|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Thank you all for the help, this is taking me in different directions that I originally planned.
I should state: no summoning. We will be playing a Ravenloft campaign which means no summoning or magics that deal with planes or planar travel of any kind (no blink, no dimension door, etc).
So a Samsaran Warpriest with a longbow and with the air + _____________ blessings. Take the alternative Mystic Past Life, Add gravity bow and Aspect of the falcon. Carry Large arrows so with gravity bow we are shooting for 3d6 each arrow. Add a reach weapon or a Falkata at level 2 or 3 for melee purposes.
I am sorry, I should restate the question: what are the best choices to use with Sacred Weapon?
@Azten: Whip sounds like a great idea, especially if sacred weapon means it is now real damage, even at level 1 that is fantastic. And you can carry a shield too. Also, I just checked sacred weapon and weapon focus, there is no reason I can find why thrown weapons would not work.
@captain Zoom: I agree, which do you believe are the best ones, I am open to suggestions, and I understand that my build might completely change based on this choice.
First off, Dot. This is really cool, if extra bookkeeping. Giving options to classes that don't rely on just magic is always good.
Second, I wrote some custom work based on iterative attacks from the point of view of weapons (weight, length, and maneuverability). In a nutshell, the smaller/lighter the weapon, the more attacks you get each turn.
I would love to merge these two concepts together, I can see it working pretty well, but I am not sure if it is totally broken or not. Opinions?
Third, A few feat ideas.
Improved maneuvers: drop the price of adding a maneuver by 1 (stackable, minimum cost of 1 per maneuver).
The character is an "npc-pc". Player controlled, but not generally active on the game, acting more as a custom store for the players, and an outlet for homebrewed items. When I said craft, I meant craft (item type) feat. Although I think I might have some of the support staff work in the actual making of things (not enchanting).
I like the idea of using a dwarf wizard for the favored class bonuses. Perhaps the cohort?
Is there any rules/feats for cooperative creation?
I like the flavor so much. I wish you would not limit the size of the statues, a 7th level spell should be able to animate stuff that can be bigger than large.
Perhaps specify how many 5 ft. of length each statue occupies. Each medium statue occupies a 5 ft. square, large occupies two 5 ft. squares, huge occupies three 5 ft. squares, gargantuan occupies four 5 ft. squares, and colossal occupies six 5 ft. squares, etc. (all touching, but not necessarily consecutive: E.g. not just a straight line 5 ft thick) I used the Creature size table, spacing specifically.
This allows the wall to be shaped vertically as much as it does horizontally, and also allows the caster to make the wall thicker by using larger statues, since the wall does not have to be exactly 5 ft. thick only.
I would also state that there would have to be a minimum amount of statues created by the spell, so it is an actual wall.
My friends and I were considering having aoe evocations deal damage based on the squares it affects. In other words, if a creature caught in a fireball occupies 4 squares, they would have to deal with 4 times the damage.
While I personally feel that a giant ball of fire should be deadly, I am not sure if it is the right direction.
What do you think? How to handle saving throws? Maybe instead a neg to saves (easier to hit)?
It would be easier to change the way to regain spells than it would be to change the system to per encounter. You would probably have an easier time simply stating that everyone requires X hours of rest before recuperating spells rather than the flat 24 hrs.
How much it would actually help as far as the 15 min adventuring day, well, that is anyone's guess.
You expand your mind's capacity to process more information and at the same time you grant yourself new senses. You automatically gather all information around you.
After casting this spell, you are under the effects of the following spells:
Furthermore you also gain scent, low-light vision and Infravision (the ability to see heat signatures).
You gain a bonus to perception and sense motive checks equal to your caster level.
If you concentrate, you can grant yourself Microscopic vision (the ability to see small things in detail), telescopic vision (the ability to see accurately something further than normal), or x-ray vision (the ability to see through solid objects).
If any original spell required a saving throw, the same effect requirs the same. Any saving throws against any of these effects are rolled against a 9th level spell DC.
Any information gained is instantaneous, without any delays. The effects either work out to a range of line of sight (if it uses a visual method of gathering information) or as a 300 ft. radius Emanation centered on you.
You cannot avoid gaze attacks while under the effects of this spell.
Extending your senses, you gain a preternatural internal sense that helps you avoid danger. From a simple, "Step more to the left" to "JUMP!", while the spell is in effect, you intuitively know what to do.
You gain the Improved Evasion, Improved Uncanny dodge (caster level is equivalent to rogue levels), and Trap Sense (caster level is equivalent to rogue levels) abilities from the rogue class.
You gain the monk's AC bonus ability with an equivalent level as your caster level. This includes adding your Wisdom modifier to AC.
give contacts levels. keep it simple, like level 1 to 5. Remember that contacts have you as a contact at the same level you have them. So expect a call from time to time asking for a favor that is the equivalent of what they can do for you.
1= barely to somewhat useful contact. no more than level 4. A bartender you know well. A younger sibling who can get you in to his or her job location. He may still not help you, but will at least listen to your issues before he dismisses it. Still expects payment.
2= somewhat useful contact. no more than level 8. An innkeeper you worked with for years, a favorite uncle with a moderately successful business. An arms dealer you grew up with. Depending on what you are asking for, you have to drop some cash.
3= useful contact. no more than level 12. Someone with decent class skill, or specialized in something you can benefit from, or a small militia, or school ties of some sort. Someone you can trust to have your back in bad situations. You still have to pay them for the big thing, but they will show up to back you up short of suicidal situations, and even then, if the money is right, for you, they might. A custom weapon maker, a good fence, a small company/community/society, a mercenary buddy, a caster or psychic of moderate power.
4= a very useful contact. no more than level 16. A successful parent, a mentor, a moderate company/community/society, a powerful guild, or the leader of something similar. A moderate politician. When S*** hits the fan, you can count on them being there. You can call powerful favors at the drop of a dime and deal with the consequences later. Suicidal situations are met side by side. They can call powerful favors in your behalf.
5= an extremely useful contact. no more than level 20. A powerful politician, potentially even a ruler. A wizard of extreme power. A powerful militia, or national/global power. You can request powerful magics or items. Funds can appear from nowhere if you require it. Rare for most to ever see, and should require some major role playing beyond just the cost of gaining this ability.
@ +5 toaster: I'm in. I like it. in fact I am dropping it to 4 and bringing 5 as an aoe.
@Queen Moragan: I like your suggestions. In fact, I would probably go with something similar in my games. It is simple and elegant.
But that is not the point of this particular exercise. I have a couple of players that want something like this, and we started it together. So here I am cleaning it up, and using the community for editing eyes/finishing touches.
So brawn IV has:
Chink in the armor I: if you spend a full round studying an opponent (no further than 60 ft away), you may consider him flat footed for the remainder of combat for purposes of sneak attack. You may have your Int modifier worth of enemies "studied" at any given time.
Chink in the armor II: You can spend a full round studying a group of opponents (within 30 ft. of each other) in order to consider them flat footed for the remainder of combat. If you have Chink in the armor I, you may now use it as part of a full defense action against any opponent you are engaged with.
I like the idea of making SA with a longer range, just not sure where it actually belongs (between brains or brawn and where).
I would make a list of the class abilities I am willing to let other classes grab, and set them up with prerequisites, just like feats. Even if you break them up into the tier system.
What would be the prereq for 1 level of arcane magic (wiz or sor)? Probably a basic magic feat of some sort. That way your fighter with a couple of spell levels worth of wiz is not actually broken.
I would probably also allow some way to bump up defenses, AC and Saves specifically (if it is a temporary bump, maybe 3rd tier?). It would be cheap in the low end (such as crappy saves) but would become exponentially expensive to keep making it better.
And since they are spending experience in some capacity, perhaps the limited ability to make magic items infused with their essence, rather than actual magic?
These are some high level spells we use to make evocation better; we feel evocation needs more love starting around 6th level spells and higher rather than across the board.
You tap into primal universal energies destabilizing the area around you, accessing a font of raw energy. While this area is unstable, all evocations you call upon double the damage they deal. Each evocation you cast reduces the available energy. You can use one evocation for every 5 caster levels you posses before the rift seals, which happens as part of the casting of the last evocation or its duration runs out, whichever happens first.
You tap into your very soul, that of a powerful mage whose had a lifetime of elemental forces at his command. Doing this grants you the ability to create one elemental effect each turn as a swift action. This effect duplicates one of the following spells:
chain lightning, cone of cold, fireball, flame strike, lightning bolt, Wall of fire
The effect however differs in several ways:
The effect has a damage cap of 50 caster levels. Each effect is under the equivalent of the Empowered Spell Feat, Enlarge Spell Feat, Silent Spell Feat, Still Spell Feat, Widen Spell Feat.
If you choose to replicate a Wall of fire, the time increases by one step to a move action.
You choose what element the effect has from among acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. You may instead choose positive or negative energy, but this turns the effect into a move action. You may instead choose a force effect, but this turns the effect into a standard action.
If the effect uses cold, electricity, or fire, it is a reflex save and deals 1.5 damage. If the effect uses acid, sonic, or force, it is a fortitude save and bypasses spell resistance. If the effect uses positive or negative energy, it is a will save and its area is doubled.
The effects DCs are as a 9th level spell. You can choose to make the area smaller if you desire.
You pick a target in your line of sight, who's body liquids begin to be replaced into whatever element(s) you choose, his body wracking in pain, stunning them for one round. The target receives a fortitude save for half damage and to negate the stun, but Spell resistance does not apply. This effect deals 2d6+ int modifier + caster level, this is the base damage. This number is multiplied by 1d4+1 for the target.
At the beginning of your next turn, the target's body violently explodes in either a 40 ft. radius burst dealing the base damage multiplied by 1d6, 80 ft. radius burst dealing the base damage multiplied by 1d4, or 300 ft. radius burst dealing the base damage multiplied by 1d2. A reflex save for half is provided, which also allows spell resistance. The original target receives this damage as well.
@+5toaster: I am thinking the same as far as the feats, I just didn't think minimum level 12 warranted the limitation. What are you thinking chink in the armor does? remember its a level 20 ability that requires a full investment into brawn, so it should be awesome if it is only 1/d.
@Queenmoragan: SA is already being increased (multiple times if desired) by brawn. If I make rogues gain a talent every level, I am better off just rolling these into talents. While I like it, I won't do it for this particular post.
I forgot to state you can always go back and choose a previous one, even if you already have it.
at what level would it not be broken if one of the brawn choices allow sneak attack damage to multiply for critical hits?
Well, I have three basic ways of looking at this. The first one is simple, you can get a ring for a bit more than 2k gp and sleep for just 2 hrs a day, and never have to eat (Ring of sustenance, personal favorite). So minimal or no sleep seems like it does not matter much. You ambush them the same way you do when they are awake, since they are.
On the other hand, fatigue does not necessarily mean the mind is rested, or even alert, just the body is not tired anymore. You are still up for X amount of time, the mind working nonstop. An argument could be made that because the mind has a physical component (the brain), remove fatigue should work on it as well.
Last but not least, when you drink a redbull, or a 5 hr energy, or take any of so many drugs, your fatigue goes away, including your mind, even if it is temporary.
For small bursts, I have no problem with it. If a player(s) tried to do it permanently, I would start giving them hallucinations after a while. I wouldn't even make him aware of it being a hallucination, i'd make him think someone is messing with his head with magic.
Edit: just noticed, there are some necromantic thread powers happenin' here! >.<
So in the vein of feeling like the poor rogue does not have the love it deserves, I wrote a small set of rules to add to the base rogue, giving it a few more options.
I have a few holes that need filling, and not sure some of them belong where they currently are, so please let me know what you think/come up with. Each level of the class ability should have at least two choices.
Click here => Brain or Brawn <= for the latest version.
Brain or Brawn: Starting at 4th level, and every 4 levels after, you select either brain or brawn. Your choice may change each time you gain this ability, but you must take them in order. For example, if at 4th level you select Brawn I, at 8th level your choices are Brawn II or Brain I. Once selected, you will have one more choice to make.
Brawn I: Select one of the following:
Brawn II: Select one of the following:
Brawn III: Select one of the following:
Brawn IV: Select one of the following:
Brawn V: Select one of the following:
Brain I: Select one of the following:
Brain II: Select one of the following:
Brain III: Select one of the following:
Brain IV: Select one of the following:
Brain V: Select one of the following:
I meant the polymorph rules in general as a "bad" rule, not the one that stopped the stacking, which I am fine with. A caster with a 6d6 base damage greatsword and 25 ft reach is just a pain to deal with on the board, even if it wasn't game breaking.
It's the same reason no one in my group abuses summoning/necromancy and fills the board with creatures, even if the rules allow it, its just a pain and makes the game no fun.
Good luck Vestrial =)
It is up to your DM. That's not really a good solution, and i think the polymorph / shapechange changes are one of the least well thought changes in pathfinder. Because it makes an interresting spell with story potential (but also very good benefits that can buff you) to a spell that is now primary useful for buffing. In both editions the spell needs a DM who makes it function in his campaign, and house rules it.
There are other issues with the PRPG version, too - for example that there are creatures you can not polymorph into (as no polymorph spells for this creature type exist), or if non humanoid creatures use the spells (they can still only polymorph into humanoids). Or static bonuses regardless if the origin and target creature match the bonus (old lady form giving you bonus str, for example).
Personally i find still the greatest issue with polymorph (and its ilk) is that no one explains what creatures you know to polymorph into. This is the same problem as in 3.5, but it is even greater in pathfinder as you can not polymorph into someone you have seen. And therefore this common house ruling does no longer makes sense. Because it makes it even less logical. You can not look like (for example) the only drow you have seen in your life - but polymorphing into a average looking drow is no problem, even if you do not know what an average drow looks like. In fact there is no reason why you would need to "know" the creature. You can not polymorph into this creature anyway.
But in the end it is like every "bad" rule - you can change it.
One spell explicitly turns you into a different creature, the other one makes you grow, regardless of what creature you are.
However, I misread your quote, which does end the argument.
Rules lawyering is attempting to use RAW or RAI for your benefit, at least that is how its always been used in my circles. I gain no benefit from this, I am simply trying to help Vestrial.
That is not rules lawyering, it is the RAW. Please don't accuse me of something without actual justification. I have not written anything here that is a stretch of the rules, just the exact combination of a situation you created. One is changing you into a different creature, the other is actually growing you. Assuming you do it in the correct order, they stack.
I am the one that makes calls on rules at my table, even when not dming. 9 times out of 10 I side with the dm, because he is usually right, and the players are trying a fast one in some way or another. I like a fair game, even when it is not to the advantage of my character, otherwise there is no challenge.
Remember, one is a transmutation effect, the other one is a transmutation (polymorph) effect. Which do stack native.
The argument comes down to whether you consider both a size increase or don't; I did some searching and there is plenty of argument on this for both sides, so pick whatever works for you.
If you really want to argue it, then replace giant form with polymorph any object.
PaO very explicitly states that you become a new creature. Not "assume form". Not "increase size category". You are a new creature. That means you are no longer the old creature. Not a size increase.
Righteous Might and Giant form, if you can legally get them on the target, stack. One changes you to a large or huge giant type (a polymorph effect, not a size increase) and Righteous Might (not a polymorph effect, a size increase) moves you up one size category. The only size increase is Righteous Might. Normally this is not an issue because they are both personal spells, and no domains gives giant form, it has never come up, to my knowledge.
A gargantuan combat monster who can mirror image and greater invisibility (need true seeing to bypass both, iirc). The damage is insane (6d6 base on a greatsword) for a fighter or barbarian of level 15. They can already become monsters so many different ways (the best really is crowd control/summoning as a wiz, it still allows your party to feel useful and you set the tempo of every battle) you are just making it happen faster.
It is not so much breaking the game as much as the noncasters are going to be outclassed faster.
I am not contradicting myself at all. They are separate instances based on different variables. One is an example of stacking being too strong. The other is a valid statement about what will occur when you start removing spells. Items cannot be created, creatures lose abilities or suddenly become much more powerful from lack of sources to combat them with, among other things.
Without Shield of Faith (among many other spells you will probably remove, rather than refluff, as you originally intended), for example, you eliminate the only early source of deflection bonuses to ac. Now items with deflection bonuses are more expensive, since the entry point to make is a higher level spell. This hurts magic item users, specifically noncasters.
You should realize that in a fantasy setting, the word "Supernatural" takes a different meaning than it does in RL. While from our perspective a man conjuring fire in his hands out of nowhere on top of not injuring himself is supernatural, in a fantasy world that is not truly supernatural. It is at most rare/uncommon. And better defined as magical, rather than "supernatural".
An atheist in that world would have never encountered anything supernatural from their perspective, but might have encountered magic in some form or another, and would think of it like that, culture permitting.
People and cultures growing up in a world of magic would not "disbelieve" magic used, they would either accept it and embrace its use, dismiss it as something that is not part of their personal lives, or outright shun it.
A wizard never claims gods gave it power, a cleric does. They both create magical effects that to the unlearned are similar and possibly divine. Their view is colored by how magic either destroyed or built (most likely a bit of both) their reality.
An atheist in FL (fantasy life) would believe a man with hands on fire before him really has his hands on fire, and can burn him, but would probably not believe it was given to him by any higher power. If that person did good or bad with that fire, an atheist would not attribute either (or any other action for that matter) to a higher power.
If you gave a character a bonus for being atheist (probably a bonus to saves against powers from any divine source, as long as he or she is aware that it is a divine source), remember that the flip side of the coin is that only characters with faith and who are cleric/pally/druid get benefits for said faith. You may consider giving something to the faithful who happen to be other classes as well, at least for balance.
Sorry I did not answer one of your questions:
Divine Power + Giant form (1-2) + Righteous Might + transformation = mega combat monster.
At caster level 15:
+5 luck bonus on attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, Strength checks, and Strength-based skill checks. You also gain 15 temporary hit points. Whenever you make a full-attack action, you can make an additional attack at your full base attack bonus, plus any appropriate modifiers.
Huge creature of the giant type. You gain a +8 size bonus to Strength, a –2 penalty to Dexterity, a +6 size bonus to Constitution, a +6 natural armor bonus, low-light vision, and a +10 foot enhancement bonus to your speed. If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: swim 60 feet, darkvision 60 feet, rend (2d8 damage), regeneration 5, rock catching, and rock throwing (range 120 feet, 2d10 damage). If the creature has immunity or resistance to one element, you gain that immunity or resistance. If the creature has vulnerability to an element, you gain that vulnerability.
Next increase your size category to the next larger one. A -2 Penalty to Dexterity. You gain DR becomes 10/evil or 10/good. Your size modifier for AC and attacks changes as appropriate to your new size category. This spell doesn't change your speed. Determine space and reach as appropriate to your new size. (which is now GARGANTUAN)
You gain a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, a +5 competence bonus on Fortitude saves, and proficiency with all simple and martial weapons. Your base attack bonus equals your character level (which may give you multiple attacks).
There are other benefits from spell overlap that don't stack. You have no negatives to DEX because you also gain a +4 to Dex, for a zero-sum (I think the penalties stack, otherwise you are looking at +2 dex).
Fighter Bab (with all iterative attacks) and proficiencies, Extra attack, +12 str, +10 con, +6 Nat. Arm bonus, +5 damage (not including STR), +15 HP (not including CON), +10 speed, Dr 10, +5 fort, and some more misc buffs.
Every spell becomes more powerful, since every spell is more likely to be used. There will be more instances of cure spells, since the spells are available to all casting classes. The same for low level evocations, since every 5th level caster can fireball (not just wizards and sorcerers). The numbers change because every day, an army can change to be a force of destruction, and then change tomorrow into a force of healing for their troops.
A smart player or two can run the game with divinations; always walk in preparred, the batman effect. Hell, all you need is to hit level 7 and grab a cohort and you can autorun the low level diviniations so you know what to prepare for the day. (yes, you can technically do the cohort part now, but the class matters more now).
The druid can keep up Pass without trace, if your party has a druid. The spell as it is currently ruled (with spell lists) is less likely to be available in every party of four, statistically (11 classes). That is part of the game balance. I am not against your idea, I am simply stating this as matter-of-fact, since you seem to think otherwise. Spell availability and limitations are part of spell power balance.
When everyone can use 1st level evocations (with just one level), chaos would be higher in every war in history, to say the least.
Those 20 healers in the backline each have a magic missile wand they made, for protection. They can kill quite a bit with those wands while they wait for someone to be hurt. From 100+ ft. away.
Magic vestment can be cast on regular clothing, and it does stack with mage armor.
Mirror image does trump most AC buffs (add displacement and you double the images). I mentioned the ac buffs to show stacking (at full caster level no less) and used illusion-bypassing as a tie-in.
Vestrial: "I will also probably cut spells that mostly duplicate other spells (Shield of faith becomes shield, bless weapon becomes magic weapon, etc)"
You're the one who said it, not me.
If you are removing all divine inspired spells, that is different than just eliminating spell lists. Spells work in different ways, and if you will be eliminating some, and not others, you will be leaving holes.
You keep changing what you want. Read OP, it says:
"no divine magic. All priests are mages who use arcane magic. I don't want to restrict the available classes, though, so I'm just refluffing divine casters as different schools of arcane magic.
I'm considering ditching specific class lists, and just having one mega list from which any spellcaster could pick their spells."
First paragraph: all classes are available, you are just changing flavor, not mechanics.
Second paragraph: No class spell lists. One major mechanical change.
Other than the word 'Shield' in the name and affecting AC, the spell Shield and Shield of Faith have nothing in common. They are different types of bonuses. Eliminating one (as you are now stating you are doing) will leave a hole in the ac buffing balance of the system. That is ok, just be aware.
This is the taunt skill from the Everquest d20 Player's Handbook, slightly modified for pathfinder. You may want to give it a decent rewrite.
Taunting is the art of angering and annoying opponents so that they attack you in preference to all other opponents, even if that's a tactically unwise decision for them.
Check: A Taunt check is opposed by the target's Sense Motive Check. Favorable and unfavorable circumstances weigh heavily on the outcome of a taunt check. Four circumstances can work against the taunter: 1) the target is already attacking someone else; 2) the target is of animal intelligence or lower (Int 2 or less); 3) the target is above animal intelligence but cannot understand the taunter (for example, it does not speak the same language); or 4) the target realizes that attacking the taunter may be tactically unwise. Each of these circumstances adds a bonus to the Sense Motive check of the creature being taunted, as listed below.
Target's Conditions / Sense Motive Bonus
Taunting is a move action. A successful Taunt check indicates that the target might move toward the taunter- depending on the target's intelligence and ranged attack options- but certainly focuses all of its attacks on the taunter for 1 round (and [possibly longer if it closes to melee). The target attacks the taunter as intelligently and effectively as it can, but if it knows it cannot attack him, it is likely to ignore the taunt. Targets affected by more than one characters' Taunt skill will attack the character who taunted them most recently. If the taunter damages a target on the same round he tries to taunt it, he receives a +5 circumstance bonus to his Taunt check.
For example, Karesh, a warrior with Charisma 16 and 8 ranks in Taunt, sees a wolf attacking her wizard companion 75 feet away. She knows she can't reach the wolf in one round, so she tries to goad the wolf into coming to her instead. Karesh first fires an arrow at the wolf to get its attention, striking it for 7 points of damage; she then makes a Taunt check, rolling a 9 and adding her Taunt bonus of +11 and her +5 circumstance bonus for having damaged the wolf this round, for a total of 25. However, the wolf gains +10 to its Sense Motive check because it is already fighting something else, +5 for not understanding Karesh's taunts, and another +5 because of its animal intelligence; the gm rolls a 6 on the wolf's Sense Motive check, so, with its =20 bonus (and +1 for its Wisdom score), it gets a total of 27. The wolf keeps attacking the wizard. If karesh had rolled an 11 or higher, the wolf would turn to attack her instead, most likely for the remainder of the combat (unless it were then taunted by someone else).
Creatures flatly unwilling to fight, such as pacifistic or incapable creatures, or those that are currently routing or fleeing, are unaffected by any use of the Taunt skill. Further, creatures immune to mind-affecting effects are immune to Taunt, although certain intelligent monsters that are technically immune might well choose to attack an impertinent taunter.
Retry: sometimes continuing to taunt a creature after a failed attempt is irritating enough to be more effective. In general, a character may retry the taunt skill freely each round, and may even take 10 or 20 on the check given enough time.
Special: a character with 5 or more ranks in Animal Empathy gets a +2 synergy bonus on Taunt Checks involving animals. A character with 9 or more ranks in Animal empathy gets a +2 synergy bonus on taunt checks involving beasts. A character with 5 or more ranks in Undead Empathy gets a +2 synergy bonus on Taunt checks involving the undead.
I would give certain classes bonuses with different types of creatures. Rangers would get their favored enemies, Fighters would get extra bonuses in general. Pallys for evil, or evil outsiders. That can replace the synergy bonuses. Not sure on the Undead empathy, maybe necromancers? can't see many that would want to use it though (Everquest has a Shadow Knight, little anti-paladin that can use it).
I would eliminate the Animal Intelligence penalty or lower it; I work with many animals (grew up on a farm) in RL, and they are pretty damn good at understanding when people or other animals are threatening to them.
If you want something else, specify what you want, you asked a very open question.
Of course there is illegal stacking, it is range of spells hand picked from two spells lists, not a list of spells that will specifically stack with each and everyone (did you read the * at the bottom?). In fact, the melee spell list has no problems stacking at all other than enlarge person/righteous might. You never specified what levels you expect to play, so a general analysis makes sense. I capped it at 5th level spells because games usually play in that range. You said a setting, you never specified anything else. Everything I have given you is a combo.
A combo can be as simple as wizard + cure spells.
The legal combos I wrote (much easier to see, rather than staring at a bunch of lists) are still very nasty. They don't even include most of the great paladin spells that a weapon wielding cleric would salivate at the thought; holy sword anyone? make a +5 holy weapon with a 4th level spell, at level 7. Even worth using on your party's beat stick weapon of choice for many levels.
Just because you can make some of these mixes right now, does not mean that they are easy to make happen without cooperation (that is a huge deal, more so than the new combos). When you can have 2 or 3 characters in a party of four make their own spell combos work (regardless if they are legal regularly or not) they will likely be more powerful than normal. So stuff will be easier, potentially game breaking based on your point of view. And the crafting and building possibilities are very nice too.
The clerical melee buff spells + transformation would be pretty nasty. And then you add displacement and mirror image, and that caster is stupidly powerful. The enemy can bypass illusions? then buff your AC. Barkskin (natural armor) Magic Vestment (enhancement), Mage Armor (armor bonus), Shield (shield bonus), Shield of Faith (Deflection bonus, not a shield bonus, not sure why you want to lump it into Shield). Since they all stack, very little will make it through. Add in some of the hand spells (interposing hand), and the numbers get pretty impressive. Don't forget they are all at full caster level, so the benefits are better.
SEMITANGENT= Bless weapon should probably not be rolled into magic weapon, makes no sense.
When every caster can imbue with spell ability, anyone can have a spell up their sleeve, easily an early version of contingency now available to grant everyone. Every caster should imbue every melee with at least one cure every day. Totally worth the potential action economy every combat.
You cannot use potions/oils for personal spells, so no you can't just make these stacks right now. Wands or scrolls require use magic device, and have a fail chance per use, requiring a buy-in.
Master Ankho was correct when he said: "It's the non-damaging stuff (e.g., wall of thorns/black tentacles/solid fog; astral projection; commune; etc) that tends to break the game."
The combos are less of a problem, its more about the extra abilities earned or a specific spell added to a type of caster. Everyone walking through walls (rather than stone shaping, or wood warping, or changing into a burrrowing creature), everyone flying (rather than changing to a bird, or air walking). Every spellcasting class can do most things, everyone being a bit better from some angle than everyone else or getting it sooner. With no class spell lists, everyone simply cherrypicks what works best.
For example, most casters (other than necromancers) will probably forget about false life and vampiric touch, since they can just cure themselves now.
A druid can use (deeper) darkness spells and be a bat, debuffing a huge list of enemies.
Alter Self/Disguise Self + Detect Thoughts + Discern Lies/Zone of Truth can get interesting in social situations. Don't forget Modify Memory after you are done.
Flame Blade + attack bonus spells.
A ranger with Flame Arrow can have quite a bit of fun with fire and add and extra 2.5 damage per shot.
Foresight + Moment of Prescience. >.<
Anyone (not just druids who respect nature and won't abuse it) can ironwood + wood shape to make +1 weapons or armor and sell them as permanent magic items, making a mint as long as they don't get caught.
Tracking becomes useless, everyone has Pass without Trace.
Everyone can Plane Shift at level 9.
Rusting grasp is significantly more common.
Most cleric and druid-like casters would grab Arcane sight (which kills so many surprises a gm comes up with, its not even funny), Beast shape (turn into anything now), Blink, Clone, Contingency, Detect Thoughts, Dimension Door, Disintegrate, Displacement, Elemental Body, Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat (+cheetah form, wow), Ethereal Jaunt (omg, ghost form fun), Fabricate, Fly, Form of the Dragon, Gaseous Form, Giant Form, Globe of invulnerability (you automatically stop over 80% of casters in most fantasy worlds), Haste, Holy Sword, Interposing Hand, Invisibility (I'm a healer, no one can see me, total win), Greater Invisibility (Did I mention I am a large, greatsword wielder?), Keen Edge, Levitate (total protection at early levels), Mage's Disjunction, Mage's Lucubration (extra options are very nice now), Mage's Magnificent Mansion (and similar conjure a home spells), Mage's Sword, Mirror Image, moment of Prescience, Pass without Trace, Permanency, Phantasmal Killer, Phantom Steed, Polymorph, Polymorph any Object (the stuff you can do here is insanity; hundreds of cubic feet of air into lava then miracle it into one giant elemental, for no xp, just off the top of my head), Prying Eyes, Rage, Reduce Person, Repulsion (mix with Repel Metal or Stone), Resilient Sphere (add Summon Nature's Ally for elementals and you are very safe), Sculpt Sound, See invisibility (a must now), Shield, Spell Turning, Stoneskin, Summon Monster Spells, telekinesis, Teleport, Time Stop (instant buff, for starters), Transformation, True Strike, Wail of the Banshee, Wall of Force
Most wizards-like casters would grab Augury (now I can get some answers), Antilife Shell, Breath of Life, Commune, Cure Spells, Death Ward (even with the nerf, any arcane caster would definitely find it useful), Detect (alignment), Divination, Divine Favor, Divine Power, Entangle, Freedom of Movement (total win), Heal/Harm, Heroes' Feast, Holy Sword, Pass without Trace, Purify Food and Water (great for socials), Raise Dead, Remove (everything), Repel Metal or Stone (too much fun on a battlefield, mix with Repulsion and fireballs), Restoration, Righteous Might (yes, it stacks with Giant Form, it is not a polymorph effect), Sculpt Sound, Shield of Faith, Silence, Spell Immunity, Spell Resistance, Storm of Vengeance, Summon Nature's Ally spells
The spoilered lists are just a glance of the spells that one type of caster would want, it's not all-inclusive, just a quick look at the stuff that is most likely to be touched upon by the general purview of that class.
I know I am long winded, sorry.
SR ROCKS!! fantastic magic system that demonstrates that flavor can define something just as well as actual mechanics. The only place where SR mechanics comes into play is in summoning (which pretty much happens at will as well as the projecting.
3.5 had a book called Unearthed Arcana, which was a collection of optional rules for the most part. It included a striped down version of the game that had only 3 classes, the warrior, the thief, and the mage. You might want to take a look at it as a jump off point.
Another option is you write up a basic spell pool, mana, magic points, whatever you want to call it, and price stuff out by level, since there is no specific class list. Make it more expensive for stuff with expensive material components?
The reason you have class lists is simply balance. The balance is the fact that the same spells are less likely to be spammed by everyone. And combining personal spells for the most part. Now all personal spells are available, which are the combos that were least likely before. Also combos in general become more common even if they are not personal, since one character can follow one class and eventually collect all the pieces. Someone could pack nothing but damage and a few healing spells (or a wand, since now any caster can use any wand) with little to no buffs, no worries.
As far as global benefits, everyone (casters) gets elementals sooner (summon nature's ally line). Anyone can summon anything. Everyone can heal. Everyone can teleport. Everyone can stop any caster early on (color spray or silence). Everyone can imbue with spell ability. Everyone can raise. Protection spells are weaker, since alignment spells of all types potentially become more common. And permanency just became megafun.
Assuming you are still using the dreadful Vancian magic system (spells per day, and yes I still use it too) every caster, with sufficient levels, can make themselves into whatever they want.
My standard set of buffs would look something like this*:
Long: Arcane Sight, Darkvision, Death Ward, Endure Elements, Freedom of Movement, Mage Armor, Magic Vestment, Mount (woohoo I can summon and move), Phantom Steed (better!), Protection from arrows, Resist Energy,
Short: Displacement, Invisibility (assuming I am not being direct), Mirror Image, Protection from [most likely evil], Reduce person (fantastic defensive spell for most non weapon users), Shield, Shield of Faith,
Melee: Aid, Bless Weapon, Divine Favor, Enlarge Person, Greater magic Weapon, Rage, Righteous Might, Stoneskin, True Strike (potentially, I might have just imbued a weapon with it, wand it, or contingency if high enough), Also a beast shape or elemental body if I find it useful over Righteous Might (one polymorph at a time).
Mage Battles: Globe of invulnerability, Misdirection, Spell Immunity, Spell Resistance, True Seeing
*= some of those spells will be in scrolls or wands, since I can make any I need and use without an issue, or permanent through permanency or worn items. Remember that some of these fall off as I continue to level up, potentially added back in when long duration or extra spell slots are common.
Assuming I am caught offguard and I am not killed/unconscious right away, I can dimension door to safety, summon or crowd control, then begin buffing, if for some reason I just don't run away to fight another day.
That is only up to 5th level spells from cleric and wizard, one pally spell for melee. I am sure I would find a few more in other lists, especially if you use anything other than corebook.
Hope that helps a bit ^.^
*not sarcasm* Shallowsoul, have you considered finding a new game to play? You obviously despise a large part of Pathfinder. If the 3.5 rules fit you so much better, there is nothing stopping you from going back to play it.
If you post something to a forum, expect people to disagree with you; just like you have the right to complain, we have the right to disagree without having to expect you throwing a hissy-fit automatically. If all you want is people to agree with you instantaneously, go to a mirror; opposing viewpoints lead to good ideas. It is the reason democratic countries have multiple parties, keeps checks and balances and makes you come up with new stuff. You think something is too lenient, others don't. It works.
Whether it is a minority or majority of people who do not like this particular section of the rules is inconsequential. A concise rewrite of the item creation system would be a major work (which would probably also include major changes to other parts of the game too) or would be very clinical in nature, removing all the customization (new, unique items) that is viable with it. Assuming it is an economical issue, Paizo will cater to the clientele that bothers to tell them that there is a problem, and as of right now on the official Paizo forums, it seems this problem fall into the minority.
Saying "I want something that does not require dm fiat" is illogical. They tell you pretty early on that some stuff you are going to have to decide on your own.
All dm's have to go through the ropes and figure out how to do things, its part of the learning curve. You can't expect every rule in a game as complex as Pathfinder to go through a "new dm screen" each time. There are plenty of magic items in the corebook for a new dm to simply not deal with item creation until he or she feels comfortable dealing with it.
Casters are already paying with Xp for their items. They have to level, then invest a feat in order to gain the ability to create something. Now they have to find the resources and time to create it. You can easily role play the component gathering sections, which would slow down item creation. Furthermore, circumstantial bonuses or penalties can apply to the necessary skill rolls, slowing down things further.
I have seen dm's abuse xp costs in both spells and magic item creation before, screwing over players. that is the flip side of a newbie dm doing a Monty Hall. So xp costs are not all that great. And parties with multiple levels are usually a bigger headache for the dm as the definition of a proper challenge changes. Not withstanding the fact that the Pathfinder experience system is not designed to handle it, it is extra bookkeeping as well.
Based on your posts (btw, most of your posts on this thread have a pretty negative tones or are simply full of attitude towards anyone who does not agree with you, don't expect people to be very nice or agreeable when you write like that) you sound like you want magic items to have a 1e/2e/ad&d/lotr/conan feel, which is Sword and Sorcery fantasy. Pathfinder is designed to be high fantasy.
Each item has a name, and making an item is more intensive. People hold on to something, and get it enchanted further later, because +1 weapons don't happen to be sitting everywhere. That sword your dad took from a battlefield long ago means much more, since it slayed 100 ogres.
You can do that already, there have been plenty of suggestions that will bring that saveur de vie that you wish for on this thread.
As to those that have a problem with his repeated questions, just don't bother posting to his threads, they will just die out. He has the right to ask, you have the right not to answer.
Thanks for all the comments =)
If I don't make a comment on your particular post(s) it is because someone else answered it already.
You get your first iterative attack at +5 with a longbow, not +6.
While it is somewhat silly, it makes sense that you are faster with a smaller weapon and takes you a bit of time (one level) to adjust your speed for a bigger weapon. For just one level, chances are that it would be of little difference once you account for the fact that the longbow the fighter has is most likely a +1 or better by level 5 (assuming the main weapon is the longbow).
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
I am lost on the 3 separate values...
I am not sure what you mean. I explain each value right below the table. What part in particular did you not understand? I will attempt to answer as best I can, just point out what is fuzzy.
I would merge the bows...
Individual bows behave differently so all you can really talk about is the potential. A longbow can potentially store more energy than a shortbow therefore have the ability to shoot a heavier arrow faster than a shortbow. A shortbow tends to be more efficient than a longbow therefore it will have greater potential to shoot a very light arrow faster than a longbow even though it is storing less energy.
It is not a perfect simulation. Pathfinder was never meant to be. Since they eliminated the importance of arrows (no frogcrotch arrows, really?), it makes sense to have the two categories, which also helps with balance in a world with small and large creatures.
While it would be easier to merge them, I did nothing to them (Azaelas Fayth classified them) other than give them a classification that is technically already there, only applied to melee for some reason.
This is the simplified 4/5/6 method. The corebook breaks down certain things (such as unarmed attacks and gauntlets) separate from the other weapons, and I kept it that way. I also included all the core ranged weapons for the same purpose.
TWF continues to work the same way, all the feats working as before. Again, this was for simplicity, which you will notice is a theme with this particular rules system, since it is tackling a complex subject and a change to the core system (how to determine extra attacks).
Initiative bonus for melee weapons are equal to the iterative attack rate (for the most part, see UA and gauntlets), while ranged weapons receive half (round down).
Weapons already include the particular bonuses you are referring to in their descriptions, so I don't want to touch those and complicate things further. I also stayed away from actually making extra math happen when actually rolling dice. That is why the greatsword vs dagger example you give would be a problem.
I like the concept of the extra bonuses, I just think it is a separate thread altogether.
@master Arminas: we are already giving them an initiative bonus, therefore modifying initiative. Ranged weapons get a bit less love, casters get practically none. The point of the thread is to enhance weapon users, particularly rogues and monks, not to penalize them. Anytime you can add a bonus to a character rather than a penalty and the result is the same, add the bonus. Players love bonuses, and hate penalties. If mathematically you are getting to the same place, there is no reason to upset your players.
@Wildbob: I am not using the "Declaration before initiative roll" rule. It is not going to be part of this particular set of rules for simplicity reasons. (Personally, I like the idea, although I prefer the way Gurps does it. You roll initiative, declare actions last to first, allowing faster characters to react to slower ones)
Weapon Speed: based on the weight category of the weapon, you gain a bonus to initiative and a shield bonus. You also determine how many attacks you have each turn.
Weapon Category/Iterative Attack Rate/Initiative Bonus/Shield Bonus
Unarmed Strike(with Imp Unarmed Strike)/+3/+3/+0
Thrown (Dart, Shuriken)/+3/+3/+0
Weapon Category: The type of weapon.
Iterative Attack Rate: You receive an extra attack for every X points of base attack bonus you have, where X is the weapon's Iterative attack rate. Each attack after the first drops its attack bonus by the Iterative attack rate (stacking). The slowest weapon you wield determines your Iterative attacks for the round.
Initiative Bonus: a weapon bonus to your initiative score, mostly based on size.
Shield Bonus: a shield bonus to your armor class, based on parry capability.
Weapons have three categories. Unfortunately, Pathfinder removes one for ranged weapons.
Fayth gave ranged weapons the category that was never given to them. And it looks downright perfect to me. (Awesome job Fayth)
I am going to summarize the rules in the next reply unless anyone else brings up anything, so please criticize. =)
I agree that mechanically it would just be easier to not split up the shields, and I argued with myself over it, I just wanted to give the option to other melees to not get terribly screwed.
As to the double weapons, it is pretty much just practically right out of the book. Look up either two weapon fighting or double weapons in the equipment chapter, under double weapons it explains how it is a one handed weapon or a one handed weapons + a light weapon, just depends on how it is wielded (use one end of the weapon in the turn, or use both, essentially).
A bit more paperwork, but I think it will do wonders for the poor rogue that gets royally screwed regularly. 3.5/pathfinder is not where simplifiers go, they have 4e (or bare bones multiverse, if they are lucky enough to hear about it, awesome indy game).
Going over the thread, I think Rainzax's 4/5/6 bonus to initiative makes more sense than my initiative, so larger weapons would be faster, simulating their larger reach by getting there sooner. While weight is a factor, your average large weapon wielder has more than enough strength to compensate.
Abadar, you are assuming I don't want a power increase for weapon wielding characters. A penalty to accuracy simply because they are using a lighter, smaller weapon makes no sense.
I don't think your math makes sense. Your base attack bonus does not change, so your chances to hit would not change (other than a bump to initiative, which may grant you extra flat footed targets on round one, and the extra chance to attack). You can't just add up all the attacks you get at 20 bab and average it out for your average "to-hit".
There is a downsize already built in. A fighter who takes a dagger over a greatsword is reducing his damage per turn considerably, for a chance to hit one or two more times, at the very bottom of his bab, so statistically, the trade-off is not as great as you seem to think. A dagger averages 2.5 damage per attack (+ 1/2 str, under the current rules on this thread) while a greatsword averages 7 damage per attack (+1.5 str).
At bab 20 (endgame, where most of the game for most people never plays much) a dagger would be 20/16/12/8/4 (2.5 x 5 = 12.5 dpt) while a greatsword would be 20/14/8/2 (7 x 4 = 28 dpt).
If wielding a weapon and a shield: Based on weapon speed. However, Bucklers and light wooden shields now have a +0 speed, light steel and heavy shield now have a -1 speed, and tower shields have a -2 speed. (a feat to reduce these penalties by 1 does not seem out of place). This means if you have certain bigger or heavier shields, you swing a bit slower. Remember the feat, and may also say that any masterwork shield drops the penalty by 1. Or treat it as TWF if you use the shield offensively as well (shield bash, spikes, etc).
Double weapons: considered one handed regardless if used as a one handed weapon or as a double weapon (which would be the equivalent of a one-handed weapon + a light weapon; add an extra attack).
As to questions:
Fayth (may I call you Fayth? perhaps Aza or AF? I don't want to be rude) I like the idea of light weapons dealing 1/2 str bonus without feat. It makes sense, those weapons are very rarely about inflicting damage with raw strength.
I seen that video before, he is awesome. Thanks for the link, I wanted to show that around to a few friends =)
As to your statement Atarlost, you can also make the assumption that an archer, regardless of bow or arrow (which in these games, arrows are not taken into consideration as much as they should), would be aiming at weak spots unprotected by plate or thick skin, such as face/eyes, neck, lower abdomen, or a joint (back shoulder/interior elbow/back knee).
Certain bows can pierce plate (less than 1-1.5mm over quilt and/or chain) with heavy arrows, usually at close range.
As to your very valid point mr. Loblaw (love your law blog btw ^.~) I would either rule that you get an amount of iterative attacks equal to the slowest weapon used in the round. Or go with the best speed but lose one attack for each weapon past the first. Or you follow the rules for twf for the first 2 weapons. After that, you begin to lose attacks for each additional one you pull out, one for one.
(Please remember that I am trying to beef melees in general, but mostly rogues and monks in this particular case. When comparing power levels, I am most likely thinking Full caster vs. Others)
Well, I guess we could always add two (three, including the weapon speed) new traits to all weapons to increase the simulation and make weapon speed viable.
One is an initiative bonus (or penalty) and the second is a parry bonus.
The initiative bonus (but not the penalty?) from weapons would not stack. light weapons receiving a positive bonus, up to two handed weapons receiving a +0 or maybe even a penalty (at least for a large hammer weapon?).
The parry bonus is a shield bonus that does not stack with other shield or parry bonuses, only highest applies (it is long overdue for melees to also gain some defense from a weapon, most weapons are designed to do both). That covers TWF or a shield. I am thinking Two handed weapons get a +2 (maybe +3 for something like the greatsword, as it supposed to be wide), One handed weapons get a +1, and light weapons get +0.
I also think that would be an incentive for larger weapons, and a true increase to ac as a whole, which as most rpg mathphiles out there can attest, it is not as important a defense past early levels.
To get any of these bonuses or penalties, the weapon would have to be wielded (just carrying it does not grant you anything).
All of these are subject to change:
If wielding two weapons: the slowest weapon determines iterative attacks + one extra attack at the highest bab. Regular penalties apply (so you still want the feats).
If wielding a weapon and a shield:
(I will continue tomorrow, sleepy)