|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
ok i haven't played the new barbarian, but actually liked it. its partially because i found the versatility so interesting. This is because i have also been read Iron Heroes, which uses similar methods in some classes and in other none at all, giving you the chance to select a no-complication class, or one with a bit more of tracking as a player. Also, it recommends that NPCs being a bit less complex... as someone mentioned... they are supposed to be expendable after all.
mmm quite interesting a combination of Animate undead Spells and the craft for more permanent ones... interesting indeed, i will need to work on it myself i do not like the feats to be broken in lesser, normal and greater (even if normal is not included), have never like that rule about Magic Items, but aye would have to check what can be done about that...
ok ok i admit i just read a couple of lines of the frist posts... jajaja but hey the politic of using other more advanced RPGs to "graduate" from WotC DnD, was already used by White Wolf with the 2nd Edition of Exalted... i loved the idea... it was so low, so much "hit you in the face with belbet globe with an iron inside" that i could not stop laughting... aside of that my only regret was i never had 3.5 books to change for my Exaled copy... and i have an exalted copy already... (never passed from 3.0 until i meet Pathfinder... i have to give credit to them for that, the only thing i ever ever liked about 3.5 was the Ranger, and Monte Cook's Ranger was better)
you are pestering the DM about this merchant rogue who deosn't like adventuring but who is carried into the role of adventure by his brother in the hopes that he will decide to run the playtest so you could try this said rogue... complain about complainers when they take about the "realism" of learning so many language, but they forgot we are playing a fantasy game :D you actually know who is who in Paizo Co. through reading their responses to the forum
If you'd like it, I can e-mail it. Just to warn you, there are some tweaks that may be necessary after some playtesting, but it is mostly solid. It includes the standard races and most of the MM races... If you can provide your e-mail I'll send it right over. me too i am curious about the changes, i do like the Gestal Rules :D cof cof
cheers :P
1) there is no "common" (always hated that.. but american movies made it famous.. even in the most distant planet someone knows english... duh!) ok thanks... that is indeed interesting, je oen thing learned today :) even then one thing is Trade langueage, and other like in the actual DnD is that common is indeed the base language of the world...
The fact that the VP/WP system has never survived in any d20 system that it was presented in should be a clue that it doesn't work out well. In concept it seems more realistic, but in play it means players die more easily, which is generally bad for the game. Not that I am in favor of the whole idea of removing all death effects from the game, but I don't believe we need to make the game deadlier. maybe the players need to learn to use strategtic instead of just charge vs the enemy :P i see it as the difference between halo and gears of war... mind you i like both... but in one you see people jumping and shooting and in the other you see people covering and using their heards because a lucky shots sends them to the ground.
my theory is that this bard is either intimidated by the fact that others could learn as much language as him... which i suppose would be fairly easy for a mercenary (fighter) in easter europe or afrika, or a scholar (wizard) in Oxford, or a smuggler (rogue) in the mediterraneum. just how they learn it is a bit different... i find not only interesting but right the fact in how other cultures interact with others via commerce/war/etc... which is pretty common even nowadays... but for the others who believes the sistem is unrealistic... please please... do not speak of realism in a game where you can learn a different set of skills (including spells, secrete languages, extraordinary habilities, supernatural habilities) with just chosing a different class the next level... and yes in my games its strange to have a character that knows more than the common a and a couple languages... but that is their decision... why cripple the one who goes for the "translator guy"? and if you want in your "home" campaign make it that languages are an issue and make them issolated.. here are some ideas for home rules: 1) there is no "common" (always hated that.. but american movies made it famous.. even in the most distant planet someone knows english... duh!) that includes elven, dwarven, etc... exchange them for the language of their region... if their region is big enough to amerit their OWN language... good... but elves froma nother region would talk different... just like spanish and portuguese or italian... 2) characters only get the language of their region, and other if they actually buy the skill and have areason for it (have traveled, are merchants, smuggled something) 3) increase the cost of the skill or make it paulative.. first level cost 1, second level cost 2, third level cost 3, 4th 4, etc... (we are using this in a modern based game, my char is the only one who speak another language and she hasn't foudn too much use for it... but i like the background) please note that someone WITHOUT some knowledge of another languages or obscure dialects would be UNEXPERIENCED and pretty much UNABLE to Descipher Scripts in other languages... because he can't understand 1 single word of what is said... ITS UNREALISTIC to asume... that because HE has Descipher Scripts HE can unravel de misteries of the old tomb, because he is good with words... even if he can even fathom what they mean in the first place... so yeah I say 1 language per level of linguistics is fine... and no i don't let my chars descipher any kind of language they don't have any idea how... so yes... knowing which alphabets compose which languages is not only cool but useful :D
there is only one thing to say to his new... I am SO SO haooy that i decided to see if there was anything new around the forum today... first post to see was really the best one... Since Arcana Unearthed I have thoroughly enjoyed Monte's work, I think he is one of the most talented guys working out there in the RPG industry... From him we adopte many rules and likings, Pathfinder RPW show us great ideas that we already love... now with Monte in the boat, we can only expect things to go uphill from here on. I was already sold to Pathfinder... but this new just make my day :D
i did a long post where i complained about the quialities of 4th edition aboput feeling like a mmorg... but for some reason it crashed middle way... just for the record: i don't play Clerics like healers (band-aid boxes) but first line combatants
*sight* as i was saying... 2 friends and I are planing to make a playtest of Pathfinder... the first thing first... we chose our classes... rogue (me) and wizards (my friend). from that we planned what we wanted to play ( GM not withstanding) i want to work ina guild and look for their enemies and targets or go for items important for our bosses.. and that the wizard buffed me and deffubed enemies... the wizard sayd NO He wanted a Tombraider adventure full of item searching and high adventure... ok I was not interested, but hear his reasons and accepted.. Instead my rogue IS NOT intersted... but forced to roll with it... the story is a fun and interesting one, he liked it and it work for us... but my rogue is not the adventure type... she is wanted to be merchant, have her ship and sail the 7 seas (or whichever its number is this days), but she got involved into this and she has no way to say no... (family issues, we all hate those)... so using the rogue she is not strong or very resistant... she is quite aguile and deeply inteligent, and she her smile win many arguments... so even when she would be detecting the tramps... she is more likely evaluating the information of how to arrive to the palce, descipher the text, convince the guide to cut a bit from his salary, evalauting the costs versus the gain of the expedition... and definitively... she IS NOT involing herself in battle... if she fights is long range... never close...the Wizard is stronger and has more hp as her (human wizard: 9 hp = 6 class +2 con +1 fav class; elven rogue: 8 hp = 8 class, + 0 con + 0 pref class) I am between giving her Persuasive or Stealthy feets :D
she would be absolutely dedicated to charm and think... and could care less about fighting... so she is not going to involve herself into combat, she is not climbing the wals if he can do it with spider walk, and she will complain all the way down... and still we intend to have fun... I can do this with pathfinder... can i play like this in 4th Ed? or i wikll be considered just the jack of all trades, disarm traps and secundary fighter? meh...
I start characters by having an idea of what I want to do in game, mechanically, and by the rules. I really don't think that much at all about where I came from, or who the guy really is... cause he didn't quite exist until then; unless of course I want some interesting tidbits explained away... but otherwise I figure character growth is when I play the character and not so much how he started. For that, I need a good understanding of whats in the party, and who does what, and who doesn't pull their weight. I really like the better defined from 4e, as I think it lets designers build options to an idea that is always needed within the tropes of DnD. Give a class a goal, and then build stuff around it. Players only need to choose what they want to do, and can mix and match to get there. for that i would play WoW... and i will in the night for RPG i HATE that they try to make my character as 2D as any class of a MMORG... barely able to customice... if i want my character to be a Pirate Princess... I will decide if i wante her to be a Foghter, Rogue or Wizard depending in how i felt about what i want her doing, not that she takes rogue because that is the only class that would more or less fit (and don't get me wrong, i love rogues)... or if i want a cleric... i don't want to make the usual band-aid box, that goes, buffs, heals and that is all... i liked my old cleric who was in the front of the battle taking down enemies... and then and only after the fight is done and every enemy is down, I will check on how are my companions... (god of war and justice, we worked as SWAT so it worked fine) I don't want that the game says ME what can or can't be, as another person mentioned... I think in a story, i tell it to the DM/GM/ST id he or she says its fine ok... i bregin with the character... i take the class, the feats and skils i deam necesary to REACH my character... not the other way around... That is what i prefered of WoW RPG over WoW Videogame... if i want to do a damnable Night Elven Ranger rebell who prefer to stick to the more savage customs of the Horde than the Alliance and their Sun Elf friends (yes in the RPG they where still allied, the blood elf are something entirely) then i am going to do my night elven ranger allied with the horde... i loved the example of one fo the games where a human rogue assassinated a Tauren Warriors that was with the Alliance, because she was paid good coin by the Chieftain to do that... the poison was a troll one... so yes... i do prefer to ROLE Play than ROLL Play
Have you looked at setting up a deviantArt account & gallery? Among other things, this would allow you to easily sell prints of your work "on demand". je i like the allien looks of MErisel, but Claudio's is pretty cool, so no complains in both aspects :P
no, its not different... spanish versions of RPG sucks... well i could be it sounds so weird in Spain Spanish... but WE HATE their translations...
i like this... this goes well with the Ranger skills of marksman and hunter...
I won't provide much more detail for now, but for those who have done something similar, you might inevitably notice that some of the "fun" of DMing, and playing for that matter, becomes lost with complete adherence to the ruleset. I find 3.5 to be very charming and sophisticated, elaborate, deep, and well structured compared to other previous dnd systems. But, to the OP's point, running all these rules can really make one miss the good old days when the "magic" occurred at the table, rather than rules-laywering, book-reading, min/maxing and munchkinism. A great shift occured with thrid edition that presented players with more information than ever before. Previous editions kept much of the ruleset and referentia for the DMs eyes alone. (Alas, it was bad for business when only 1 in 5 players (the DM) actually purchased game materials.)) Now, there is less mystery about the rules, but more complication, and there is more transparency about what goes on behind the DM screen, but a slower pace becuase those rulings are instantly validated or rejected by keen players who study the system in detail. A deep desire for simplicity is something all DMs and players long for, but there's there's the rub—its hard to have it all. rule # 0 ( o golden rule) of EVERY Roleplaying game if a rule cause problems, slows the game or make it less fun... take the rule and throw it throught the window... Aside of that... if the rule lawyers get something right under their rules, i thank them and use it another time against them using NPCs...Or if i am not applying that... I tell it to them... I am the DM I change things... and the monsters I NEVER use them as they came in the book... Simplicity is easy... play along... don't expect that the books bring new and more simpler things... no if you expect to keep using soophysticated rules... ok i read most are not happy MMORGs but here is an example... World of warcraft is simple and elegant, it keeps you entertained and focused in looking for more things... it has some things you need to check and that slow down a few things... but ITS OK its a Winner... World of Magic is a new Free MMORG, its easy, simple and doesn't give many options, it follows the same squematics than WoW in how it does things... but in itself is would be never as good... its not the grapics only i lack options... that is why i i keep paying for WoW. EVE is wonderful and interesting SCI-Fi game, and i really liked what i saw... in about an hour... but it really challenged me... i was absolutely lost and I had so many options I became lost... so i left it... in my opinion 3.0 is WoW, you ask for Magic World... 4.0... i don't know what they will be doing, but the little i read just exasperas me... aside that i am not really buying new set of rules, that is why i bought SCION.
The last time i did was about 4 years, using 3.0 rules enhnaced with bits of 3.5... yes it was challenging... but not more challenging than when i mastyered the same quantity in AD&D 2nd Edition. To my experience you should add just the rules you want to use, call for rolls when they are absolutely necesary, still that will leave the fights of 1 to 5 minutes Game time into about 1 hour of gameplay. Give part of the spot to everyone... I did it, it worked, and I think they loved that Campaing... but it was more for the story than just the rollplaying. *note after edit* my recommendation and we tried it a couple ot times... ask one of the players to assist you, it will take some of the fire from yourself and will let it you work, don't give this player new things opr more power or anything for helping you... players tend to see this as preferntism and act accordingly... meaning BAD. If there is a problem 1 helps then take 2 and roll between them... Once we tried a game where there where 2 masters and 6 to 8 players... it was the same world, and the same advenbture, but we took different steps toward the gol, and we meet in the middle (i began as a player) in this meeting the DM where supposed to change i was one, the other one just thought he was not prepared for that... so i took whole stock of players until the end of the adventure... i think they had fun... but one of the players would never use a pladin ever again, he hated the moral issues :P he just asked for something easy to play morally, like a barbarian or fighter... *finish edit note* Which rules are new and will add enhancement... the Barbarian is an excelent thing, just add some counters, pennies, etc and its easy to manage... the rest just won enphasis in what they do... ok combat is a bit tricky, more exiting but aye a bit more complicated... if you don't like it, use the old rules... keep tables... i know its LOTS of Works... and I admit I never did it... I think in an story, I roll with it, get afew stats and I began, and my players move by themelves toward the goal, following whatever path they prefer... its like "open world for me" if they go to another place, cool that is fine... later an enemy would appear to link them back to the original story... or they will go by themselves or do another thing... je this may be the reason iHATE dungeoncrawlers and canned adventures :P they shot down my improvisation... but after ranting a bit... Ridolfin, give it a shotm, i don't think Pathfinder changes are so worrysome by themselves, if you are playing already 3.5 it will be fine... my only complain continue to be the downgradded magic with wine... useful spells for other things than war and battle continue having durations of rounds or encounter... i know... this falls in deaf ears.. that is why we play with the spell list of 3.0 :D
so... every race gets 2 +2 and 1 -2 but because people don't like the half-orc or go with the idea of brutish or want to min max monstruos fighters/barbarians... is ok to give one race less advantages than the others? at least the human gets to chose where he want his +2 to go...
I am with what the book shows... just because we don't like orcs they need to be less charismatic to their people... and charisma is also used for Intimidate & Diplomacy... not just for looking cute the book mentions: +2 Strength, +2 Wisdom, –2 Intelligence: Half-orcs are physically strong and constantly on the lookout for danger, but their orc stock hinders their intelligence. I totally go with +2 to wisdom, they survive by keen observation, natural inscstint and guts... not just raw strenght... Also for those who want +2 str +2 con -2 cha... please please, stop being munchkins... i know all those who make orc barbarians go toward making the strongest and most brutish builts... lets stop the cliche... i love this Half-Orc as DM and player... of ocourse i play like elf :P
excellent work Claudio, its pretty cool what you have done... I hope to the the rest of Merisiel soon... she is my favorit char of the iconics :) and continue the excellent work
i am with this too... all my players get 2 extra skill points per level, that way i don't take advantage from the rest, but i give more options for the players... specially clerics and fighters... when i play i usually play with a rogue, so i have no problems... but its ridiciulous to see that the cleric or the paladin or the wizard that are supposed to be scholared... get so little points to skills, including knowledges that they should have...
well dude people can't make happy everyone... Cest la vie I myself like the art and think is one of the best i have seen... is not completly anime like (like the 3rd edition token chars of Vampire: The Masquerade) or of other products... and it gives enough inhuman character to the other races... which I find ok *points to his avatar* i do love that elven rogue :D
The background system is used in Iron Heroes, where you get some benefit or advantage, skills boost, semi-feat, etc... its neat... for this skills system.. i as a DM and as a player who use rogues... love it... ok ok i miss my 40 something skills points but it stops munchkins to min/max in some way... and it forces me to focus so i can have some skills in high level when i am high level instead of lots of skills in a very very low level :P hit is my new char, a rogue elf with merchant & sailor background, built with 28 points (10 str, 16 dex, 10 con, 16 int, 12 wis, 14 cha) Stealth +7
i must say... this works pretty cool for me...
In the earlier games I played in, my DM's simplified it by totally chucking Cross-Class limitations out the window and making everything across the board Class skills for all. It made for some interesting and creative characters. exactly!!!! why penalice a character because his background says he knows how to do soemthing or he has certain hobby... why can't a Noble Fighter not know of linguistics, etc... for all this i thank Paizo for bringing a houserule i had for a while... making "Sense Motive" class skill for paladins & Clerics... a friend insist it was done in 3.5... but since i worked mostly with 3.0 i am not sure...
I must say that I like the Rolemaster-style rank-based system better than the 4e version simply for flexibility. However, when I read the section for converting PrC skill requirements for class versus cross-classes skills I though of a much smoother way to get it to flow. Simply categorize the +3 bonus for a trained class skill as a +3 rank bonus. It could have its own column on the skill table for easy adjustment and it would count as ranks for PrC requirements. That way you don't need to make all kinds of adjustments when adjusting PrC requirements - just read it straight. this only works if the skill is from your class.. but it will penalice someone who has not that skill in his class buit can achieve the PrC... i will go with Paizo... just cut 3 points from the max of the skills requieres... obviously this will make some skills PrC a bit ridiculous to get, as there are some that requiere only 5 ranks in some skills... i think the feats would get in there... I love the system... i will just boost all classes with 1 or 2 base skill points for the class.. why? ok the Rogue would get a boost... but lets think about this... the fighter and the cleric and a few other classes don't usually get lots of intelligence as an attribute, so we are talking about chars that would get 1 to 3 or 4 skills points per level... I like games focused in the intelligent use of skills... so i give all of them a boost so it will be enhanced... but this is me :D
maybe Orlando he even got more ladies swanning over him.... Actually... maybe the ears were not mentioned... but for those who have read the Lord of the Rings Trilogy... elves were talk, perfect and chiseled... they were stronger, more resiliant and more beautiful than humans... so deal with it... elves are like that... the ears i blame on Record of Loddoss Wars' Deedlit... but she was beautiful so I don't complain... and AYE... that Rogue is THE ELF for me :D
No army will pay 1500 GPs per soldier for a single +1 in AC or BAB... mercs are cheaper, soldiers are cheaper... why woudl you want to spent in magic items that can be stole by your soldiers and join the enemy by deserting... or wort they get killed and their equioment looted and used against you... Most soldiers get paid i think 10 GP per day... (and i may be exagerating) meaning they won't be able to pay this kind of item except if they spent in NOTHING ELSE for the next 150 days... or after a successufyul year of campaings and some looting he would be able to buy his equipment like this.... but what goverment in its rightmind would? I will post an example... The realms of "lost Odyssey" does... but this are High Techn/High MAgic Worlds... wher they have "Ressurection Turrets propeled by half a dozen clerics"! if iuts your usual and normal fabtasy world... no goverment would have either the resources or the interest of equiping every 0 lvl soldier or 1st level fighter with +1 sword, +1 scale mail.. ok possibly the tide would turn in their favor... but simply the logistics, spenditures and sher level of organization would bring the country to ruins... its easier to pay for less and more powerful equipment for elite groups for special missions... or give some bones to expendable assets (aka adventurers and mercs)
this is SOO OLD SCHOOL... Create an adventure for them to be able to crete the MAgic Item they requiere to aocmplish another adventure... I like it :D, that make Magic Items memorable!
I do agree specially with this last statement... jajajaja its what i call "arming the enemy"... i like it very much :D give great ideas...also lets get real... in a not densely populated world... where most people survive a weak with 10 GP (which usually is a fortune) who would be willing or able to buy items at such prices? Adventurers, Villians, Royalty... meaning its not a good business if you can get to many clients... and then... there is the problem of taxes by the goverments, paying rent, etc etc... not withstanding thieves, thugs, guilds (both merchant and thief) who would look with interest into THE new bussines... also as you state... the "magic Shops" of faerun with dozens of magical items are just ridiculous... I banned them from my campaings... but i let them use an alternate rule i found in a Dragon Magazine... they could "level" their magic items using their own experience... some did... most didn't... those who did got great equipment... those who didn't went to upper levels easier... and there was no weight over the wizards shoulders... who me and the other DM in the table saw no reason to let the players presure him to hand his experience for the other's benefit... as always for everyone think more in what this will affect roleplaying and not only mechanics...
there was a reason why Paladins in 2nd Advance Dungeons & Dragons where rare, not uncommon like Rangers or Bards, but actualy rare... almost unique in which they requieres at least 2 very high skill scores (Cha 17, Wis 15 i think) and other few scores up from the avarage... That also explained the Alignment Restriction... But lets also remember... they were modeled into the Chivalrous Knights and Paladins of Medieval Europe... If the setting is pretty much different to Europe... the Paladin can receive changes... But yes I think a PAragon of Virtue demands at least Good Wisdom... he requieres to learn something of what he does and what he is taught... but yes he requieres Charisma because he IS a beacon for his faith... everything is extra, well received but extra. Skills i will give him 4 + int per level... but well i always boost every class skills because I like to give emphasis on the skills and not just the combat. I requiere still to read the book to know well which changes could or could not go (just learned of this, and began readong the book, but Paladin is one of my 2 favorites classes)... But Detect Evil... I can go with the wind... sometiemes the enemy of the faith are not hidding behind evil... and it kind of ruins an intrigue if the Paladin just know who re the evil persons in the court... I have seen this skills used and abused continiously and I liked the changes Ravenloft did by changing it to Detect Chaos... you detect those who are way different of your mindset, of your discipline and are unthrusworthy in this... that is as good for a Paladin to despise a Rogue as for him to be Evil...
but aside of that also the real "Holy Warriors" of medieval times would go to great lenghts to do their church bidding.... any one remember the Inquisition? or the Templars? (yeah i Know second edition depicts them as Clerics...) The question is to what lenghts would you let a Paladin go to "banquish" evil? about the round/encounter... it really really is a change from the original editions to 3.5 that i HATED... you make the spells usefuls for nothing but combat... as if it was a videogame... if I wanted to play RPG Videogames I would paly Dark Alliance (or finish it) at least there the spells returns as easily as they go... why spent a Bull's Strenght or Cat's Grace in nothing but a few rounds of combat when it was usefull for better things... Strenghten the workers for the temple or giving a girl a better chance to get her loved one's heart by enhancing her dancing skills... those things are human things... things that Clerics or anyone should care... and i think i ranted in a different post...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
