Don't forget that Julio has a drama-based prestige class - if any character is entitled to flout the rules for the sake of the story, it's him. He probably has a Dramatic Exit class ability that lets him leave a fight without provoking as long as he does it in an awesome way.
We just introduced a new 11th level Warpriest to our party last night, and I was DMing, so this feedback may be a little vague as I'm not on the front line of the mechanics. We are playing Kingmaker (more or less), and the character didn't see much in-game action last night.
However, one thing we noticed right away was how poorly the abilities granted stacked with the magic item package the party had. We aren't dedicated min-maxers, but we do have a handful of crafting feats in the party. Each party member has a ring of protection +2 or greater and a stat bump item with at least a +2 enchancement bonus. As we were trying to pick appropriate domains for the warpriest to fit him into the party, we kept running into domain abilities that were ineffectual for the party level - any bonus the warpriest could provide did not stack with and thus did not do anything to the party members with magic items (which was effectively all party members).
This may be an intentional design choice, and it might be that these abilities are intentionally skewed to be effective at low levels, but become less useful as the character advances. However, other abilities in that same slot for different domains continued to be effective/useful (e.g., one ability would've let the character fly) even at the levels of the party.
I realize character generation is probably on the border of what constitutes playtesting, but the initial experience with making a high level Warpriest is that it has some abilities that are dead-ends/traps for a typically equipped party.
Alex Martin wrote:
I especially liked how the prior conflict between Nale and Malack reinforced the notion that Durkon would be helpless, but that there were important differences at play in the confrontation between Durkon and the psion (e.g., the shadow (obviously), but also the lack of negative energy protection that Nale had in place).
When it comes to the ratings, you've got to trust the system.
My latest take is that this is Alias, but without the awesomeness of Jennifer Garner playing sexy dress-up every episode. Also, her nerdy tech guy > FitzSimmons.
Barring the unexpected and dramatic death of half the existing characters, I don't think I'm destined to watch this show for much longer.
Alright, I'm just gonna ask - WTF is being argued here? I keep trying to figure out what proposition ciretose is making that gets people hot and bothered, but all I see is stuff about killing horses with slings and using them as eyepatches.
Is the argument about whether a slinger is as effective as a bowman of some stripe?
It the argument that the sling, while worse than a bow, is still not horrible?
Is the argument that the sling, while worse than a bow, is still a viable choice for characters who don't have martial weapon proficiency?
Is the argument that the sling should be made better so that it doesn't suck as much as it currently does?
Help me out, people! I don't understand how we got 23+ pages out of the sling.
Belkar is surpised he just bought it; Durkon is surprised he's unaffected!
(Though I suppose we will know for sure in an unknowable amount of time)
Hmmmm...Belkar does have a surprise face instead of an angry face like Roy and Haley. I was expecting X's if Belkar had been killed by the psion, but Nale had a similar expression right before he died from an unexpected attack.
There are edition changes (1e-->2e; 3e-->3.5; maybe 3.5-->PF) and then there are EDITION CHANGES (2e-->3e; 3.5-->4e; maybe 3.5-->PF). I wouldn't necessarily object to the former, but am not particularly interested in the later.
But, that's neither here nor there - all signs indicate that there are no plans for a new edition of Pathfinder any time in the near future. The closest they seem to come is incorporating and updating materials from the softcover supplements into the hardcover offerings, which is a trend I generally like. I have a hankering for a PF spell tome that collects, updates, and polishes the best of the spells have been released to date.
The wall is just an example - you can take any number of obstacles where Pathfinder sets the DC based on the environmental factors and 4e sets the DC based on character level and challenge. Neither approach is bad, just different. It's also not black or white - you'll often see high level Pathfinder modules scrambling to justify a high DC on a particular check that should be easy in order to have a meaningful challenge for high level players. Similarly, 4e had some modifiers based on the terrain/etc. But, for the most part, Pathfinder tries more to model the reality whereas 4e tries more to base things on making appropriate challenges for the PCs.
<--Insert extended arguments regarding gamist v. simulationist stuff here.
Base Class: The classes in the Core Rule Book - rogue, fighter, wizard, barbarian, sorcerer, etc. I'd recommend starting with just the core book and the core classes for now. If you use the Beginner Box as your intro, I believe it only has 4 classes and does a good job introducing those (fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard or sorcerer). They go from levels 1 through 20.
Core Class: These are classes introduced in the Advanced Players Guide, Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat and are a little more advanced (alchemist, summoner, magus, gunslinger, inquisitor, etc.) They are balanced against the Base Classes and also go from levels 1 through 20.
Archetypes: Archetypes take an existing Base or Core Class and replaces some of the class abilities. For example, the Invulernable Ranger is a barbarian, except instead of getting dodge based abilities, it gets better damage reduction. Archetypes are not in the core rules, but are fairly easy to use and implement.
Prestige Classes: These are advanced classes that require pre-reqs. Back in the 3e days, you'd typically plan your character around the prestige class you wanted to qualify for, but Paizo has done a lot to make the base/core classes better and the prestige classes aren't as important or powerful. You can't typically qualify before level 5 or higher, and these classes only go from levels 1 through 10.
As a new gamer, I'd recommend sticking with the core rules classes and maybe introducing archetypes.
Nathanael Love wrote:
When you suggest that you should make Magic Missile have to roll to hit you have to expect people don't think its a good idea.
Except that's not what I suggested. You said that. I said magic missle is not newb friendly because it doesn't follow the general rules. Try to keep up here.
Nathanael Love wrote:
You weren't clear that you meant a different selection of spells in the book compared to removing the spells altogether.
And yet, even after I've made it clear, you've still been responding as if I'm proposing a revised version of the rules instead of a re-cut version of the rules. As shown by...
Nathanael Love wrote:
Just to make sure we're clear, I'm not actually proposing changing the rules. I'm proposing a core rule book which takes certain elements of the game not featured in the core rules (e.g., spells, feats, classes, races, etc. from other sources), perhaps combining them with new elements (e.g., a spell like magic missile, that isn't actually magic missile, but that has an attack roll and does damage), and releasing the whole shabam as a standalone product (which still has access to all the old grandfathered stuff, just not in that particular version of the core rule book). No part of this proposal includes taking existing books from your home or traveling through time to alter the contents of the original CRB to change the audience or its function. I'm well aware of the events leading to the current CRB, I generally think it's pretty damn awesome, and I was just spouting off about one particular product type that I've always thought would be groovy (an alternate CRB) and specifically mentioned that the spell issue is a pet peeve (pet peeve != OMG MAJOR DESIGN FLAW) when you decided I was attacking game balance, apple pie, and generally tilting at historical windmills.
Nathanael Love wrote:
No idea who or what you're responding to, but it wasn't to my point. Go b$&$@ about balance to someone who's interested in having that discussion with you. Wizards could still take magic missile because it's in the main CRB; my proposal is for a parallel CRB with different classes/spells/feats/etc. featured.
My point is that the core rulebook isn't necessarily filled with feats and spells that reinforce the core concepts of the game. Example: a new player learns they can critically hit with a ray spell. What ray spell can they take in the core rule book at 1st level? Ray of Enfeeblement, which can't crit! I'm not saying get Ray of Enfeeblement is too powerful, but replacing it with a ray spell that actually follows the general rules for ray spells will help teach a new player how to use ray spells (though I suppose Ray of Frost is also conveniently available at 0 level). If you're going to deviate sharply from the generic ray spell rules (or the generic stat damage rules), save it for higher level spells that are less likely to be encountered by a newb.
Yes, I get that spells and feats break the rules, but they also help in teaching the game. The current grab bag of spells reflect the legacy of the game and it couldn't hurt to revisit what to include/not include if a product is needed with a slightly different focus (e.g., teaching newbs). No where did I advocate the absurd braindead version of the rules that you made up and then incorrectly attributed to me.
I suspect you'll follow-up with further posts in which you introduce various straw-men based around core rule books where the only classes are fighter, expert, and sorcerer, but I will leave the responses to those posts to the scarecrows to whom they are addressed.
I've always dreamed of an alternate core rule book, which provides a different mix of races, classes, and spells, that also has the actual core rules (combat, movement, etc). Spells in particular are one of my pet peeves when it comes to newbs - a lot of the low level spells don't follow the general rules for spells because they are wonky grandfathered spells from prior editions (e.g., magic missle and its lack of a to-hit roll, ray of enfeeblement can't crit because it's a penalty rather than stat drain, etc.) I'd like to see a core rulebook that is newb friendly by eliminating the grandfathered elements and focusing on clean and simple executions of the core concepts of the game.
Before you "fix" it for being "plain stupid," you might want to try to understand what the rule is designed to deal with. A paladin's detect evil ability completely destroys low level adventures where the identity of the villian is an open question. Instead of the paladin's ability resolving the entire adventure without a single roll, the party needs to investigate and identify the villian using their wits, skills, and other abilities. The paladin's ability is also very good in low level dungeons because it can be used through wooden doors and the like, allowing the party access to an easy to use enemy detection power.
That said, if those aren't the types of adventures you run, or you don't mind the PCs having enemy radar, by all means, fix away.
Damn, this thread is even less coherent than these threads typically are wont to be. Let's review!
1. Private companies aren't susceptible to hostile takeovers. Anyone can sue anyone, but if you're found to be doing it for bad reasons (e.g., anti-competitive intent), you can get hit with punitive damages and the legal fees of the other side. Short of Hasbro sending Lisa and Vic a large suitcase with all remaining Star Wars collectables they don't already own, there's no way Hasbro can force a sale.
2. Paizo is tiny compared to Hasbro. WotC is small. D&D is a small portion of WotC (which is in turn, a small portion of Hasbro), a company which makes the bulk of its money off Magic. Hasbro bought WotC for Pokemon*, not D&D. They could not care less about D&D unless and until it actually starts making real money. So far, that ain't happening. As an ancillary point, Hasbro could not care less about Pathfinder. If they were to deign to sell D&D to Paizo (lord knows why given that they can sit on the brand and relaunch/reuse/etc. in the future at low cost as others have mentioned), they would not be selling it based on Hasbro's valuation. That's like selling someone your spare tire based on the value of your car.
3. Anti-trust/monopoly laws get kicked in when there's a barrier to entry/harm to consumers. D&D being owned by Pathfinder isn't going to trigger anti-trust issues anymore than Disney buying Star Wars triggered anti-trust issues. Even if somehow Paizo bought every single existing pen and paper rpg company in existence as of today, a new one could be formed tomorrow with minimal cost/investment. Maybe if we really went off the rails and created a scenario in which Paizo magically owned all the rpg distribution channels, but given that they would need to own the internet to pull that off, I think we should dial back the crack smoking instead.
*make that Magic...
I'm not a Paizo fan. I just buy their products, and play their game, and read their message boards, and go to their conventions, and tell my friends how much I like their products. I'm actually entirely indifferent between Paizo's products and WotC's products, even though many people say that WotC's products are written on the skins of babies and cause cancer when you read them.
Damnit - if someone doesn't go through Chekov's portal, I'm going to be pissed!
Hmmm...maybe Tarquin will...
...send some troops through it to see what happens. Seems like the original portal killed the goblins Xykon sent through, but maybe that was a feature of the gate.
I'm more concerned with the seriously bloated cast. Although that probably won't matter too much, since it's doubtful that anyone other than Wolverine will be allowed to have the spotlight for more than a fleeting moment.
Not if Halle Berry's agent has anything to say about it! She's a Very Important Actress playing the Most Important Member of the X-men, and if Storm doesn't have a big important role at the expense of better actors and more interesting characters, Halle Berry will be in her trailer sulking until things change.
As for the sentinel itself, it's not nearly as terrible looking as the transformers. But, to be fair, even the coolest depicition of a sentinel in the comics is pretty dated and ugly,* and it seems like it's even harder to make it look good in real life (or CGI, as the case may be).
*Based upon my comics consumption pre-2000 or so. If anyone has a more recent piece of sentinel art that looks awesome, I will happily eat my words.
I don't think D&D takes up enough of Hasbro's profit share that it doing poorly would ruin the business.
I doubt D&D takes up enough of WotC's profit share that it doing poorly would ruin the business. When it comes to Hasbro, D&D is probably less to them than the amount they spend on toilet paper in company HQ.
Plus, all the whining about how Joss Whedon loves to kill characters as evidenced by Coulson's death has gotten very old, very quickly. You might as well complain that the deaths of Uncle Ben or Martha and Thomas Wayne were arbitrary. Having a supporting character die to spur the heroes to action is a trope that pre-dates Whedon. The only way Coulson' death could've been more obvious is if he had talked about how he was going to sell his Captain America cards to fund his retirement, scheduled to occur the following week.
I'd join in the opinion of those who disagree with everything the OP wrote (sorry!). It's almost a checklist of everything I disliked about 3.5 (feats strewn across multiple splatbooks willy-nilly, prestige classes generally, and a high number of hardcover books). I'm getting worn down by Paizo's current release schedule as it is - more hardcover books is the last thing I want.
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if some people aren't conservative simply because they're more competent than your average person, and can do awesome things like roll in with a 1st level character and whup ass in a 1e game, fix their own car, balance their checkbook, etc. They're the kind of badasses who roll up their sleeves and just get the damn job done without drama or excuses. They help those around them, they give to their church, and they generally make the world a better place. And yet they have to deal with utter incompetence of so many people who can't seem to differentiate their elbows from their a!%~#$%s and can't help but become frustrated.
I'm not saying this to set up a "and they are myopic and insensitive bastards" punchline, but rather to say that I wish we had more of them. Alternatively, I'd accept an explanation of why s##@ keeps coming out of my elbow.
Finally got around to reading a playtest packet. My impression is, "cute." It's the best retro clone I've ever seen; I can see how this edition might appeal to that segment of the gaming community (assuming they can overcome their accumulated hatred of all things WotC).
I'd say there's a 30% chance I'll pick up the book when it hits, which is a pretty dramatic increase given that I was at 1% before.
For whatever it's worth, my initial reaction way back in 2008 was pretty similar to yours and based on substantially the reasoning above. It felt very much to me that Paizo had decided to insert a real-world political debate into a product that didn't really have anything to do with that debate.
What I didn't appreciate, and what I've come to appreciate since then, is how for so many people this isn't a political issue - it's a personal issue because this is who they are. In a sense, it's fan service - providing a certain segment of the audience with content that appeals to them. Fairly minor content at that, given that it amounts to 2-3 lines of text (at most) in any particular AP volume. The inclusion of LGBTQ characters isn't at the expense of other content, doesn't affect game balance, and really means a lot to a certain segment of the Paizo audience. Given these parameters, it's hard to see how such elements cause any harm and provides a context in which it is not a political issue.
That said, there's another line in this thread which strikes me as a bridge too far, and that's the assertion that the failure to include LGBTQ elements in your home game makes you bad/homophobic/etc. Maybe I'm playing the game wrong, but the relationship status of NPCs simply doesn't come up in my campaigns. I don't feel the need to highlight that element and find it very annoying that so many people insist that the game is being played wrong as a result.
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
Imho, if it doesn't have advertisements (and not just for other products by the same company), it ain't a magazine.
I miss the ads! :-(
Oh well, I'm old and bitter and still have a surprising amount of anger towards WotC with regards to the original cancellation of the magazines.
Time to turn the other cheek and celebrate the death of the imposters! (That is what people mean when the say "turn the other cheek," right?)
Having their own rack seems more appropriate...
Going away implies they still exist. Dragon and Dungeon have been gone for many years, notwithstanding the use of those labels for website articles by WotC.
It is a shame that subscription based periodicals isn't a successful business model. Someone should give Paizo a heads up before they waste more time and money getting Pathfinder up to isse #100...
To be fair, some of the blame lies with Sony and their lazy naming convention. Nintendo and Sega set the precedent of coming up with a new name for your next gen console, but Sony couldn't be bothered with that practice and went with the boring old numbering. That painted Microsoft into the corner where they couldn't just be lazy and copy Sony's naming convention because their X-Box 2 might've been seen as older/less advanced than the PS3.
To really solve their naming problems, Microsoft should release a new console in October called the X-Box 3. It will be a box with an outlet and the guts of an Atari 2600. Then, in November, they can re-brand the Xbone as the Xbox 4 and all will be happy!
That strategy will be even more advantageous in the next gen of consoles, when Microsoft can unleash the full fury of Roman numerals and release the X-BOX V!!!!
(Or, better yet, they could release an additional 7 consoles between now and November, (X-Boxes 3-9) and then re-name the Xbone the X-Box X, which will most certainly not be abbreviated to the XXX).
I should be in product marketing.
P.S. Wii is still a terrible name.
Nintendo already won the stupidest name for a console contest when they released the Revolution as the Wii. If a company can intentionally release a product with such a horrible name and have it do well, I'm sure Microsoft will weather having their device referred to as the Xbone.
Heck, Wii doesn't even sound stupid to me anymore, and I used to cringe every time I heard it uttered.
I have a nostalgic desire to return to 2e from time to time, but it doesn't last all that long when exposed to the harsh light of day. I played in a Hackmaster/1e style campaign in the not so distant past, and it's mismash of rules quickly moved from cute and quirky to DIE IN A FIRE!
In particular, I was playing a monk who had an insanely small percentage chance of killing a foe with a single attack (I think - it's been a while). At one point the dice gods smiled upon me, and I actually rolled a 20 and confirmed the killing blow on percentile dice (chance of success was in the low teens), only to have the DM decide that my character (a dwarf) couldn't actually reach the vital nerve of his hobgoblin opponent. Sure, that could happen in Pathfinder (e.g., a critical hit against a golem), but it's a lot less DM-fiaty when it happens.
I tried grappling in the same game (we were fighting a spellcaster), and discovered that, as much criticized as grapple rules are, they're way better than not having any such rules at all.
Liz Courts wrote:
FLAGGED FOR BEING OFF-TOPIC!!!!
Golarion doesn't have Jelly Bellys, and the way you eat them is badwrongfun. Your hands get sticky and gross.
In the 80s, I was really big into Satanism because I played D&D (natch). I brought this new girl into our gaming group, and she couldn't handle the stress. Her character, some ridiculous thief thing called Lotus Blossom or something, died. Even though I explained to her that Satan could make her more powerful and even bring her dead character back to life, she couldn't take it and cracked, committing suicide. I remember meeting her former pastor, Jack Chick, at the funeral, and telling him that it was all his fault for not embracing the dark master's teachings.