|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Steve Geddes wrote:
It's clear. I had the same puzzle. We eventually concluded it was ambiguous and went with spell level (ie cure wounds is always +2). We figured they're pretty good about explicitly using 'spell slot' when that's what they mean.
1. A first level spell would be +3 (level +2), and2. I have the opposite interpretation. Note The same wording is used in the dispel magic spell.
Read the paragraph on page 201 about casting spells at a higher level it seems that if you use a 3rd level spell to cast cure wounds you have just cast a 3rd level spell.
DM Jeff wrote:
I use masterwork weapons in 5e. I decided if one damage die of the weapon rolls a 1, consider it a 2 instead. That's it.
This is what I am planning as well.
I am thinking of also having it double the short range for thrown weapons.
A possible issue with this is that in 3.x all magic weapons were masterwork (the logic being as I understand it that most magic weapons would have been crafted to masterwork level before being enchanted) and the magic bonus overwrote the masterwork bonus. Do you then in 5e say that all magic weapons have the masterwork bonus?
Do you have masterwork armour in 5e?
There's also lots of free stuff for 4th including downloadable pre-gen characters, classes, adventures, and simply buying 1 month of DDI gets you the ENTIRE system of rules, classes, races, monsters, feats, powers/spells, and adventures. You could download all the Dungeon adventures and the Scales of War AP for 1 lump price.
Is this right? I have never used DDI or 4e but I would be interested in downloading the online dungeons and adventures to read them and possibly mine them.
So, assuming I'm a noob at this stuff what would I do and what would I be able to get ?
Why are you quitting playing pathfinder?
I quit because it was too complex at levels 7+ and just kept getting more complex as it went up, over rewarded game mechanic mastery and took too long to design and play combats.
I initially switched to Savage Worlds a few years ago as a simpler system (I still like it) and now play 5e. It doesn't have any of the problems I mentioned above.
I think this is the way to look at treasure once you get past about 5th level. Up until then you are buying armour, healing potions and the like. Beyond that point those things become easy to obtain and cash becomes a narrative reward.
This means you have to allow it to be used in the narrative. Give the party the chance to gain some information, reputation, help out a friend, live well etc if they have cash.
That's really interesting that 11th level 5e = 14th level pathfinder. Partly because I would have said 14th level pathfinder = 16th level 3/3.5e. Maybe I could actually run Rappan Athuk to the end.
I am running pre 5e adventures converted to 5e as well (just started). I would imagine that the treasure has been filleted a bit to fit with the 5e approach to magic.
What magic items do you have at 11th?
I have multiplied the amount of exp earned for defeating a monster by 0.4 which means you have to defeat 2.5 times as many creatures to level up. I do give some quest exp
Other house rules:
Rules 1-3 above and the slow exp is partially to stretch out the time taken in game.
Most crucial thing to remember is that 5e is a different game.
I think a major point of 5e limiting feats and making them have greater effect was to follow the principal of giving characters less stuff but making it bigger so a feat is special. It would not be unusual for characters will reach 12th level before even taking a feat. I think giving them all these extra feats works against that intention.
The reason the AC is what it is has to do with bounded accuracy, if you in essence just give all armour wearers +1 AC you simply increase the defence of all characters except those that don't wear armour. The biggest difference this will make is to the heavy armour, shield using defence based fighter who will gain a fair bit from it, and monks, wizards etc who will lose. The reason they lowered them was because 5e is a different game.
I considered flanking but favoured ditching the +2 bonuses for simplicity. With the reduced attacks of opportunity it's easy to flank. My players appreciated not having to gang up in the right squares to get a bonus.
I allowed a max of 2 inspirations - no one ever got there. I still don't have a handle on giving them out.
As for the stat bonuses an extra 1 point won't make a difference - except to humans I guess. I made my players roll up their characters (stats in order, no rearrange) because I wanted that old school feel. Initially they were grumpy about but after about 30 hours of play and 1 death (new character rolled up) they like it.
My anecdotal experience is the same as Tormsskull's.
IMO The hydrophobia sufferer who crosses the water to get a more powerful item, then justifies it as "character development" is wrapping their optimisation in roleplaying fluff (that is not hard to see through), rather than actually roleplaying.
Often optimisation and roleplaying can walk along the same path. The relevant question is what do you do when optimisation says go left and roleplaying say ago right? If you pay no heed to following the optimisation path this is an easy decision.
Where did your campaign get up to?
Nicolas Logue wrote:
High level thread necromancy required....
Did this sequel ever happen? Did it get converted into something else?
I am looking for monk/monastery adventures
Jzadirune is a real grind because at low level you have little resilience, I don't plan to let the players go I to it until they are 2nd or maybe 3rd level. Big dungeons at low level are just repetitive as progress is so slow.
But for that encounter as you described the issue was more the DM than the dungeon.
Meh pick and choose different recipes but can't as easily learn about history or how to animal handle.
My primary suggestion would be to Play a bard, especially a knowledge bard Or maybe a rogue, a knowledge cleric or a champion fighter. They all get a bit of skill boost along the way. Multiclass into rogue, ranger or bard if you want to skill up later on.
IMO If you want to play a skills generalist, they exist. You just can't be a skills generalist and a class that doesn't focus on skills. This is a feature of the game, not a bug. Skill granularity leads more toward skill min maxing (ie focussing on the more commonly used and in game valuable skills than the more esoteric skills) than generalisation.
The house rule I would offer as GM would be to let you freeze a proficiency at 5th and add the bonuses to another skill if that's what you wanted (I.e. when you go up to 5th you don't go up in it but you can add it to something else).
One way of looking at the system in a 3e way is that say you get 5 skills at +2 at first level, they go up to +3 at 5th so that means you get 10 points to distribute at 1st level (maximum bonus +2) and another 5 skill points to distribute at 5th, 9th, 13th and 17th. If your class picks up an extra proficiency you get extra points. You may need to come up with some sort of class skill mechanism ( like a lower max for non class skills etc). My view is this would likely lead to the 3e min,max on skills - with perception athletics and acrobatics being maxed for the wizard.
It's hard to put a finger on it.
For me I always felt that forgotten realms was similar in its generic fantasy trope but is trying too hard to be "better than Greyhawk". Like everything Greyhawk has it tries to have one, but better. That doesn't work.
I am just about to start a 5e campaign. I will return to Greyhawk after 6 years in Golarion. Shackled City with a bucketload of extras to make it a sandbox with an adventure path spine. I am setting it around the time of the 3e era gazetteer and am looking forward to the influence of the battle between the Scarlet Brotherhood and the Sea Princes spilling over into Cauldron.
Oh, and yes I would love some 5e greyhawk ( any non massive adventure path 5e really - WOTC doesn't make small adventures I can fit into my Greyhawk)
I would think that Triel is the most charismatic of the three leaders and with her gone the alley bashers and hill folk would pull out. Really once their hidden lair has been found they best leg it.
Iirc the reason for stealing the wands was to ransom them back for money. Once they are found they should go and hide again. This probably means the party will fail to recover enough wands.
This is a disappointing way for the adventure to end so perhaps Tarkilar could stay in the ruins and some of the dead could be brought back to assist him? Skaven can live to fight another day.
I read a more interesting reason for the bad guys wanting the wands which was along the lines that they were using them to drain the water from the ruins to discover something within the lake. I can't recall exactly what it was down there. But if you follow that motivation they might have a reason to stay.
Yes. I modified the "Cauldron and Environs" map to reflect plantation locations. It's not very complicated but it helped me describe what the players saw as they took various trips outside the city. If you have an email address, I'll send it to you for use however you see fit.
Thanks Greystaff. It'sThomashobday at hotmail dot com
I'm not familiar enough with Greyhawk to give recommendations for that setting. Generically you could have them as the routes to the various mines and plantations that are mentioned in the various installments but never specifically placed on the maps.
Did you use them when you ran it?
I suspect there is no canon for this. I am looking for ideas for expanding the area. I am thinking of having Port Shaw from Razor Coast set up some distance to the South so the Hollowsky road could go there.
Yeah, but the guardians if the galaxy movie wasn't premised on a big comic book following to sell tickets was it? IMO It was just a story turned into a film - using a bit of goodwill from Marvel, from space films etc
I would have thought getting the D&D brand a bit of a spit & polish would be all that Hasbro would need ( I certainly wouldn't think the rpg was anymore than a small plank in their intellectual property plan) then they could make a Drizzt movie riffing off the books, the recent warm fuzziness toward the game ( including cprg's , board games etc ) and 'magic/fantasy' films like LOTR, hobbit, harry potter. They could then see if they have got the Marvel style movie franchise they dream of.
( of course this means they need some sort of control of the D&D film licence - what happened to that?)
For me and most of my group it wasn't the complexity of character build that was a major contributor to making 3.x popular.
It was that it had a robust system for a tactical level combat. Things like flanking, attacks of opportunity, 5' step, straight line charging, miniature scale movement etc all were new for d&d. We had rarely used mini before because combat didn't really benefit from it. AD&D was more about resource management - combats were simpler - fighters at the front, magic users at the back hand wave the rest.
Suddenly 3.x added a tactical combat game to the roleplaying, adventure, storytelling game that had always been D&D.
Now I agree that the character build part was initially fun too but that side of it became more and more like homework. The imbalance between characters, problems that were created by things going slightly wrong, the maths to check each round based on buffs and the like became frustrating. But having been exposed to the added tactical element for my group we couldn't go back totally to the hand wave tactics of previous editions - not when playing D&D. I mean, we could do it a bit, but those tactical combats were fun.
So if 5e can be a roleplaying, storytelling, adventure, tactical game without making any part too complicated I am in.
Oh and I am 47 and started with the basic set in 79.
Well yes but I think the point is that if the way you deal with a class, or spell or whatever is by having a bunch of " you can't do that " things then you are already conceding you have a problem that "normal" rules don't solve.
It's like designing a river crossing problem for a 6th level party then saying there is some magic preventing you from flying.
Btw you look way over there, in the distance , you can see the point of this thread : )
Pathfinder is awesome for those that like it, same for 5e.
Has anyone played 5e to high level yet? How did that compare ? ( I haven't but I have given up on trying to run 3.x/pathfinder above 15th)
This is an interesting result, I would have thought they would be a decent threat in 5e, especially with their ranged attacks and pack tactics/martial advantage. I can certainly understand AoE being a crucial part of such an encounter. I hadn't really picked up that 5e allowed copious in combat healing.
Was this against 4pcs?
I guess some of my assumptions may turn out to be incorrect.
Maybe I'm wrong about how 5e will play out.
Maybe my perception of 3e/pathfinder is coloured by most campaigns I have been in or run in the last 14 years being adventure paths ( I ran a converted Night Below from 2000-2006 before Paizo started producing them). Maybe it's partly because most published adventure paths seem to use the "to help the party be tough enough to face the next encounter have them beat up this side quest" trope. Or maybe because when we played 3e we went up levels so much faster than when we played 1e so if you met a threat that was too tough a legitimate solution was to leave it alone, go up a few levels, then come back & kill it.
I guess in the 1e games I ran it felt like a bad guy was almost like a terrain feature. Everyone knew the evil summoner lived in the hills which are infested by ogres - but he had lived there for years and no-one could do anything about it except thwart his plots when he sent his minions into the kingdom. In 3e he would be a threat for about 2 months until the party hit 10th level.
But this is probably more a speed of levelling up effect, and it doesn't really look like the default speed of levelling up has changed so this will still be a feature. It does look like numbers matter a lot more. So if a tribe of orcs rules an area it will be tougher to just run them out when you reach 8th level.
I guess I am looking forward to more intractable foes in the campaign world that aren't uber level.
How do other perceive it will play out compared to pathfinder?
I haven't played much 5e but to me what looks like a difference in style of game between 5e & pathfinder is that pathfinder seems to suit the epic adventure path style of game and 5e a more sandbox style.
A pathfinder adventure path often involves events which are essentially a way to gain levels to allow you to trouble a BBEG. The difference between a 3rd and a 15th level character is enormous. So adventure design tends to lean towards a linear adventure progression. You don't want the 4th level characters stumbling into the 9th level adventure because that's a TPK waiting to happen. So you fight goblins, then ghouls, then ogres, then giants etc you don't want to meet a couple of giants when you should be fighting ghouls!
5e seems to have a less steep improvement curve, meaning that at 4th level if you wander into the 9th level dungeon you can survive ( probably only long enough to get out). So this means you can make the world a bit more sandboxy, let the players find their own way. Now maybe this will just lead to the players having a false sense of their ability to defeat a big threat.
Now that I look back on it when 3.0 came out I started running essentially much more linear adventure path style campaigns. I like the story element of the game anyway. Maybe now I will try a bit more sandbox.
Like I said I admit I haven't had much experience with 5e but that's my thoughts .
Yep, if a player gets the best protective magical items in the game, and take the right class options and spells, they have a really high Armour Class and are hard to hit - same as it ever was.
(Off topic 1: I recall from one edition the write up of Grazzt was that he could hit any Armour Class on a natural roll of 13 or higher, I thought it was a cool ability to get past the uber munchkin AC fiends)
( off topic 2: GWL - what do you consider are the most crucial elements of 4e style play ( or any other edition) that are not replicated, or able to be replicated in 5e? - I don't know 4e well but for mine:
As for the list of info from the DMG it is too scarce to influence me one way or the other - but the PHB and MM have been enough to make me look forward to the DMG.
I don't agree that that is their stated plan. Their plan as I understand it is to release 2 stories a year - with some support for each story. That doesn't mean once a story is released they will not touch the setting again, or that they will not allow 3pp to do so, or that there will be no other source of new adventures for that setting.
But, hypothetically, if they released a Spelljammer story - with the support they have referred to and only that - nothing more & all 3pp support or future module support for that setting prohibited into the future. I would be less interested than if they produced a swathe of new material. But if it was a good enough story & I wanted to run it I might buy the background stuff. It's pretty good value.
But that wasn't my point - my point was in response to you saying they are planning to "start" a setting then abandon it. They ain't starting any of those settings, they are adding stories to settings that already exist, the settings already have stories. If you liked the old ones you can convert them to 5e and here are some new stories - some new support for an old setting.
During the time of 4e iirc the old settings weren't available online. Now they are. That makes a difference as to what WOTC need to do with a setting. Then they needed to entirely explain and support the setting. Now they just need to add to a setting. It's already there.
See, from my point of view, I don't think that WOTC need to "start" the setting of Spelljammer. It was already started 20+ years ago. They just need to make the background stuff available online (which they largely have). To throw support behind it now they need to release a conversion guide (which they say they will), maybe have a small Spelljammer 5e guide, then release a players guide with some mechanical stuff and some fluff and an adventure showcasing the setting including some GM appropriate stuff.
As far as support after ( or before) that is concerned - modules ( either from WOTC or more likely 3p) and the sort of material that used to be in Dungeon & Dragon magazines (digital if that fits the economic model) would be what I would want.
Don't get me wrong if I was a big Spelljammer fan I would want them to produce lots of Spelljammer stuff ( that's what fans want). I am more a Greyhawk fan and I could start a classic Greyhawk campaign right now - without anything more from WOTC ( though I would like the DMG, more monster manuals and a conversion guide - but I don't need any more greyhawk setting stuff - it's out there).
They also don't need to start Darksun, Ravenloft Dragonlance or birthright either. ( let's face it hoard of the dragon queen could probably be adapted to dragonlance post war of the lance pretty easily.)
I have never played or owned Spelljammer in my life, but if a 5e adventure I was interested In came out I could fork out between $10 and $40 at rpgnow and get a chunk of it. Then I would know the setting and could run it.
Night below: it is suitable for young people. The first book is above ground. It has some straightforward quests, the village is ok but the main plot is obscure and not really discovered until later. Then into books 2 & 3 where the exploration is fun but can be a bit of a grind. Again the main plot is revealed layer by layer. By the time you find the missing girl I guarantee you have forgotten you were looking for her. Like any big adventure it will need tweaks along the way to fit your group.
I agree with Misroi, if you are in for the long haul it's a great plot and pretty well done. The first 3.0 campaign I ran was a converted Night Below campaign. It lasted 6 years and went to level 20. Awesome.
About 3 years ago a campaign I was playing in fell apart for a variety of non game reasons. We had played shackled city up to about the battle in the town where the masons are. Anyway I would like to run it now with some of the same players, starting from the beginning but I am happy to make some changes so the people who went through it don't get bored ( although to be fair the secret plot was still pretty much a secret).
Any suggestions for tweaks to the early parts to make it replayable ?
Perhaps I am wrong about the Mummy's Mask.
I recognise that there is a proportion of standard fantasy in the AP line especially early ( I think I said that) and I hope I didn't come across as strident criticism of the non standard. It's not of use to me, but so be it. I just want to express my opinion that standard fantasy is my preference. I don't believe you need to put pistols or lasers into fantasy to make it a fresh and interesting story. For me that is a true rarity, a 1 in 100 adventure, not a 1 in 2 or 3
I truly hope that Paizo doesn't believe that it has already done the standard fantasy exploration ideas several times over so now they need to put guns, robots or ray beams into the fantasy so they don't stagnate.
Pushing boundaries is fine but witch war, wrath of righteous, now mummy's mask ( which I had thought was the 'normal' one after a couple of odd ones and before Iron Gods - but that looks wrong) then Iron gods all seem to fit this ott or hi tech twist category. It's no longer a fresh twist if it happens every time. I guess I am just one of the people who isn't yet bored with normal swords and spells adventure fantasy.
I am looking forward to the post Iron Gods AP ( fingers crossed) and will give Emerald spire a look too.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Yes, but fluff and description matter when playing a game of imagination. Describing an item as something that shoots forth a magical bolt of flame vs that emits a laser beam vs a ranged touch attack that does 4d6 fire damage mechanically may be the same but it does matter. In a game meant to be played partially in your imagination, how it's described is crucial. For some people the description that juxtaposes different genre's breaks their immersion. In this supplement you are not talking about strange magical treasures from another world you are talking about technological devices.
Now I know some people love that stuff, and importantly the creative minds at Paizo want to produce it so fine. Bring it on. I am very unlikely to use it but others will and that's fine. I hope you get it out of your system and start producing stuff that is more my speed again.
The AP's started off as being fairly standard fantasy exploration discovery stories but it seems like for some time this has been the exception rather than the norm.
1890 - 1920s style horror, Ninja quest, dimension hopping to earth, mythic monty haul adventuring. I was really looking forward to the Mummy's Mask as a return to 'standard' fantasy but I see that technology appears likely to taint that as well.
Can I request that the AP following the Iron Gods one just be a standard old fashioned no guns, no lasers, no anachronisms adventure.
Pure game mechanic fix proposed - directly related to the game mechanic problem
Light crossbow - problem : it needs a move action to reload making it poor, particularly at bab +6 or higher
Solution : the base damage for a light crossbow increases by 1d6 per +6 bab the firer has (ie +1d6 at bab+6, +2d6 at bab +12 etc) ( personally I would use an extra d8 but that might seem too much to some people)
Heavy crossbow - problem : it needs a full round action to reload, making it poor
Solution : as above but make the extra dice higher ( ie d10)
In addition, and more radically, I note that in other games crossbows tend to be "armour piercing". In pathfinder that would equate to a bonus to hit, and maybe damage so maybe make crossbows have the "point blank shot" feat built into the item. This gives everyone who uses them a bonus to hit and damage and enables them to just take precise shot etc more easily
( disclaimer - I play 3.5 not pathfinder so some rule nuance may be lost on me, I apologise for any associated errors)
Thanks for the reply shadow born. I didn't make myself clear. I am the GM - when I say I have a PC I mean one of the PC's I am running is a Calistria cleric.
I have read through the material and it seems that the drow all worship demon lords & only demon lords, as a society, I am sure there are individuals that worship outlier deities but demon lords seems to be their thing.
So I was wondering what the canon is ( & others thought) about drow worshipping Calistria.
I am back and getting ready for my next all weekend session in 3 weeks time. The usual group is being joined by a couple of extra players brining the numbers up to 9 pc's so I am going to have to adjust the encounters a bit. More open plan fighting, increase the numbers and hit points of foes, less small group roleplaying or investigative stuff. This means I will change the emphasis of Endless Night, but I think I was going to anyway.
So here are my thoughts for changes to the rest of the path. I have no doubt some of this will change when the session actually starts but the main stuff will stick. My thoughts are a bit disorganised but I will try and put some of them down...
First the Winter Council, how it all went pear shaped and how they are now.
So back at Celwynvian
In drow land
The elf queen
Anyway that's a fair bit of my planned big picture changes - I hope the party ends up rescuing Perelir from Q in the harrowing before going to the land of the black blood. And eventually replaces the now useless Winter Council : )
Now to work on the small picture encounters
Very interesting take on the AP - did they interact with the librarian in the sphere at all?
They met him, but didn't interact with him much. initially they tried to discuss the drow and so on, but once they realized his knowledge stopped prior to earth fall they just asked about the identification of various buildings and the like.
Do you have any suggestions about how to get the most out of him?
They will have further interaction I expect once they enter the Armageddon Echo. They also saw the blacksmith ghost in the graveyard but too were caught up in hunting for the huecava's lair to follow.
All part of the stuff I have to make sure they recall when next we play.