|
|
|
 Recent posts by
Jason Bulmahn:
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Mortika wrote:
Let me ask a question, because I think the answer is an important facet to the Oracle class. The gods use their churches among the mortal races as their agents, furthering their will and advancing their causes. They empower clerics with supernatural powers to guide the churches in the gods' ways and to assist them in their missions.
To what purpose do the gods empower Oracles?
I'm not looking for any responses like "Nobody knows; it's a great enigma." I'm not asking what the residents of Golarion understand about the gods' purposes. I'm asking the Lead Designer as a member of his playtesting team: what do the gods want with these guys?
Oracles are not directly empowered by the gods themselves at all. The gods contribute their divine power to certain ideals (part of their portfolio). In some cases the gods have interests that overlap with each other, even if they do not share a similar view about how that ideal should be put forward or advanced. In any case, the ideal itself can manifest through mortals that have some link to it, either through a strange omen at their birth, the divine event, or some other reason. In this case, these mortals become a conduit for the divine power that fuels that ideal, becoming oracles.
The gods themselves have an odd relationship with the oracles. They cannot control them or dictate whether or not they get their powers, but the gods vie to sway them to their view of the ideal. The oracles on the other hand, are trapped in the middle, trying to understand why they have this power and making sense of the ideal that provides the strange powers that they possess.
I hope that makes some sense..
This is how I see their powers working. How this is tied to Golarion, I will let the folks who spend all day on that side of the wall answer.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lastknightleft wrote:
So I have a player in my game who is a sorcerer 4/Oracle 2 and has gone with the flame foci and the lame curse. By my reading of the oracle, the curse and the revelations he already has are based off of total level (only the saves seem to be based off of oracle level). So an he has immunity to fatigue and if he has fire breath he deals 6d4 with a save of (+3 Cha) 14. Just wanted to make sure that was intentional.
I do think that it is good though because it makes an oracle decent when multiclassed the curse especially can't be based off of Oracle level, that would instantly kill any multi-classing so well done.
The player was a bit disappointed because he originally had favored soul levels so his saves took a massive hit. But he does like the Burning magic revalation which is the one he ultimately chose. Unfortunately they had suffered heavily from disease so we didn't get to any combat this session, roleplaying the reactions of the greatful populace.
Unless otherwise noted, class abilities are based off levels in that class. This is discussed on page 31 of the core rulebook, in the last paragraph of the Multiclassing section.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let me address a few issues here...
1. The fact that the cavalier and the paladin both have "target the leader" abilities is not really all that unusual. As has been mentioned here, nearly every class can take that mentality. Changing the class to focus on "holding off minions" is not really the way that I would like to see this class go. I think that too is a role that most players fill at one time or another. Taking away the capability to take on a big foe really pulls a lot of life and interest from the class.
2. I like a number of the names for the mechanic that have been presented here. I am not going to mention a favorite just yet, but feel free to continue the debate.
3. I am not so worried about the bad guys running just because they are challenged. There are plenty of other abilities and spells that should trigger the same response, but they rarely do. Bag guys, in general are there to fight. I am possibly interested in abilities that keep the bad guy "glued" to the cavalier, but that is some tricky ground to tread. Especially since the cavalier is not based in magic in any way.
Thoughts.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mdt wrote:
The problem I have with it Jason is you are violating your own stated aims with this :
Cavalier wrote:
Demanding Challenge (Ex): At 12th level, whenever a cavalier declares a challenge, his target must pay attention to the threat he poses. As long as the target can see the cavalier, it takes a –2 penalty to its AC from attacks made by anyone other than the cavalier. This penalty does not apply if the cavalier is within the target’s threatened area.
Here you are forcing something off the cavalier and onto the target, which you stated above you didn't want to do. I prefer your stated aim over what actually ended up in the...
Yeah... and I have reservations about that specific ability. It was very close to being cut from the playtest version, specifically for the reasons cited. I left it in to float the concept of challenges that affect the foe. My reasoning here is that at that level, the cavalier's challenge can not be so simply ignored...
I am still not comfortable with the concept. Lets not toss the whole idea because of one violation of concept... after all. My keyboard has a delete key... a well used delete key, let me tell you.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can'tFindthePath wrote:
I really wish Jason would clarify this, but it seems to me that the intention is for the "flanked" condition to apply only when the cavalier is engaged in melee with his challenge target. After all, you only get your bonuses against the target in melee, and it makes sense that you focus completely only when you are getting the bonuses. Also, this would solve the issue of the Challenge "not ending".
Cheers
The flanking part starts the moment the cavalier declares his challenge. There are currently a fair number of concerns about this, but as of yet, I am not seeing a lot of playtest feedback, just hypotheticals and conjecture. Give it a try and let me know.
I am open to general feedback, but I do not think I am going to move on this until I get some actual play experience.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey there all,
So, there seems to be a bit of confusion over the flavor behind the challenge mechanic... so let me take a moment to make the intent clear.
Leave aside the name challenge for a moment. The point of this ability is that the cavalier picks a foe and dedicates all of his focus to bringing that foe down. He does this by studying where best to strike and how to inflict the most deadly wounds possible. This has little or nothing to do with the foe being cognizant of the challenge itself. It is all about the cavalier and his drive to bring the foe down.
This was done for a few reasons. Having it tied to the foes reaction limited the ability way too much and forced certain assumptions on the foe that I am not comfortable with in absence of magic (which the cavalier does not possess in any way). Such taunting mechanics or marking mechanics are not something I am overly fond of, as it takes forces certain behaviors in a monster that might not make sense.
So.. with this in mind... we end up with the ability as currently written. The orders affect this by giving a small spin on the way that the ability manifests, but it is still the same at its core.
As for comparison to the other classes. Every melee class needs a chance to shine at one time or another. The paladin has his smite, the ranger has his favored enemies, the barbarian has rage, and the fighter acts as a sort of improved base line. The point with the cavalier was to give him a chance to peg targets that the others have limited effectiveness against by allowing him to go after the foes that the others cannot adequately take on. That is not to say there will not be overlap at times, but I think the cavalier is doing a pretty decent job, as currently written, of filling this role. Flexibility in targets is key. His damage pegs a little lower than a others in some situations, but overall he can take a "shine" in a number of situations.
So.. I am a little concerned that the name "challenge" might be giving the wrong impression, but I think the mechanics are heading in the right direction.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Couple of things here..
1. I do listen to all of the feedback. That is why we are doing a playtest.
2. The cavalier will not be made into a Pclass. We are well beyond the point where that change is even possible. Not that it is desired.
3. The cavalier mount abilities are a bit extra on top of the class. I well realize that they will not be useful most of the time, and swapping them out with something else goes against the very name of the class.
4. The niche...
This really depends on the order taken, but generally speaking, the cavalier is meant to be a melee character with a stronger focus on group boosting, battlefield control, and social interactions. This is not a niche that the any of the core melee focus classes do particularly well. Mind you, the focus here really does depend on the order as these abilities do make up a lot of its niche.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jigg wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
If it doesnt list language dependent that I would say no, after all most battlecries are not language dependant, they are rarely language. Something loud and gutteral normally suffices.
That's what I was thinking, but I wanted a second opinion on the matter.
Thanks for the response!
How about mine?
If it does not say language dependent, then it does not require the targets to understand the user.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shade325 wrote:
Wings of Air (Su): "... You must be at least 5th level before selecting this revelation."
Am I the only one who sees that as weird. You only get revelations at 1st, 3rd, 7th, 11th... There is no revelation at 5th level so why say you must be at least 5th level.
The only reason I can see is that you must be at least 5th character level not oracle level. Is this true. Could a 2nd level paladin/3rd level oracle choose wings of air with his 3rd level revelation if he was 5th level total at the time?
Shade325
This is a mistake. It should be 7th...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleece66 wrote:
The Oracle's Battle Focus contains the Combat Healer ability that I think it needs some clarification to prevent potential abuse. It states that an oracle can cast any cure spell as a swift action by "expending two spell slots," but is unclear if this specifically means the slots must both be of the same level as the cure spell being attempted, or if, say, a high-level oracle can cast a quickened cure critical wounds by spending a 4th level slot and a 1st level slot for the same effect.
Is there a prior precedent for this sort of slot expenditure that I haven't run across in play yet? Unsure of the intention, I fear it could be taken advantage of as read, if that is in fact not the intention.
Great stuff. I REALLY like the cavalier a lot, and that sort of class isn't really my thing, so kudos for the best version of cavalier yet!
B.
That is two slots of the same level as the spell being cast.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
riatin wrote:
From the first read through without having playtested, my biggest question is about the Order of the Dragon challenge ability. From reading, most of the Order additional abilities are either activated by something the Cavalier or the target does (attacks another target, attacks the cavalier, etc). The only one from the list that can be completely negated by an enemy attack is the Order of the Dragon. There's no issue with the 'as long as he is the only creature threatening the target,' that's the Dragon's whole thing, personal glory. The question comes in where 'The bonus ends if the target of the challenge makes a successful melee attack against the cavalier' part. This seems to want make the fight a one on one type deal, but then the Dragon loses his bonus as soon as he's struck in melee, so he'd be lucky to keep his morale bonus on damage rolls for more than say one or two lucky rounds. It's a nice bonus to be sure, but being negated so easily would seem to me to make it mostly useless. Perhaps I'm missing something though.
This one was a bit of a balancing act. This is the only challenge bonus that adds even more damage to the additional damage dice, meaning that we wanted a way to limit it in some small way.
I am open to discussion on this though... but I would really like to get some playtest feedback before making any decisions.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jreyst wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
jreyst wrote:
Check it out here and then be sure to post your playtest results!
While I appreciate the ease of reference for this class, I would like to suggest that all of the playtesters download a copy. It is the only metric we have for tracking the number of playtesters.
Thanks
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I'd be fine with taking it down if you prefer.
If you could take them down temporarily that would be great. Give us a two week window (till the next set comes out, on Nov 30th) and then you can feel free to put them back up. If we could repeat this with each release, that would be fine by us.
Thanks
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jreyst wrote:
More nit-picking:
Cavalier wrote:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Cavaliers are proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with all armor (heavy, light, and medium) and shields (except tower shields).
while...
Paladin wrote:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Paladins are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, with all types of armor (heavy, medium, and light), and with shields (except tower shields).
So they are the same thing. Why not just copy and paste the exact same verbiage and be consistent? Saying the same words in a different order makes it look like its different.
And yes, I know, pretty nit-picky, but its this sort of little thing that bugs me lol
True... and being nit-picky during a playtest is ok. I will look at the language.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asgetrion wrote:
First of all... *GREAT* illustrations -- I think Wayne has "nailed" it once again! For some reason he seems to do his best pieces for Paizo... :)
Secondly, the only thing that bothered me (after a quick glance) was the Cavalier's 'Supreme Charge' ability -- why is the DC tied to BAB, rather than 10 + 1/2 x level plus STR or CON, or even CHA?
There are abilities that work out there that work off both formulas. We decided to go with the one in the document, but I am certainly open to debate...
The current one is better, generally speaking than the one that you suggest (unless you can get a Str above 30).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rugult wrote:
Skeld wrote:
That was the first thing i noticed too, "Melee attacks made against the cavalier, except those made by the target of his challenge, treat the cavalier as if he is f lanked." That seems like a huge potential boon to Rogues. I'd rather see it say foes other than the challenged get a +2 circumstance bonus to attacks made against the Cav, but to say treat as flanked is begging the Rogue to come over and kidney-stab the Cav. If nothing else, a parenthetical saying "treat as flanked (except with regard to the Rogue's Sneak Attack and similar abilities)" seems to be in order.
Beyond that I think not being able to turn off or redirect the challenge is an issue.
-Skeld
PS: I'm at work so none of my comments have any playtest behind them.
Mechanically I am in complete agreement with you. The potential for rogues to jump the Cavalier is way too high in the current rendition of the rules.
However, flavor wise I do believe the sneak attacking rogues really would be the bane of a Cavalier's life. After all, the Cavalier is basically a knight in shining armor, going off to challenge his enemies in noble combat... then along comes the sneak rogue to ruin his day. It almost seems too perfect to change! :D
Remember that the cavalier gets a full BAB, d10 hit dice, and a host of other abilities, all on top of the challenge mechanic, which gives bonus damage dice. The drawback mechanic was an important part of balancing this feature. I need to get some playtest feedback on this feature though, as this is one of the more powerful aspects of the class.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Draeke Raefel wrote:
The oracle does not gain eschew materials nor does it say that it does not need a divine focus to cast their spells. I assume this means that they need both. My problem is you could make the same argument for eschew materials for the oracle as has been made for the sorcerer. Not a big deal.
What I have more of an issue with is the divine focus. The oracle isn't supposed to worship any particular deity. Deities just give him his power and expect him to be a champion of their cause. Does that mean he has to use any holy symbol of a god that champions his focus or can he choose any other item that seems to hold some meaning for his focus? For example, a Battle Oracle using whatever weapon he happens to be holding or a Stone Oracle picking up some dirt or a piece of rock from the ground.
It seems that since they are being infused with and changed by the power of their focus, they themselves could serve as their divine focus...
I am thinking that the oracle class will probably get Eschew Materials as a bonus feat.
As for the divine focus needed for spellcasting, this is something I am still working on. I am thinking that it will be a symbol of the oracles focus, like an actual bone for the bones focus.
Thoughts
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ernest Mueller wrote:
The Cavalier's challenge ability (very nice by the way) - it doesn't say anything about the target needing to be intelligent, speak the cavalier's language, or anything like that, right, so you can challenge an armchair if you want? Just asking because similar powers in D&D in the past have specified that, and the word "challenge" and phrase "challenge a foe to combat" kinda implies it. If that's not the case, maybe a different word to denote the cavalier's focusing on the one target?
It is not, as of the current rules, language or intelligence dependent. You could not challenge a chair, since it is not a foe (but this language does need a bit of clarification). Besides, precision based damage is not going to do you much good against a chair.
The bonus damage here comes from a complete focus on harming the target of the challenge... not from some consequence of the target being yelled at by the cavalier. At least, that is the current intent. This is why the cavalier gets a penalty to its AC from other attackers.. he is focused on his challenge.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mach1.9pants wrote:
As these classes are no longer going for the backwards compatibility with these classes, why does the oracle use Cha for spellcasting? It annoys me no end that almost all spontaneous casters use charisma. It doesn't fit in with the fluff given, unlike Sorcerer. Divine casters use WIS, arcane INT but all spontaneous use CHA? Sorry think a bit out of the box; to me rather than having the willpower/strength of personality that Sorcerers have to battle the power within them Wisdom.. being sensitive and open to many different powers.. makes more sense.
Truth be told, I went back and forth on this issue myself. In the end, I decided it was better to have the class based on a different stat than the cleric (for the sake of diversity in divine casters, and to prevent a bit of stat stacking), but that left me with Int and Cha...
Int did not make much sense and Cha has always been used as a force of will and strength of spirit stat, making it a good fit for the oracle's flavor.
Thoughts.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
found one I think
Clouded Vision: Your eyes are obscured, making it
difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond
30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision. At 5th
level, this distance increases to 60 feet. At 10th level, you
gain blindsense out to a range of 30 feet. At 15th level, you
gain blindsight out to a range of 15 feet
That looks reversed
Nope, those are correct. At 15th level, you would have darkvision out to 60 ft, blindsense out to 30 ft, and blindsight out to 15 feet...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Bulmahn
(Lead Designer),
