from your last attack. If that is hard, our society is in trouble.

My vote for changing iteratives is to make them available for fighters, who have something special, and remove unneeded options for wizards (who are the ones who end up missing on second or third attacks).

Yeah, I agree that the main problem I had with THAC0 was the benchmark.

"Wait, you mean that the number I need to roll is what I need to hit a guy in magic full plate armor? WHA?"

So much easier in 3.0.

"So, I need to get a 10 to hit an average human with no armor? That means an untrained peasant has a 50% chance to hit another untrained peasant!"

No complaints over THAC0, it was the many different saving throws that were unnecessary.

Not at all, I think it was an excellent post. I would add to it that not only game theme changes over time, but also game design itself. In other words, what is "fun" or "boring" at any given time does not exist in a vacuum either.

It has been said that Blizzard really doesn't invent things, but instead integrates and refines what other people have created. I would say that these refinements are worthy in their own right as being looked at as creativity. Whatever the case, changes made over the years by video game designers have worked their way in, with an extreme emphasis on class balance and reducing the likelihood of character loss as two examples that come to mind. But before there were video games, there were still a lot of influences that made the definition of interesting and boring shift over time.

All this by way of saying that some of the elements that add the most fun for some people are an irritation and hindrance to others, because people play games for different reasons. What to Eileen is an interesting puzzle to sort out in the game rules feels like getting bogged down to someone else. And they're both right. The posts I find least pleasant from both people who like 3.5 and those who like 4e are the ones that suggest that anyone who feels differently is somehow mentally lacking.

I wholeheartedly agree. The people designing 4ed. are obviously capable and intelligent enough to get where they are in a small industry - and just like anything else in life, you get out of it what you put into it. That is why I title the thread with "feel" not "intelligence" or "inferiority". The debate is as old as time - as society changes, what do we hold on to and what to we let go?

The nice thing about D&D is that books never go out of date - generations from now people can still play 3.5, or even Chainmail if that is "D&D" to them. Regardless of the evolution of the game, if 4th Edition manages to make even one person interested in Conan or Lord of the Rings or The Wheel of Time, etc, then I call it even.

Now, if D&D ever goes completely ethereal, it could be lost to the ages...

Le schtroumphf in europe.

And apparently, also here in Canada in Quebec.

Thanks Jal, Trey, Eileen and Chris, I found your posts thoughtful insights, each from a different angle, and I tend to agree with them all. Though 4E may yet surprise me once I read it, your posts reflect my current feelings.

As for the 15 minute work day, I agree with Timothy's experience. But it does depend on the type of adventure you're playing, and how it is written/structured/presented.

15 minute work days don't work too well in a dungeon crawl where monsters rush at you from every door you open. However, an adventure in which encounters are broken up into more digestable bites, such as the first few scenes of Burnt Offerings or Edge of Anarchy, brief encounters or missions occurring naturally over a period of days, the 15 minute work day isn't a problem at all.

Granted, this means one style of adventure is more workable under a 15 minute work day than another, but a good workman never blames his tools. I think Paizo's adventures do a better job than most of working within the confines of the game.

I have had a similar experience. With some guidance, any player can make a wizard useful all day without at-will spells. But some adventures work better with 3.X than others.

Dungeon crawls literally take forever, because you never seem to move anywhere as you get bogged down (but then again, Tomb of Horrors took forever too). I ran two Red Hand of Doom campaigns, and they flew by because all the resting was done during travel times between encounters. 3.X seems to lend itself more to a LotR-style epic adventure.

As to other posts, it seems more than a few others have been feeling the same thing. It does seem most of the "feel" of 4th Edition is a result of marketing. As I posted, I will try before I buy. But it took me until 3.5 to realize it was a stable property and start buying thousands of dollars of books and minis. If Hasbro keeps releasing new editions every 5 years I will stop buying from them, I just can't afford it.

So I question the marketing at Hasbro: you gamble my $100/month of guaranteed steady sales for the chance that 1 new person will buy the core books for 4th Edition every month for the next 10 years? I know, other variables are in play, but at the simplest level this is what they NEED in order to maintain profits.

I think I have finally pinpointed the hesitancy I have to 4th Edition. I was initially curious, but slowly disenchanted as more information has been released.

As representatives of 4th Ed. have stated, they wanted to make the rules clean and effortless for the players. I think this is the problem.

When Gygax (RIP) and Arneson created what eventually became D&D they created a game to fulfill a role (ie. "let's simulate a medieval setting focused on combat, what rules do we need...what if magic is involved...what if someone does X or Y..."). The end result was a series of oddball rules designed to serve an open-ended purpose so that players could try to do anything and eventually live another life in another world (I liken this to codified rules to children's pretend games). I felt 3.X was an improvement on this. This is a design-down philosophy, in which the goal - anything is possible - is set first and then the method devised. The rules exist to keep everything fair and consistent, to manage expected outcomes and ensure everyone has fun regardless of their choices in game.

4th Edition seems (from the designers admission) to have been a design-up philosophy (make up good rules, then watch the outcome). Sure it might be the best game ever made, it might be balanced, fast and easy and never confuse anyone, and it might, just might, be really fun to play...

But if I want to play a well-planned game, I can play chess. In chess the rules come first, there is no extraneous result. This is why I feel 4th Ed. does not "feel" like D&D, because it was not planned as D&D, it was planned as a game.

Agree? Disagree?

It is already easy to do a more peaceful cleric. Just because the class HAS heavy armour proficency doesn't mean you HAVE to wear heavy armour. The cleric already has access to 9th level spells as well, so just doing one as a standard caster is pretty easy. Hell, I once played a game with a priest of Mystra, and for the most part, all the other players thought my character was actually a wizard.

You also need to remember that D'n'D is a team orientated game, so it may become a bit of a problem when you have a peaceful cleric who stands back and does nothing when the party have to hold off a handful of encounters.

Not choosing to use class options is fine to create a character, but the problem is that clerics are "balanced" with wizards by giving them combat abilities in return for a less offensive spell list/less spells per day.

While we're on the subject of attacks, I'd like to see a little more love given to the two-handed fighting style in Pathfinder RPG. It just seems with 3.5 that all fighter types walk around with a two-handed weapon because they get the max Str adj to dmg with none of the penalties associated with two weapon fighting. Even with a light off-hand weapon and the two-weapon fighting feat you're -2 (or -10%) on every attack - the best case scenario. Maybe having Dex offset these penalties like in 1e/2e is a possibility, or allowing full Str mod to dmg on both weapons to give it an advantage over a two-handed weapon to justify the associated penalties?

Or just make Weapon Finesse available to any character at 1st level.

Oh, and I vote to get rid of iterative attacks, but make a feat that lets players get iterative attacks if they want them. That way the useless wizard/rogue BAB is not wasted on iterative attacks.

Blue_eyed_paladin wrote:

I have a (somewhat radical) idea...

What about if there are staged successes for attack rolls, like there are for Combat Maneuvers. If you hit by 10 or more over the DC, you cause an extra amount equal to (base weapon damage). By 20 or more, +2x(base weapon damage). It means fighter's aren't stuck there slugging things out with massive-AC foes forever, trying to chip down their hit points 2d6+10 at a time while the wizard laughs and goes "touch attack, 8d6. ranged touch attack, 11d6. Reflex save, 15d6".

The fighter is good at combat. The rogue has an 'always-on' class ability that lets them use buckets of dice nearly every round (if they play their tactics right)... why not let the fighter do more than just pure math... give them a chance to really shine and get out there.

Yeah, the rogue might hit for 1d3+35d6 sneak attack, but the fighter's carving through armour plates for critical blows once or twice a round. It would make the melee classes more valuable than just speedbumps.

Just a thought.

I find interesting the idea of 'if you hit by 10 or more' then a bonus to the attack of some sort kicks in.... what about 'free' sunder, disarm or trip attempts (with no danger of comebacks for the attacker) if they hit by that much, as alternatives to extra damage? You don't just *hurt* your target; you threaten to maybe carve into their shield, flick their weapon from their grasp, or send them sprawling on the ground?

I really like this idea. I requires little to no tinkering of the 3.5 rules (only a new rule for fighters) and is 100% backwards compatible. In other words, any 3.X Fighter can be played as is, but now gets cool bonuses if he beats the opponents AC by a certain amount.

This could go one step further, and introduce a sort of 3 stage system for each Weapon Group.

Example:

Weapon Focus (Heavy Blades)
If you beat an opponents AC with a melee attack while wielding a Heavy Blade (or a specific Heavy Blade if using 3.X rules) then you gain the benefit of one of the following:
5+ your opponent must make a fort save against a DC of the damage dealt or be dazed for 1 round.
10+ you may make an extra attack at your current attack bonus, but you also take a -2 penalty to AC for one round.
15+ you may make a free bull rush attempt on your opponent.

Etc for each Group.

Definitely worth the $120 (Canadian) I spent on this. Keep playing, once at least one person in your group gets a grasp on the rules the game clicks and you get to discover all its unique random goodness.

I mean, each BBEG and each Investigator makes the game different, and then you have the random nature of the game progression. There are so many strategies, and sometimes you have to switch-up mid-game...

I recommend starting the game using Azathoth. You lose if he appears, but he has little effect in game and takes a long time to appear, so you get to learn the rules of the game in a good long session.

There is an inclination in D&D to give any divine class a warrior-mentality because divine casters can wear armor (see Paladin, Cleric, Favored Soul).

I would love a new Priest class that has stronger casting ability and less combat prowess. Something like:

HD: d6
BAB: Low
Good Saves: Will
Skill Points: 4+Int
Magic Bonus Feats (Similar to Wizard)
Spells Known: as Cleric
Spells/Day: more than Cleric (no domains)

I know Unearthed Arcana has the Cloistered Cleric variant, but I think a few other abilities are needed to fill this role (namely, a divine magic powerhouse).

A big trend in these Alpha boards is a surge of armchair designers offering up their own rulesets and tweaks. In their zeal to display their creativity they are missing what Paizo has asked of us.

We are being asked to playtest and comment on the contents of Alpha 1. The fact that we are now asked to reference page numbers from the download is evidence that Paizo is trying to weed through the inundation of "helpful" suggestions to get at the meat of what we've been asked.

Posters to these boards - if they want to actually make a difference - should focus on the task at hand. We weren't asked to rewrite Jason's stuff, we're asked to test it and comment on it.

I agree, Paizo could make things easier for Jason by giving us a seperate forum for "upcoming suggestions" and/or "new rules ideas", and reserve comments on the Alpha document specifics in here.

Including options in the final release (or an Arcana release) is fine, but the thing is that a common rule must exist in order to produce adventures, otherwise each adventure has to be balanced with each option in mind.

Not sure if this has come up in other threads, but...

Are there any plans or community demands for collections of the Pathfinder Adventure Paths, similar to Shackled City?

I am hesitant to purchase the individual adventure books if a collection is in the works. I would pay the same money for a collection as for all the books, I just prefer a single campaign book.

Jal Dorak wrote:

Monk
Big fan of the monk fighting styles from Unearthed Arcana.

Me too. This is something I'm for-sure going to bug Jason to do. :)

Also, new ranger styles are a must in my book. :)

Yay! Feedback is awesome. I have never considered Ranger styles, what sorts of things do people employ in this area?

Jal Dorak wrote:

Druid

Have the druid choose animal companion or wild shape. Make both better and wild shape available earlier. Far less book-keeping and more personalized.

Druids really don't need any more power. If anything I hope they get powered down a bit, they should probably get intermediate fort saves, not good. I will also say I like the PHII variant, but it can be abused with PrCs like war shaper.

I agree they don't need more power. I do think that players should have the option to choose either an animal companion that improves more as the druid levels in place of wildshape.

Also, I agree that wildshape is overpowered using the standard 3.X shapechange rules. But I do think that if they give up their animal companion, druids should wildshape earlier and more often.

I humbly present my own houserule core class, the Negotiator:

NEGOTIATOR
Sometimes troubles can not be solved by force of arms alone. In these situations, kings, generals and priests may call upon the services of a negotiator. Negotiators might be part of a police force, a trusted advisor to the king, or a village chieftain. Their powers can be used to bring troubled people together – or to fiendishly drive friends apart. An adventuring negotiator may also refer to himself as a communicator, a go-between, or a strategist.
Adventures: Most negotiators seek out the ills of the world to set them right. Perhaps they have been sent on a quest by their lord or their subjects. In a few evil cases, they are out to create chaos. A negotiator will almost always travel with others, for their comforting presence if nothing else.
Characteristics: Negotiators are not capable warriors. Although they study with simple weapons in order to protect themselves in an emergency, they aim to prevent this from happening. Negotiators rely on either their ability to know their targets, or to make good use of their charismatic presence.
Alignment: Negotiators must maintain some level-headedness during sessions. As such, they must be neutral on one or more axis. For example, although many are good-aligned, and even more are lawful, no negotiator may ever combine the two.
Religion: Negotiators usually seek to avoid the complications of religion in their lives – but they certainly understand its usefulness. In rare cases, a negotiator might take up worship of an aspect of wood or water.
Background: Being a negotiator is a bit like being a rogue. In many cases, extensive training has been undertaken in order to perfect the craft. But some come by it naturally. For those who study, enrollment is usually in some type of government or military academy.
Races: Forest elves make the best negotiators; their level-headed outlook provides them the impetus to take up the class, and the skills to succeed. Aquatic elves have also been known to be successful. An occasional halfling picks up the trade out of concern for the community. Dwarves are far too rigid, gnomes are more interested in enjoyment, and bastion elves are simply not well received.
Other classes: Negotiators get along best with other classes that are open-minded and natural. Druids, sorcerers, rogues and bards are often great companions of negotiators. Classes that focus on combat, such as rangers or fighters, are often disdained by negotiators. Monks, paladins and wizards are too inflexible to cooperate well with negotiators.
Role: The negotiator disarms situations before they devolve into combat. They get the party into secure areas, and out of inescapable situations. They often require the backup of at least one combat-oriented class.
Game Rule Information
Negotiators have the following game statistics.
Abilities: Wisdom is the most important for negotiators who take the Assessment path. Charisma is likewise necessary for the Forceful path. A good Intelligence score helps with important class skills. Dexterity might help the negotiator avoid dangerous situations.
Alignment: Any neutral.
Hit Die: d6
Starting Gold: 5d4 x 10 gp

Class Skills
The negotiators class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are: Bluff (Cha), Decipher Script (Int), Gather Information (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Knowledge (Warfare), Listen (Wis), Perform (Cha), Ride (Str), Sense Motive (Wis), Speak Language (not relevant), Spot (Wis).
Skill Points at 1st Level: (6 + Int modifier) x 4
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 6 + Int modifier

Lev BAB Fort Ref Will Special

1st +0 +0 +0 +2 Path +2, negotiate on the run
2nd +1 +0 +0 +3 Initiative, language
3rd +1 +1 +1 +3 Mental deftness
4th +2 +1 +1 +4 Silk tongue
5th +2 +1 +1 +4 Path +4
6th +3 +2 +2 +5 Presence +2
7th +3 +2 +2 +5 Language
8th +4 +2 +2 +6 Prediction, silk tongue 2/day
9th +4 +3 +3 +6 Mental balance
10th +5 +3 +3 +7 Path specialty
11th +5 +3 +3 +7 Path +6
12th +6/+1 +4 +4 +8 Language, silk tongue 3/day
13th +6/+1 +4 +4 +8 Leadership
14th +7/+2 +4 +4 +9 Presence +4
15th +7/+2 +5 +5 +9 Path mastery
16th +8/+3 +5 +5 +10
17th +8/+3 +5 +5 +10 Language
18th +9/+4 +6 +6 +11 Path +8
19th +9/+4 +6 +6 +11
20th +10/+5 +6 +6 +12 Mental perfection

Class Features
All of the following are class features of the negotiator.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A negotiator is proficient with basic weapons plus 1 other group. They can wear light and medium armor but not shields.
Path (Ex): At first level the negotiator chooses his path, either assessment or forceful. Once the choice is made it can not be changed. The path represents the negotiator’s tactics and techniques. The following applies to the respective path:
Assessment Path: The negotiator has chosen to use standard diplomacy tactics. Diplomacy becomes the negotiators key skill as applying to his other path abilities. The negotiator adds Knowledge (Geography), Knowledge (History), Knowledge (Local), Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty) and Knowledge (Religion) to his list of class skills.
At first level, the negotiator receives a +2 competence bonus to checks involving Diplomacy, Gather Information, Listen, and Sense Motive. This bonus increases to +4 at 5th level.
Specialty (Su): At 10th level as a free action the negotiator can use discern lies at will as a supernatural ability. The caster level is the negotiator level. The save DC is equal to 10 + ½ negotiator level + Charisma bonus.
Mastery (Ex): At 15th level the negotiator is close to the pinnacle of his craft. He can make Diplomacy checks as a full-round action without any penalty normally applied for doing so. In addition, while attempting any diplomacy check the negotiator may also attempt a simultaneous Sense Motive check.
Forceful Path: The negotiator has chosen to berate his opponents into submission. Intimidate becomes the negotiators key skill as applying to his other path abilities. The negotiator adds Disguise, Forgery, Hide, Intimidate, Move Silently, and Sleight of Hand to his list of class skills.
At first level, the negotiator receives a +2 competence bonus to checks involving Bluff, Forgery, Intimidate and Sleight of Hand. This bonus increases to +4 at 5th level.
Specialty (Su): At 10th level the negotiator can use command at will as a supernatural ability. The caster level is the negotiator level. The save DC is equal to 10 + ½ negotiator level + Charisma bonus.
Mastery (Ex): At 15th level the negotiator is so familiar with demoralizing opponents he now ignores the opponents size when determining penalties for Intimidate checks. Bonuses from the negotiator’s size still count. In addition, normal Intimidate checks may be attempted as a full-round action.
Negotiate on the Run (Ex): The negotiator may attempt their preferred path of negotiation on a single creature as a free action during a move action. Doing so applies a -5 penalty on the check for the hurried attempt, in addition to any other penalties applied for rushing these checks.
Language: At 2nd level the negotiator has studied enough foes to have learned an additional language. This language can be selected from any monstrous foe such as Slaadi, and may also be Druidic. An additional language is learned at 7th, 12th, and 17th level.
Initiative: The negotiator is aware of any moves his opponents may make. The negotiator gains the Uncanny Dodge ability at 2nd level and a +2 bonus to all initiative checks.
Silk Tongue (Ex): Once per day after reaching 4th level, the negotiator can choose to re-roll any Diplomacy or Intimidate check (as per chosen path). The negotiator can choose the higher of the rolls. This ability can be used 2/day upon reaching 8th level, and 3/day after reaching 12th level.
Presence (Su): At 6th level the negotiator is an identifiable sight on the battlefield. All allies within line of sight to the negotiator receive a +4 morale bonus on saves against fear or compulsion effects. This bonus increases to +8 at 14th level. The negotiator must be conscious for this ability to work.
Mental Deftness (Ex): At 3rd level the negotiator has become so skilled at his craft that, unless willing, he can not be influenced by any checks made using Diplomacy or Intimidate. This immunity is lost if the creature attempting the check is a negotiator at least 2 levels higher than the target negotiator.
Prediction (Ex): At 8th level the negotiator has become very aware of his opponents. He can no longer be flanked by opponents unless they are at least 4 levels higher than the negotiator in a class with a similar ability. This ability functions like Improved Uncanny Dodge.
Mental Balance (Su): At 9th level the negotiator has become so accustomed to being neutral that he is no longer in danger of going astray. He is immune to any magical effects that would otherwise change his alignment. He is also under an effect similar to a phylactery of faithfulness. If the negotiator takes a standard action to question whether his action will affect his alignment, he will know as such.
Leadership: At 13th level the negotiator receives the leadership feat for free. If he already has this feat he may choose any other feat he meets prerequisites for.
Mental Perfection (Su): The negotiator is the pinnacle of understanding and reasoning. His mind is so attuned to its own workings that he is no longer subject to many effects. The negotiator gains immunity to any mind-affecting effect. In addition, the negotiator is under the constant effect of the comprehend languages spell, but the negotiator does not have to touch the person or object.

Ex-Negotiators
A negotiator who ceases to be neutral on at least one axis loses all class abilities except weapon proficiencies. The negotiator must return to a neutral alignment and then perform a personal penance requiring 200gp in materials and one week of reflection. After this time all class features are restored.

Good discussion on the Fighter. I have three simple suggestions:

1) A fighter bonus feat every level.

2) More fighter bonus feats, like the PHB II.

3) 4 + Int bonus trained skills.

I was toying with this idea the last week. I think it would be fair if fighters retained their normal bonus feats, and at other levels they got a non-fighter bonus feat. That would give players of fighters room to take interesting feats or shore up holes with Iron Will and such...plus, the new feats cannot be fighter feats which means no min/maxing.

Another Suggestion:

Other classes get unique abilities, such as Ninja Ki, or Turn Attempts. Why not make fighters the only class that has Weapon Proficiency Slots (I'm talking AD&D style)!!!

Jal Dorak wrote:

A few ideas about where to go from here:

Barbarian
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but give them d10 HD and some form of bonus hp/level system.

Sorry, but what the diff? So what if they get a D12? If you give them bonuses via class, then they will probably just end up tougher any way. Seriously D12 isn't really a problem.

My observation is not really about the d12 per se, but the fact that in Pathfinder every class has its HD tied to BAB except the barbarian. I think it would streamline things, and I would rather gave extra hp than damage reduction anyway.

The more feedback Paizo gets the better.

Complicated cover is unnecessary.

I agree the system does need a bit more detail (more l ike 3rd Ed and less like 3.5). Many of the suggestions here have been good, such as using a rule for degrees of cover.

Cover
For every square of cover on a side with your attacker, +2 AC and +1 reflex saves. This way a giant behind a wall with a human gets less of a benefit from the cover.

It has little to do with the attacker. Simply look at the line along the relevant side of a creature and add up the size of the intersecting object.

I have played campaigns with both (auto-crit and threats) and I personally find the following:

Threats are more balanced.

Because something like a Grell or a Dragon could attack you 8 times in one round, they will invariably roll more threats than a 20th level fighter. By using threats, there is a chance some of those will be eliminated.

Auto-Crits are way more fun/

Seriously, players love rolling critical hits, and there is nothing worse than losing a crit to a shoddy confirmation roll.

My general crit rule is an attempt to comprimise:

1. 20 is an auto-hit and auto-crit.
Larger threat range is an auto-crit if it hits.
2. Roll weapon damage once and multiply by weapons crit multiplier.
3. Any damage bonus (such as Str) is not multiplied.

The result is that the warriors crits are more impressive, as they tend to use better martial weapons, and a monster crit on a player is less of an impact (because the hill giants 2d8+10 does not become 4d8+20). The odds say the average damage from a crit increases, but the maximum damage is lessened, which is what I want from a crit.

I tried switching back to the normal crit rules and EVERY person in my group complained!

A few ideas about where to go from here:

Barbarian
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but give them d10 HD and some form of bonus hp/level system.

Bard
Simplify bardsong or make some of its features more powerful. I would say the biggest sticking point is the whole "singing in combat" deal.

Bardsong You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to your bard level and when not engaged in other activity, doing so requires 10 minutes. When engaging in combat, the bard can choose to activate the effects of bardsong on any allies that were present at the preperation. Etc, etc...

Druid
Have the druid choose animal companion or wild shape. Make both better and wild shape available earlier. Far less book-keeping and more personalized.

Monk
Big fan of the monk fighting styles from Unearthed Arcana.

Paladin
A holy warrior should have good will saves! Give Paladin's good will saves! Never liked the flavour of mounts, would not miss them.

Sorcerer
A sorcerer is already hindered by spells known, no specialization, and metamagic casting time: give them a wizards spell progression. Getting 2nd level spells at level 4 is unfair...according to the rules, my 3rd level sorcerer has 5 magic missiles per day and I may realistically expect to fight a CR 5 creature?

Keep up the great work!

While I don't think this fighter is yet balanced with spellcasters, they are an improvement (and definitely better than an anime-style uber-fighter with supernatural powers).

Fighters should be grounded in reality, just really really amazing.

I think fighters should get to do more awesome types of maneuvers based on their weapon specialities, just a like a specialist wizard. These would just be special attacks that have a secondary effect.

For example, a Level 1 blades specialist might do a single slash that can also disarm, and by level 20 can attempt to slice his opponents throat so they die in 3 rounds!

Hurray for Paizo!

Like many people, I am getting the unnerving sensation that 4th edition just "isn't D&D".

I showed the Pathfinder Alpha to some of my gaming group last night, and they agree: this is a stroke of genius!

Not only do we get to keep using our vast stock of 3.5 material, we get new material to add, and great fixes to many common problems!

Thanks, team!

A few thoughts about what I see so far (and I like it):

General Comments: (Races, Alpha Release, p. 4-7)

I love how each racial ability has a name now! I always have to come up with names for things when making characters or describing them. Now I can just write "Hatred" on my dwarfs character sheet and be done. Not sure how the Racial Favored Class (p.7) works, is it within your hit die, or a bonus on top like Con? For example, can a dwarf fighter with 10 Con get 11 hp per fighter level?

I would perhaps standardize base speed as 30ft and only put this line in if it is relevant.

Overall, like the new ability modifiers and weapon proficiencies.

Dwarf:

Like grouping related abilities together.

Elf:

Not sure about the "instant attitude adjustment". Perhaps a bonus to diplomacy/bluff checks would be more reasonable?

Gnome:

Yay, Charisma bonus! It makes sense for this race. Not sure if the Hatred really fits with the new gnome anymore.

Half-Elf:

Nice balance between human/elf, very close to a house rule I once used. I think choosing any ability bonus diminishes the special feel of humans. Maybe limit to anything but Str or Con?

Half-Orc:

Good minor addition in the Ferocity and weapon usage. A much stronger outing. I would suggest +2 Str and +2 Con. I know, too awesome for a fighter-type, but isn't the halfling is too awesome for rogues?

Humans:

Tweaked the skill bonus, but this is balanced by more ability bonus. If anyone wants the old human+, just take +2 Int!

Classes (Alpha Release, p. 8-19)

HD changes (p.18): Wasn't sure at first, but I like the tie to BAB. However, rather than create an exception for barbarians, why not just give them d10 HD and a class ability:

Barbarian Vigor: Barbarians are tougher than most folks due to their harsh lifestyle and environment. They gain +1 hp/level in addition to all other bonuses. At fourth level, and every 3 levels thereafter (7th, 10th, 13th, 16th, 19th) this bonus increases by +1 hp, so that at 13th level that barbarian now gains +5 hp/level.

Cleric:

Hurray! Clerics know how to use their deities favored weapon! Also enjoy the increasing domain powers. At-will orisons, not overpowered, but game enhancing. PLEASE PUT TURN UNDEAD RULES IN THE CLERIC SECTION!

Fighter:

Not just trained to attack, but avoids the class defense bonus. Nice work. Weapon groups are my favorite house rule, and now fighters don't have to waste a feat on Weapon Focus...and it scales! At 20th level, it would be nice to have the option of either increased threat range or multiplier.

Rogue:

Changing sneak attack is nice, but how does the awesome crit-master-fighter feel about this? May want to have different DCs for Master Strike. But I do like the talents (even the magic ones).

Wizard:

Bonded objects are a nice change for those who dislike familiars. Again, at-will 0th level is great (unlike 4th edition at-will magic missile, which is just...world breaking). YES! Love the new powers for specialization, no "penalty" but good benefits compared to a paltry +2 to learn spells.

Thanks for the chance to provide feedback! I will be making the switch to Pathfinder!