|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Paizo Pathfinder® GameMastery® Planet Stories® Paizo Games | |||||||||||||||||||
| About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posts
 Recent Posts
You demand.. really? Lets just walk things back here a bit before folks start making demands. This is just a preview taken out of context. Lets all just calm down a bit. As has been pointed out, the need for level 0 spells starts to wane pretty fast, and even the level 1 spells become less attractive once you know five of them. I am not saying it is even necessarily, but its not a slam dunk either. Jason Bulmahn
I have to disagree with Bulmahn's comment that lower level spells don't increase the classes power. The big problem with the sorcerer is your spells known aren't always effective for the situation at hand. The more spells you can cover the more likely you are going to have an effective option. Well, let me rephrase here just a bit. It does increase the power, but not by the magnitude that some would imply. Being able to cast a useful spell in a situation is more powerful than not being able to, but most sorcerers gravitate toward spells that are useful in most situations anyway, so this just adds options to how they are useful. There is some power there, but it is not quite as good in reality as it is on paper. Better than +1 hp or +1 skill point.. possibly, depending on the situation. Folks need to calm it down a bit. We've got five more previews before launch and I cannot give you the whole picture, not by a long shot... Jason Bulmahn
This is exactly the same calculus we went through when balancing out these abilities. Its good, but its not quite a great in practice as it seems to be. Jason Bulmahn
The problem with this equation, and most arguments like this, is that you are assuming that toughness is on par with every other feat, which it is clearly not. Nor is Extra Spell a great feat. These sorts of comparisons certainly work to attempt to prove points, but they are often flawed, forcing me to go back to other metrics.. such as what is the actual impact on the game. In this case, an extra spell, of a level lower than your highest, added to your list of spells known, is not really all that unbalancing to the game. Thats about all there is to it. Jason Bulmahn
But having the lead designer say that publishing unbalanced material is no big deal because it can just be disallowed is another thing altogether. That is actually not at all what I said and I resent the mischaracterization. At the end of the day, balance is a matter of perspective. I have no issue at all with this favored class bonus. Is it good, yes, is it too good, no. You and your GM might disagree. You have my permission to do so. It is your game. I may have written it and developed it, but I cannot come and force you to play my way, nor would I want to. So, with that comes the permission to do with the game what you will. If you think it is too good, feel free to change it. That is what I am saying. I do not think it is broken. But, if you do, you can change it or outright disallow it. There is no way my idea of balanced is going to be the same as 50,000 other people. I have come to terms with that. Everyone else needs to as well. Jason Bulmahn
Possibly, but I think you are equating versatility with power, which is not always the case. A hit point or a skill point is a permanent increase to the power of your character. While it might not always come into play, it is something that will always be there for you. I think it is easy to look at this bonus and say "wow that is really good", but when you are making that decision one step at a time, the bonus becomes a little less significant. When you hit sixth level, you are much more excited about the third level spell you get, and a bit less about the extra 2nd level spell you can choose. In the end, it does not grant you any additional power, but it does grant you a little extra versatility. Handy to be sure, but not really as overpowered as some are making it out to be. Its a balancing act to be sure... Jason Bulmahn
And for people who say that the Sorcerer favored class bonus is equivalent to 20 feats (Extra spell), I would like to point out that the feat was not 3.5 Core but from a splatbook. Some people could know it, some people would allow it, but for those without the book (or with a GM who would not allow it), the ability is not worth 20 feats - since there are NO such feats. Unless I put a similar feat into this book.. one that was better than the relatively poor Extra Spell feat. Not saying anything.. just moving along...
This is wisdom. There are a lot of other abilities here. Some are a little better than others, but it is about versatility here. What you are getting is relatively small in the grand scheme of things. Jason Bulmahn
1. Correct. 2. Correct. I cut out a sentence that said just that just to keep the blog post short. 3. Correct. Jason Bulmahn
Hey there Everybody, Let me just dive right into the deep end here with the Human Sorcerer favored class bonus. Yes, it is an attractive choice. No, it is not really game breaking. Here's why. The sorcerer's main balance for his increased number of spells is two-fold. The first, and most important, is his staggered spell progression (he gets his higher level spells later). I cannot stress how large of a drawback this is. The second, is his limited spell selection. This is a lesser concern because it is easily overcome with items (scrolls, wands, staves, all make this a much smaller issue). When it came time to look at these class bonuses, this one did seem quite good, on paper. In reality, due to the staggered progression, you are, at best, getting a bit of extra variety, in a power level that is roughly 3 levels behind where the groups current power level is. That is valuable, to be sure, but it actually is only working to alleviate the second concern, while still living in the constraints of the first. Now, that said, you might not agree. If you are the GM, you are free to work with your group to allow or disallow anything in the game, from this class bonus right up to the ranger class if you want, but there are a lot of fun, new options in this book, and I hope you will take a look. Jason Bulmahn
No the picture on Jason's fanpage on facebook tells us what he's been doing all week... For those of you on the book of faces... Jason
Flexibility for one. If his eidolon is not suited for the encounter at hand, he can use his summons to get a creature that is more suitable. Second is death. If his eidolon dies, he cannot summon it again until the next day, but he can continue to use his summons to get useful creatures. Jason Bulmahn
Ahh, the delicious Antipaladin. Now, admittedly, he was 10th level, fighting a bunch of 3rd level PCs, but every single time I activated him, he killed at least 1 PC, sometimes 2.You killed seven of my Good-aligned characters in your events this year, yet allowed my traitorous character who grovelled at the feet of a demon to live. Coincidence? I think not. Its the way I roll.. Jason
Lets hope we get small spoilers once a week in the Blog. When I use to play CCGs the weeks leading up to the release and they would show like 1 card every week would have you back chompin at the bit and in that huge of a book they could put little spoilers all the time and wouldnt spoil the book. No worries, in the coming weeks, leading up to GenCon, there will be plenty of spoilers in the blog. Jason Bulmahn
Hey there Folks, Due to a small error, I am in need of one more volunteer to help run Fight Club on Friday, from noon till 5pm. You must be capable of running Pathfinder, possess a vast well of cruelty, and burn with the desire to deal pain to others. Apply to this thread and try to impress me with tales of your cruelty. One post per applicant please. I will pick an assistant on Monday. You will be rewarded. Jason Bulmahn
Alright, looks like I got too cute with the logic behind my explanation. Let me be clear... Glitterdust kills invisibility and all the rules that go with it.
That is all... (as it is currently worded). Jason Bulmahn
15 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
There is an incongruence btw the magic chapter and the grappled condition (and a few other spots). This will be cleared up, but the grappled condition wins out here. Jason Bulmahn
Glitterdust specifically mentions that it cancels invisibility, it says nothing of concealment. In this case, it cancels the specific effect (invisibility), which has the side effect of also canceling its result (concealment), but that is not a retroactive cancelation. If you catch my drift... (although, at the heart of the matter is the fact that glitterdust could use some clarification, it is a poorly worded spell) Jason Bulmahn
This is the sort of thing that is perfect for the FAQ, which will be starting up here on the boards very soon. Jason Bulmahn
Would it be an issue for any of the Paizo Pathfinder crew to sign a few Pathfinder RPGs? I would love to get a few signatures in my first (still pristine) copy however, I do not want to cause an issue at the con nor breech etiquette. At Paizocon? Yeah, track us down and we will be happy to sign books for you. Jason Bulmahn
(may have just opened Pandora's Box... )
It is a combination of problems, but the biggest is that there was a time crunch right when the third printing came onto the schedule. That is a problem we are looking to address is a more measured stance now. This problem will be corrected. The FAQ is a big step, but there are others happening behind the scenes to make sure we take advantage of all of the great feedback we have gotten over the past 10 months. Jason Bulmahn
Still Spell is really only useful for situations where you do not have one hand to devote to spellcasting, such as when you are pinned. You can attempt to cast a spell when grappled, and you must make a concentration check to cast it (whether or not the spell has a Somatic component). Still spell is also handy for casters who intend to wield weapons or shields quite frequently. Jason Bulmahn
Hey there Folks, The text for Glitterdust does not make any mention of concealment at all, meaning that is has no effect on such affects (regardless of what the spell effect itself might indicate as logical). Little logic inconsistencies like this are the price of doing business within an incredibly complex system attempting to mimic reality (to some extent). Hope that clears things up Jason Bulmahn
DR does not negate sneak attack damage. The sneak attack damage is not a special effect that accompanies the attack, it is part of the damage roll. Hope that clears it up. Jason Bulmahn
I am, but in the end, your GM at the table calls the shots. Until I can fix it in a permanent manner, all I can do is tell you what my intent was (or was not as the case may be) and let your GM make the call. I am here to clarify and clean up the system, your GM still has to run the game and the system will never cover every possibility (nor should it). Anyway, I am sure that is a lot more serious than you intended, but I just thought I would go an clarify my position. Jason Bulmahn
There are a lot of issues floating around here, so I am going to go back to the original and answer that one. When you wild shape, you should lose your shield bonus. I say should, because as of right now, the rules do not support this as written (although there is some wiggle room in the "require activation" language, in that shields must be wielded, but this is flimsy at best). I will endeavor to fix this issue in the next go around. Until then, it is GM call, but common sense (and a future correction) should indicate your direction. Jason Bulmahn
Hey there All, Just thought I would chime in on the subject as well. We are aware that there are a number of issues in the rules that need to be tackled and I will be taking a personal hand in making sure that these problems are addressed. The first step will be to comb through threads like this, and a few others, to gather up a list of potential outstanding issues. I will be doing this in short order. Next, we are implementing a system by which you will be able to ask questions that will get added to a FAQ for ease of reference. Finally, I hope to have a more active presence here on the boards, keeping tabs on issues as they arise. Just thought I would give every one the heads up here. There are a number of issues to tackle, but rest assured, they will get addressed. Jason Bulmahn
No, please don't fix the "problem". The Paladin is quite fine at the moment, as many have noted before. If anything could need toning down, it's Aura of Justice, not Smite per se. Don't worry. I am a big fan of small steps as opposed to drastic revisions. The change that has been made is not huge, but it does address some of my power concerns with the ability. Jason Bulmahn
The why, is because this clearly violates the intent of the spell storing item, which was meant to be capped at 3rd level. I can see how this seems like an okay way to circumvent that limitation, but this allows certain abuses that were not really intended for a "+1 bonus" weapon enhancement. It lets you get a big spell effect and it allows you to "store" uses of your rod and still have your full compliment on the days when you need them. Clearly these are both outside the original intent of these rules. That said, the language is a bit unclear. I intend to fix it at the next opportunity, but until then, you have one of two choices. You can either make your own call, which as GM is perfectly within your purview, or you can cite my reasoning and go with my answer. The choice is yours, but for the time being, I consider this issue closed. Jason Bulmahn
This does not work. There is an ambiguity in the language of the spell storing property here that is causing a bit of confusion. The storage process for adding a spell to a spell storing weapon is a special action that is similar, although not the same as casting a spell. The issue here is that the rod applies to a spell as it is being cast, which this is not quite the same. In the end, this is an issue for your GM to decide, but since I tend to err on the side of caution when it comes to issues such as these, I am going to say that this does not work. A spell storing weapon holds a spell of up to 3rd level. A metamagic rod cannot be used during the storage process (although I would probably allow it during the usages of the stored spell... ) Jason Bulmahn
Although I have very little time to do anything right now other than finish the APG, I wanted to take a second to say... Thanks for taking part and I am glad that most folks had a good time taking part in the APG playtest. This one was quite a bit more difficult than the core rulebook playtest, being that the classes were new, but the feedback and playtest data we received has really helped to shape these classes. Back to work... Jason Bulmahn
This concludes the playtest of the Advanced Player's Guide classes. I want to thank everyone who contributed to this process. I feel that with your help, we have refined the six classes set to appear in the book quite a bit. I am sure that you will be pleased with the final results. In the coming months, I hope to preview the final classes along with some of the other great content coming together for this book. You will find this content on the Paizo Blog. Thanks again for all of your insightful help and feedback. Jason Bulmahn
Long live the Rat King! (does this guy get into power struggles with the rat emperor? Questions to ponder). Interesting take on the concept. I think this might be a bit more appropriate for the original concept than the others, but I will leave that for the other judges. Stastically, I cannot find much to complain about here with one exception. He is a bit too tough for his CR. Ideally he should probably have 1 fewer HD. As it currently stands, he is closer to CR 4 than 3. As a note, Improved Natural Attack is usually reserved for creature advancement, not base construction. Of the four, I think you handled the flea swarm in the simplest manner. The ranged attack is a bit odd for the ability, but it is at least clean and simple to use. There is not much else to this monster. I am kinda surprised there is no spell penalty or manipulation here as there is with the others, but I am not convinced this is a bad thing. None of the others seemed to get it quite right. I guess the biggest issue here is the power level. I would need to either reduce its HD or bump up its CR. Fortunately, not by too much, but it is still a fair amount of work either way. I give this monster a B. Jason Bulmahn
This one is the rat emperor! All bow before his rat-iness. Moving on, the statistics here look pretty solid. He is on target for his CR for the most part and his abilities are mostly a good extrapolation of the concept. That said, I gotta side with Wes here. The flea swarm is confusing at best and outright illogical at worst. To top it off, all it seems to do is make folks sickened. If this was the effect, I think it would have been more appropriate just to surround it with an area of fleas that makes folks sickened. Easier to use and a lot more clear. The next issue for me is the disease. Determining random spell slots to lose at the result of a disease is an innovative way to deal with the rat's theme. That said, I think it is kind of a pain to implement. There is no good system for randomly determining spell slots. To top it off, the disease to not really progress. It just stays at the listed number of slots lost. It would have been better and easier to implement if it started at the lowest level slots and slowly ate its way up the food chain to the high level slots. Perhaps as slowly as 1 per day. It still would have been a terror for spellcasters and it would have been a lot easier to implement. I am on the fence about the necrotic wound element. It is all good until I get to the repeating nonlethal damage bit. It could be very deadly to a group without healing (I know that is a rarity, but it does happen). Overall, I think this monster works well with the theme, for the most part. I give this monster a B. Jason Bulmahn
A two headed rat demon.... Seems to be a popular monster this year. Mechanically, the execution here is really pretty good. I am not finding any problems that raise huge red flags. The monster is just about on target for a CR 6 creature and the abilities are a good extrapolation of the theme. I am with Wes though on one bit. The save or lose your magic is way too rough. It basically is a save or do nothing for 1d6 rounds for most classes based on spellcasting. I suppose this is less of an issue at lower levels than at high, but it is still quite powerful. I think I would have preferred to see a penalty on concentration checks or perhaps even forced concentration checks while the effect lasts. That would have been far less powerful. That said, that particular issue is a relatively easy fix, making this monster a pretty good entry. I give this monster a A-. Jason Bulmahn
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
