|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
For the record, I never said point buy stat creation was bad. I use that all the time in PF over rolling. What I mean was full on point buy systems where you build an entire character. Things like HERO and GURPS.
I dislike Prestige Classes in the core. I prefer having a character concept that doesn't require 6 levels of crappy multiclassing. Prestige Class that are more from a story line perspective (like in Paths of Prestige) are more my jam.
Beside, we already have the magus, the slayer/ninja, the bloodrager, and the myrmadarch that take the concepts of Prestige Classes (Eldritch Knight, Assassin, Dragon Disciple, Arcane Archer) and allow them to be playable right from the get go. Personally, I'd absolutely LOVE a Mystic Theurge, but for me, I have the Magister class from RGG.
Honestly, having played point buy systems, I can tell you that would really be easy to abuse and game. It's better to have advice that can help guide a GM make good judgement calls about class design.
Point buy systems can never beat experienced advice.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
Divine casters and arcane casters have fairly different spell lists. While the cleric does have some powerful spells, many of their spells are buffing spells. Arcane full casters have a wider utility of spells that they can cast from. And the arcane caster that can use armor have altered spell lists to compensate for that.
And considering that divine casters were brought down in power from the 3.5 transistion, I'd hardly call divine casters their favorites.
Exactly. And people that wanted an Asian setting had to deal with these type of threads and comments.
"Great, we gotta deal with these weeabo settings that don't belong in a western setting."
"Why cant we have a separate setting for this? I don't want ninjas / samurai stretching my disbelief in a traditional western setting."
"If I wanted samurai , I'd play Legend of the Five Rings. "
And thus the cycle repeats itself. Because apparently people aren't allowed to have fun with options another person doesn't like.
Rasputin Must Die! clearly ;)
No joke, though, that was probably one of the most well-written adventures of 2013. Even people that thought Paizo jumped the shark on that were like "Damn, that was pretty good".
As for the "rabid, traditionalist fans" comment, while it is hyperbole, it's sadly kind of true. Look through the forums and compare how many "Give us Numeria" topics there are vs "Don't ruin our fantasy with tech" and you'll see that more often than not, it's the traditional people making the fuss. Not us. Tian Xia was proof of that. So much vitriol and borderline racism in those topics. In fact, pretty much any time Paizo does something that is a divergence from the tradition, it brings on the waves of naysayers wary that their ideal fantasy setting is suddenly in peril.
Yeah, I am a little sad about how the momentum to Tian Xia lost steam after Jade Regent. At least we got some good modules in there. I just really would love to see more of the other countries fleshed out. Especially the non-traditional ones you don't see in RPGs, like the ones based on SE Asian culture. Anti-weeaboos be damned!
Exactly. We don't want one AP of support, then get abandoned for other things. I'd really like to see more products that "rattles the cages" as it will. Not replacing traditional modules and APs, but also not swept aside for them. I still have faith in Paizo for it, since Distant Worlds and Rasputin Must Die! showed that this isn't just a niche thing (as many would have you believe).
If having an Asian, Egyptian, and Pirates setting is breaking the mold, especially given how many DnD adventures take place in those settings, we have a problem.
Though I do remember when Jade Regent was announced and how up in arms everybody was about how Paizo was ruining Pathfinder and they needed to stick with traditional fantasy and not "this weeabo crap". Replace weeabo with filthy tech and that's what it is.
It's just a bit disheartening that when we finally get an adventure that tries something different, it's always met with the same crowd that wants to keep the adventures from trying new things. Or decries it as ruining their fantasy. Or deem it just a phase and hope we don't get near enough the support traditional fantasy gets. Not saying YOU are, but the tone from others is here.
idk, the pissing and moaning didn't stop Paizo from bringing out an Asian setting or firearms. God I remembered the borderline racism when Tian-Xia was announced.
As a matter of fact, yes. It is traditional :) Along with City of the Gods.
A lot of books from the period of 0e/1e had aspects of fantasy and science in it. This was long before people latched on to Lord of the Rings and made that the bar that all settings had to be compared to. My point is, a return to what is deemed as "traditional" isn't long overdue. In fact, it's the reverse. Getting things that break the mold is long overdue. I couldn't count the number of "traditional" modules and Adventure Paths that exist in DnD for those that want it. But I can count DnD modules like this on one hand. Barrier of the Peaks, City of the Gods, and this. That's pretty much my point for people who complain that "we need more traditional APs" or "Pathfinder is becoming too genre inclusive". This AP isn't the end of traditional modules. Rather, this AP is a bone thrown to those of us that want something more. Something different and exciting that sparks the imagination and isn't tied down to the fantasy tropes we see in every video game, book, and movie.
At level 20/MR 10, the best bets are the Half Celestial/Half Fiend templates. Both would give a +3 to CR and be fitting for PCs that want to step into godhood.
Lich and Shadow Lord would be cool, clocking in at +2 CR.
The CR 25 includes that. Without PC wealth, it'd just be CR 24.
I've actually contemplated giving players the half-celestial/fiend or advanced templates to continue on into godhood.
Lamashtu killed Curchanus when she was only a demon lord. Took his portfolio too. And being a bonafide demon lord requires you to be CR 26-30. Not impossible for PCs.
Let's just face facts. There are two groups of people. The first like the idea of killing gods. It takes them back to Birthright and mythologies where cultural heroes defeat the gods. The other thinks that you shouldn't kill gods. Gods are kind of the last ultimate thing left in the universe and should be unkillable unless the story wills it.
Both believe the other group is having BADWRONGFUN and are probably dirty little powergames/power hungry GMs.
Meanwhile, This is a thing.
You had me up until giving it half caster progression. I'd be very against that. I love the sorcerer and prefer it to the wizard. I love that it's the other side of the coin as far as full casters go. That's my draw to it and changing it from a full caster would kill the class for me. I think it should stay a full caster.
That said, I'd like to see bloodlines similar to the Oracle Mysteries. A kind of "choose your blood power" thing. Better skill points is cool. Class Skills are fine I think, but more skill points is nice. But yeah, bloodlines could be a bit better.
Though perhaps the issue isn't the other casters, but the wizard. Maybe we need a chained wizard.
Not to steal James's thunder, but in the Blood of Fiends/Angels, it is commonly described that the outsider-to-native-outsider lineage goes:
fiend > half-fiend > tiefling
celestial > half-celestial > aasimar
So the native outsiders are like the grandkids of an outsider. In addition, the tiefling/aasimar gene can spontaneously appear in a family. So even if a group of people are ten generations removed from the original outsider, they can still pop out an aasimar or tiefling.
That said, there are examples where aasimars and tiefling are born due to other circumstances that don't involve making the beast of two backs with an outsider. That's actually a plot point in one of Paizo's adventure paths.
So I have two house rules I've been brewing up, thanks to reading a lot of 13th Age, D&D 4th Edition, and Marvel RPG (Cortex Heroic).
Climax Dice: The first is something I call the Climax Die. Essentially, at the beginning of combat, I set out a d4 die in view of everyone. After the first round of combat, the die grows bigger (d6, d8,) until it becomes a d12 (where it stays). A player that rolls a natural one for an attack or save causes the dice to drop by one step, while an enemy that does the same causes it to rise one step. At any time they need an extra dice, a player can grab the dice and roll it. That player can only roll once per round. They add the rolled number to the following:
Now, when a player uses the die, it drops back down to a d4. In addition, the die that they used is added to the Danger Pool. This pool can be used by the GM in the same way, only they have no limit on dice per round. Each die must be rolled for something different. The GM can't put them all on damage, or two on AC. Once a GM rolls the die (or dice), they are removed from the danger pool. In addition, when the GM's monsters roll a 20 for an attack or save roll, they can step up the lowest value die in the Danger Pool by one. If that die is a d12, the GM instead adds a d4 to the Danger Pool. If a player rolls a 20 for an attack or save, the GM loses their lowest die. The Danger Pool starts a story arc with one d4 and at the end of a story arc, the GM empties the Danger Pool.
Recovery: This house rule uses the Wounds and Vigor subsystem in Ultimate Combat, a system I really love. Though I'm sure you can adapt this for normal HP. This is for use in a low to no magic game, where there is little to no magical healing. Players gain an amount of Recoveries equal to half their Constitution Score (round down, minimum 1). This represents a five minute break. The player heals an amount of Vigor points equal to their hit die + (character level * Con modifier). If a character is multiclassed, they use the highest of the hit dice. These recoveries refresh completely after 8 hours of rest.
For healing Wounds, a player can use the Heal skill untrained to heal the victim. The DC is 15. The medic heals a number of wound points equal to the victim's Con Bonus (minimum 1). If the medic is trained in using the Heal Skill, they can heal the victim for more. The medic rolls the victim's highest hit die and adds the victim's Con bonus (minimum 1) to see how many wounds they heal. Both uses of the Heal skill use up a single use of the victim's recovery. This healing must be down within an hour of taking damage, or else the medic cannot heal Wounds in this manner. Think of it like the Golden Hour.
So, what do you think? Too overpowered, underpowered? Thanks for any feedback. I'd love to give these a proper playtest.
Here's a Google Docs link so you can see the updated version of them.
At the same time, though, it kind of makes it less appealing for those trying to plan for a budget. Not having a solid length of what the AP will be will make that more difficult.
Plus, if it's an AP you don't like, you'd have to wait almost a year to resubscribe to grab something you might like. That's a long time to wait for an AP you want. I couldn't imagine how much that would affect sales when people unsubscribe for an extra three months.
Plus, I'd imagine that writing up 6 would be a handful already. But a nine-parter? Especially trying to keep up with it during the Con Crunch? I think JJ would be able to shed more light on this.
I mean, I think splitting the APs into three 4 parters would be interesting. But I don't think I can get behind varying the APs to such a degree. Feeling unstable and the consumer in me like stability. Sorry.
However, they are getting a great deal of support from fan for more than just the standard western fantasy. First it was Distant Worlds, then Rasputin Must Die, and now Numeria. So while it might seem like one-offs, they are giving a great deal of more support for these style of play. And chances are they won't stop.
Then again, I still wish there was more support for Tian Xia than just some PFS modules. So, who knows.
To be fair, Gorbacz is. But that's Gorbacz for ya!
*cue sitcom canned laughter*
Except you kind of are being dismissive. You made it clear that you don't want Paizo to do this with your Rifts comment. Pretty much a "Why do this when we have Rifts?" Imagine if you wanted more classic fantasy and someone said "Why publish more classic fantasy when we have 30+ years of that to work with"? Probably wouldn't like that, no? Same with the "Is Paizo Being Too Genre Inclusive" thread you posted in. It's essentially saying, "Yes Paizo is being too genre inclusive and I'm afraid it'd going to overshadow what I like, so they shouldn't do it". Or else, why post this "fear that fans of classic/high fantasy" that you have? What is it you meant when you had a fear for the Technology Guide? ;)
Honestly, I'm not dismissive of peoples' wants from Pathfinder, and at the very least, I'm not of yours. I love having options, even if I don't use them. I think that having option for people that like classic fantasy is great. And I think having options for people that like sword and planet style is great as well. And psionics and eastern settings and New World settings... For me, having options for everyone is great for the fan base. The beauty of it is you don't have to buy it if you don't like it. I may never run an eastern campaign, but it's great that someone has the tools to run one. And as Paizo has shown, they will continue to support different genres and playstyles. Which is awesome. It means you get to enjoy Pathfinder how you wish, and I get to enjoy Pathfinder how I wish. The existence of what you like doesn't lower my enjoyment of Pathfinder, and vice versa.
Everyone can have their cake and eat it too. And cake is awesome :D
To be fair, you did end with the snide remark that compares what Pathfinder is doing to the utter rules mess that is Rifts. Subtle and maybe unintentional, but it felt like the comparison was out of disgust. Also by saying that, you are essentially saying "Paizo is wrong in doing this and leave it to another system". Which, for those of us that like more options, is something we think is bunk. It's like saying "Paizo, don't do Tian Xia. If I wanted that, I'd play Lot5R". Feels very dismissive of our likes.
I know people didn't like it, but I actually really liked the trials in Book 4 of Crimson Throne. It was the only AP I was able to play start to finish (sadly, looks like current Jade Regent is over due to me moving and GM disinterest). I actually liked being chased out of the city and having to earn the trust of the tribes of Shoanti. And Book 6 felt like a "heroes return to save the day" moment, which was awesome for all of us. Shame people didn't like book 4 because it was really awesome and well done.
Honestly I never really liked non-magic abilities that force someone to attack you. From a verisimilitude stand point, it can make things really janky. Imagine if you are playing a fighter and your friend is in danger. You could go save them right? But if an orc fighter decided to hit you and you failed the Aggression save, suddenly, saving your friend in mortal danger is less of a priority because you have this unnerving need to beat the hell out of that orc. It's abusable and doesn't make a lot of sense in the real world. It'd prevent people from running away from an attacking foe when they are clearly outmatched because GRRRR AGGRESSION!
I think 4ed and the Cavalier does Aggression right. It's still a choice left to the victim, but you or your party still get benefits if they attack the tank or not. I'd much prefer something that doesn't take away agency from the player/GM.
Luckily, the Technology Guide and the Iron Gods AP aren't necessary to run a Pathfinder game. If you are the GM and you don't want futuristic technology in your game, then don't include it. It's that simple. Just like how some people don't allow firearms or eastern inspired things. These options exist for those that wish to utilize it in their campaign. For example, I'm running a New World Renaissance campaign that takes place in a psuedo Caribbean. So, I need firearms in my setting. In addition, I do have a little influence of Ancient Astronauts in my setting. So this book is perfect for me. However, if it isn't something you wish to use, then you simply don't buy it and don't allow it. No one is forcing you. Its existence isn't going to cheapen the quality of the fantasy you run.
It's better to have many options for different styles of play that different people have, rather than be shackled to a singular style of play. I'd honestly would love to see Pathfinder expand its ruleset for more than just fantasy, but that may be a project better left for 3PP right now. I do hear good things about the Modern Path.
Joe M. wrote:
Honestly this is the main reason why I have found it pointless to bring up my fighter thoughts in the other thread. The general tone is "The fighter sucks and if you don't agree with our changes 100%, then you are playing the game wrong/too ignorant to understand". And while I share the belief that the fighter could use a boost, there are some things about the fighter class I do like. But I feel like it's pointless to throw in any feedback when it's going to be met with "You are what's killing martials right now!". So why bother giving our feedback if they don't want any that doesn't completely agree with the echo chamber?
Like LG said, Numeria has been here since the beginning of Pathfinder. Golarion itself is a modular, kitchen-sink world by design. If there is an aspect someone doesn't like, they can easily remove it. Better to have more options that you can ban if you don't like. And I like aliens in my fantasy, so this will be fun for me.