|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Thank you for the info, Robert and Jason. I am now backing. Wish I could afford to throw down more than my $75, but I can't wait to get my grubby hands on these wonderful PDFs. ^_^
Though it will be a little sad to replace my Mythic Magic: Core Spells book. I'll just have to think of it as him growing up. I hope the backers will greatly exceed your expectations to the point where you have trouble thinking of new stretch goals to provide.
I've never participated in a 3PP RPG Kickstarter and the only other Kickstarters I've pledged to have been music (Mindless Self Indulgence) and anime (Time of Eve), but I love the mythic rules and this just seems like a 100% must have! I have a few questions, though.
A few years ago, I decided to go all-PDF with my RPG products, partly to save space and largely due to how publishers can update the files for errata and corrections later. So I'll likely be pledging for the $75 PDF set. For these PDFs from Kickstarter, what would be the process of getting new PDFs if updates are made?
The Kickstarter calls the spell book the Mythic Spell Compendium and in the Mythic Hero's Handbook description is says "incorporating feats from all of the Pathfinder Core Rules hardbacks" so I was wondering, will you be re-printing all of the existing mythic spells and feats that are in Paizo's Mythic Adventures book or just including the ones that weren't in there? I'm assuming it will just have the new stuff, but I figured I'd ask anyway.
And, I thought I had some other questions but I can't think of them. Good luck with the stretch goals! I've very excited about the possibility of having mythic versions of every spell and feat from the Pathfinder RPG line books and maybe having mythic psionics too would be amazing! The mythic monsters probably won't get much use right away, but will be good to have for future use when I get more into a GM role with my group. Can't wait to see the results of all your hard work!
Yes, I wrote them with a heavy feat investment. Based on what the ability does, it felt warranted (it is a 3rd-tier mythic ability after all). Personally, I don't find it to be much different than someone being a ranged fighter, especially if you're going thrown or crossbow. In my experience, Quick Draw/Rapid Reload, Point-Blank Shot, and Precise Shot are required for such a character. On top of that, most characters would also want Rapid Shot and Deadly Aim. The third option is also 3 feats and since the only big level based limiting requirement for that option is +6 BAB, it's not very late entry since that's when you get your first extra attack anyway (unless you go two-weapon).
Again, that is just what I would require if a character wanted such feats as non-mythic options. I've never actually ran a game before beyond a few one-on-one sessions with my wife, so take my option with a grain of salt. Personally, when I really get into GMing, I see myself almost always utilizing Mythic rules, so this isn't really an issue for me anyway.
If you want an option that isn't feat intensive, I'd say try to use Gunsmith's full-attack = standard action option. It will invalidate a lot of things in the game so it would require a good amount of work, but it seems like fun. And it might make martial classes a little more balanced against casters. If a 6th level wizard can throw a fireball at a mob doing 6d6 of damage to everyone in range as a standard action, why can't a fighter of the same level attack twice as a standard action?
But if you aren't typically the GM and you're thinking of trying to convince your GM to let you get this ability in a non-mythic campaign and therefore need something that is balanced against the current rule-set, I think the stupid feat trees are the best I have without making a lot of archetype trades or getting magic items or something involved. Sorry.
Fleet Warrior is a pretty awesome ability. Personally, if I were running a game and wanted to make it available to my players as a non-mythic ability, I wouldn't change anything about it and would just make it a feat expanding on either Spring Attack or the Step Up feat tree:
Fleet Warrior (Combat)
Fleet Warrior (Combat)
-or- (if I was feeling more generous)
Fleet Warrior (Combat)
As for Weapon Finesse (Mythic), it's probably a little too good to just make it non-mythic without anything else. Again, if I was running a game, I'd be okay with this:
Improved Weapon Finesse (Combat)
Thanks for the detailed feedback! I'll try to respond to most of your comments:
I figure it's less of an oversight and maybe more of a balance reason. Evoking and direct damage mechanics are not efficient as other types of casting. This gives a blaster build some options when faced with something immune or highly resistant to his shtick.
Yeah, I figured it was probably for something like that. This is the main reason I really wanted to make an archetype that got more of a benefit using a single energy type, because just making a wilder which took nothing but powers of one energy type would be pretty weak. Maybe a high level ability that lets the focused kineticist ignore part of a creature's resistance or immunity to the chosen energy type would be appropriate?
I think that there ought to be a simpler way to phrase the idea that you can pick powers with any energy type and they only manifest as your chosen energy type, but I'm just not sure how to phrase it.
After reading more into how some of the kineticist powers and other abilities in the book work, I was thinking about making the first entry for the archetype something like this instead:
Single Energy Focus: At 1st level, a focused kineticist must choose one energy type: cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. This is always considered to be the focused kineticist's active energy type. Any power that has an energy type in its descriptor must match your chosen energy type or include it as a choice, otherwise the focused kineticist cannot learn it. A focused kineticist can always learn such powers even if it they do not appear on the wilder power list. These powers are treated as having power levels equal to the lowest power level at which it is available for any particular class. The talent and 1st-level power chosen at level 1 must also be powers of this type (most commonly Energy Splash and Energy Ray). This modifies the Powers Known and Talent abilities.
Having the focused kineticist to only be able to use his energy type as his active energy type makes sense and also makes the Elemental Blast bonus feat a little easier to write:
Elemental Blast: At 1st level, a focused kineticist gains Elemental Blast as a bonus feat. The focused kineticist is not normally able to deal force damage with his Surge Blast. This ability modifies the Surge Blast ability.
Although I'm not sure if the "not normally able to deal force damage" line is needed. It seems like any wilder that takes Elemental Blast can't use the surge blast to do force damage anymore, if you do a strict reading of the feat. Any opinion on that?
But yeah, having the focused kineticist always having the same active energy type may have some other consequences I don't recognize right now? It would probably be especially troublesome with multiclassing, but that might be a good thing. This archetype might be too dipable otherwise.
This is now getting something for nothing. That should never happen. I'd probably rework it such that when one surges and manifests a power with an associated energy type (which now becomes his chosen energy type thanks to the modification to powers known) the chance for psychic enervation drops to 5% and when manifesting any other power the chance for psychic enervation increases to 20%.
This isn't exactly something for nothing. The balancing factor for all of the abilities that don't say they replace something directly is meant to be the fact that the focused kineticist can only use one energy type. I can probably go with the 10% reduction and 5% increase, but it just seemed to make sense that they should be able to power up their element's powers without risk. They would still risk a 15% chance of psychic enervation if they wanted to manifest the power without using power points (35% for other powers). It's a really nice ability, but I didn't think it was too great since, again, they can only use the one energy type. Considering that most of your other comments call out how the archetype is a drop in power, I would think it should be fine, but I'll think about it further.
Splitting the damage type does mean bypassing some resistance sometimes. Other times it means nothing. I am kind of 'meh' here.
I do sort of agree. It can be pretty situational, but I didn't think Surging Euphoria was all that great of an ability either, although with the focused kineticist being able to wild surge with little or no risk of psychic enervation, that would make Suring Euphoria a bit better.
I do like this ability. As I mentioned earlier in this response, being able to bypass resistance or immunity is something I am thinking of adding in or swapping with something else. I do prefer the way I wrote the trigger for the ability, to include an extra power point as an option to activate it instead of being locked into expending his focus. I also think the final ability is rather strong to just be a replacement for Surging Euphoria and should probably also replace Perfect Surge at 20th level. How about this:
Penetrating Energy (Su): Starting at 4th level, whenever a focused kineticist is dealing damage of his chosen type he may as a free action spend 1 power point or expend his psionic focus to bypass some of the targets' resistance to that type. Treat such energy resistance from all targets damaged as one less for every manifester level of the focused kineticist. This has no effect on targets with immunity to the chosen energy type. This ability may be applied to the focused kineticist's Elemental Blast at no cost.
At 12th level, targets with immunity to the chosen energy type are treated as if they have a resistance of 30 instead when using this ability. This resistance cannot be further reduced.
At 20th level, all resistances and immunities to the chosen energy type are ignored when using this ability. Additionally, when this ability is used against creatures with vulnerability to the chosen energy type, the modified damage deals double (+100%) the amount of damage as normal, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed or if the save is a success or failure. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria and Perfect Surge.
The only question I'd have is if the additional damage to creatures with vulnerability replaces the normal vulnerability increase of +50%? If so, maybe it should be reworded to this just to be clearer:
....Additionally, when this ability is used against creatures with vulnerability to the chosen energy type, they take double as much damage (+100%) from the energy type, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed or if the save is a success or failure instead of the normal +50% damage from vulnerability.
If you don't like the penetration idea above, I'd almost say adding status effects, like stun and then paralysis for electricity, fatigue and exhaustion for cold, sickened and nauseated for acid, and... something for fire.
Well, I do like the penetration idea, but I like this one, too. Unfortunately, there isn't much left to replace. Maybe I can write exclusive Surge Types for the four different focused kineticists that can include the application of status effects. I could also write up a Force of Energy Surge that would be available to focused kineticists of all types to preserve some of that idea as well....
Oh, and acid isn't an option for an active energy type so it wouldn't be a possible focused kineticist. It's sonic instead. Although I was thinking a bit about how to implement acid as a special choice for the archetype. I'll have to think about that a bit. I'd have to write special modifications for acid when the focused kineticist uses Elemental Blast and powers that have a choice of energy type. Looking them over, most of them are the same from power to power. I can probably be safe in just saying that acid works the same as fire for Elemental Blast and most of those powers. The only problem child with that would be Energy Splash's alternate ability for fire (lighting something like a torch or heating something like food). Acid wouldn't do that and I'm not sure what it would do instead.
Thanks again for the feedback and the ideas. Let me know if you have any other thoughts!
I'm currently working on a setting to run with my wife and a friend in which the PCs will eventually be traveling between different universes based on various fantasy, sci-fi, video game, and anime worlds. One such world is going to be a mess of merged worlds from various different modern anime series (actually part of the story with different characters and influences from different shows forcefully get pulled into one of the universes). While they are there, they will likely meet a character named Misaka from a series called Toaru no Majutsu no Index (or A Certain Magical Index). She is a young girl and a very powerful electromacer type esper. Now, having recently purchased the Ultimate Psionics PDF, I figured it would be a good time to play around with the book. Sadly, I couldn't find any option to really make a character that focused almost exclusively on the use of a single elemental energy. Maybe I missed something in the book, but from what I could see just about all characters that could use psionics of one energy type can also use it for all other types. With how common such a power is in the fantasy/sci-fi genres, it seemed like a bit of an oversite to me to not have such an option.
TLDR: So basically, I made an archetype for a psionic using character that focuses on one energy type. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! (oh, and does anyone know a good name for someone focused on using sonic energy, like pyromancer is for fire?)
Focused Kineticist (Wilder Archetype)
Some wilders are gifted with an affinity for a specific energy. Similar to a Kineticist Psion, they can wield the power of their energy with ease, but they do so forsaking the use of other energy types. Often these focused kineticists have specific names associated with their gifted energy type such as pyromancer (fire), electromancer (electricity), cryomancer (cold).
Powers Known: At 1st level, a focused kineticist must choose one energy type: cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. Any power that has an energy type in its descriptor must match your chosen energy type or you cannot learn it. Any power that gives a choice for the energy type must always use your chosen energy type. A focused kineticist can always learn powers which include his selected energy type in the descriptor even if it the power does not appear on the wilder power list. Such powers are treated as having power levels equal to the lowest power level it is available for any particular class. The talent and 1st-level power chosen at level 1 must have the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type in its descriptor (most commonly Energy Splash and Energy Ray). This modifies the Powers Known and Talent abilities.
Wild Surge: Whenever a focused kineticist uses his wild surge for abilities using his chosen energy type, the chance for enervation is reduced by 15%. Whenever using wild surge for any other powers, the chance of enervation is increased by 5%. Wild Surge otherwise functions as the standard ability.
Favored Energy: At 1st level, a focused kineticist gains Favored Energy as a bonus feat without needing to meet the prerequisites. This feat must be taken for the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type.
Elemental Blast: At 1st level, a focused kineticist gains Elemental Blast as a bonus feat without needing to meet the prerequisites. This feat must always use the focused kineticist’s chosen energy type and the focused kineticist is not normally able to deal force damage with his Surge Blast. This ability modifies the Surge Blast ability.
Force of Energy (Su): Starting at 4th level, whenever a focused kineticist is dealing damage of his chosen type he may as a free action spend 1 power point or expend his psionic focus to do half of that damage as force damage instead of the normal energy type. This ability may be applied to the focused kineticist’s Elemental Blast at no cost. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +1.
Energy Force Push (Su): Starting at 12th level, whenever a focused kineticist uses his Force of Energy ability, he may attempt a bull rush or trip combat maneuver against all creatures who took force damage from the attack as a free action. A single combat maneuver check is made using the focused kineticist’s manifester level in place of his base attack bonus and Charisma modifier in place of his Strength modifier. The result is applied to each creature’s CMD to determine success. Successful bull rush maneuvers move creatures away from the focused kineticist’s location. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +2.
Greater Energy Force Push (Su): At 20th level, whenever a focused kineticist uses his Energy Force Push ability, he may attempt both a bull rush and a trip combat maneuver. He first rolls a single bull rush attempt and then a single trip attempt in the same manner as when using Energy Force Push. This ability replaces Surging Euphoria +3.
Astral Wanderer wrote:
More importantly, Keen can only be added to piercing or slashing melee weapons, so this longbow is impossible to begin with. Keen should be removed or replaced with Seeking or something else appropriate.
Made a revision to this houserule after re-reading Divine Source. Since you must be at least 9th tier to take the ability a third time (the Guardian, Hierophant, and Trickster paths also each have an ability that requires 9th tier to be taken a 2nd or 3rd time), I added a line to the rule the removes the lower tier restriction at 10th tier. I also changed the starting tier from 5th to 4th and the lower tier adjustment to 3 tiers instead of 4. Makes the houserule a little more powerful, but I don't think it's too overpowered and it serves the purpose better to open up more opportunities to take Mythic abilities and feats.
Mythic Flexibility: Once characters reach their 4th mythic tier, they can take mythic path abilities and mythic feats in place of normal feats gained through class levels. They must treat their mythic tier as 3 tiers lower when meeting any minimum mythic tier requirements to take abilities and feats in this way. Upon reaching their 10th mythic tier, this restriction is removed. Mythic path abilities and unique mythic feats (such as Dual Path) may only be taken in place of feats gained from normal advancement. Mythic enhancement feats can be taken in place of bonus feats as long as the original feat was one that the character could take as a bonus feat and as long the character meets all other prerequisites, even if members of the class don’t typically have to meet the prerequisites for their bonus feats. For example, a 10th level ranger with the two-weapon combat style and at least 4 mythic tiers can take Two-Weapon Fighting (Mythic) as a combat style feat as long as he already has the regular Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
I recently played in my first Mythic campaign. Although it was a little short lived, I enjoyed what I did play and had most of my characters mythic tiers planned out. I like Mythic. I think it's a very fun and flavorful system. However, for some characters, the system may cause a problem: So many abilities, so little space to take them. If, for example, you wanted to play as living gods. To truly be on par with what most people consider to be a god, you would need to take Longevity, Mythic Sustenance, Sleepless and Divine Source three times. That doesn't leave much room for other cool abilities. To rectify this, I propose a simple house rule for the system to open up more opportunities to take mythic path abilities and mythic feats in high level games.
Mythic Flexibility: Once characters reach their 5th mythic tier, they can take mythic path abilities and mythic feats in place of normal feats gained through class levels. They must treat their mythic tier as 4 tiers lower when meeting the minimum mythic tier requirements to take abilities and feats in this way. Mythic path abilities and unique mythic feats (such as Dual Path) may only be taken in place of feats gained from normal advancement. Mythic enhancement feats can be taken in place of bonus feats as long as the original feat was one that the character could take as a bonus feat and as long the character meets all other prerequisites, even if members of the class don’t typically have to meet the prerequisites for their bonus feats. For example, a 10th level ranger with the two-weapon combat style and at least 5 mythic tiers can take Two-Weapon Fighting (Mythic) as a combat style feat as long as he already has the regular Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
Having just tried one out for the first time recently, I really liked it, but felt very restricted by the class in trying to pull off my concept. For the most part, I loved the Kensai archetype to make my finesse whip-using magus, but didn't want all of the critical hit stuff and a few other things so I had to make some GM-approved adjustments. It was a bit of a pain. Alchemist would have been a close second (or even my first choice) if it wasn't for the fact that Advanced Options: Alchemists' Discoveries already fixed my main problem with that class: not liking the Mutagen.
Joseph Davis wrote:
This is probably a given, but I figure I'll ask here (may have even missed it, I do that from time to time); Can we use characters from the previous game. For example, if I really like Lem, and he's not present in the S&S set, can I sue the Lem from ROTRL instead. Furthermore, if I don't like the Valeros from S&S would I be able to use the Valeros from ROTRL instead.
Well, a new version of Lem is in S&S, but I get your point. Yes, you can use previous characters in the new set. For some characters you might want to add some RotRL boons into the S&S pool to make them fully effective (similar to adding guns to RotRL to play it with Lirianne). The only example I can think of off hand is moving over Amulet of Mighty Fists-type cards if you want to use Sajan in S&S, but there might be others you'd want to consider.
The converse, though, is what has me pondering. Since I am head over heels in love with Lirianne and a big fan of gunslingers, I want to be able to play Lirianne in RotRL - not to mention whatever comes out in Feb 2015 - but I'm worried about how feasible she will be without guns in the weapon decks. How hard or easy will it be to bring those elements into other AP decks?
If you tried to play Lirianne without guns, she would likely have quite a few wasted abilities. But, I wouldn't see any problems with taking all of the firearms from the Skull & Shackles set and the chapter packs and mixing them into the weapons of the corresponding RotRL cards. It might be a bit of work to manage where the cards are and such, but I think she would mostly work fine as long as she has enough guns available. She might have a few powers that work with some of the other mechanics unique to S&S, though.
I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure neither of these cases work. Wand of Force Missile generates a combat check. Just because it the card has the arcane trait doesn't make it an arcane check. Both powers you referenced specify that they add to arcane checks. If these bonuses applied, then there would be no reason for the characters' innate bonuses to the Arcane skill wouldn't also apply. And since Glibness wouldn't provide its bonus to the check (since it not being an Arcane check also makes it not a Charisma check for Seoni), the Blessing of Pharasma would not provide double dice. But the blessing die would still be a d12 which is nice on its own. And remember, the blessings from characters with their preferred gods don't only give the d12 to their own checks, it also applies to checks by other characters as long as the favored character is the one playing the blessing.
Daniel Hamrick 458 wrote:
Just because there is no material currently planned for high-level characters after finishing the 6th chapter of an AP doesn't mean there never will be. Kind of a future proofing measure. Also, you or other fans can always dream up custom scenarios for such characters.
By the way, I think you have too few items in your starting deck for your alchemist - maybe reduce an ally for an item? You want to cycle a lot of them.
Yes, I was a little worried about that, too. He might be able to deal with one less ally. It is just a first draft after all. But remember, as written right now, he doesn't need to have items to be able to cycle his deck. Items are just nicer to have for his bombs.
Pathfinder Alchemists don't seem to be spellcasters, so why does he have spells?
Alchemists are weird quasi-casters. They create special potions each day called extracts that work almost identical to spells. In the card game, I don't see any way to emulate this other than to just give him spell casting. And like the Bard, some of his "spells" are arcane while others are divine.
Also, an Alchemist should definitely have the Craft skill!
You know, I could have sworn there was a card that had Craft as a possible skill for the check. And I could have sworn Ezren had that skill. But looking at his character sheet, I don't see the Craft skill. Does the skill really exist??
Thanks for the feedback!
Vic Wertz wrote:
Good to know! I'll be sure to not use anything from the playtest as inspiration in any fan-made content; at least not until after Skull & Shackles comes out. Just to avoid any possible coincidence of similarity, here is my first draft of the goblin alchemist (just the base character; no role card yet):
Strength d4 [ ] +1
HAND SIZE 6
PROFICIENT WITH: [X] Light Armors [ ] Weapons
For your combat check, you may recharge a card to roll your Ranged die + 1d4 ([ ] +1)([ ] +2). If the card has the Liquid trait, add an additional 1d4 and the check gains the Fire and Magic traits. This counts as playing a weapon.
When you play a boon with the Liquid trait, you may discard ([ ] or recharge) it instead of banishing it.
CARDS LIST ----- FAVORED CARD TYPE: ITEM
Weapon - 1 [ ] 2
Vic Wertz wrote:
4) You're correct—the policy doesn't allow for adapting our storylines into other media; that's a right we're reserving.
So then would it be okay to adapt We Be Goblins and other modules and adventures as long as there is no actual plot description? Like making We Be Goblins as a scenario with Vorka as the villain and her pets as the henchmen with a few new locations and special mechanics inspired by the module, as long as there is basically no story on the "back-side" of the scenario card telling what is specifically going on? Or is that also not authorized?
With all of the custom content being made for the Pathfinder ACG, the idea came to me to try to adapt We Be Goblins! into the ACG format. This would include the four pregens as playable characters (maybe also two more for 5-6 player games, either based on other pregen goblins or making my own) and a custom scenario or two representing the module with new henchmen and villain cards. If we can, I'd like to discuss the concept of adapting official Paizo works from the Pathfinder RPG into the Pathfinder ACG, just to clarify any copyright issues that might arise from free fan-made material and the distribution of such. Basically, what can we get away with and what can't we?
I've read over the Community Use Policy (after Vic linked it in another thread) and I think I understand most of it pretty well. But with the new situation of trying to adapt the RPG into the ACG format, I'm not sure how certain parts of the policy apply to this situation. Here are a few questions that I'd like to bring up:
1) First, something related to my particular project: We Be Goblins Too! is listed on the Community Use Approved Product List, but the original We Be Goblins! is not. Is this an error or was the first module intentionally left off the list for some reason? If there are any other products that might not appear on the list (under Section 1 or Section 2), what is the best way to ask if it should have actually been included or not?
2) To make sure I fully understand how the Community Use Policy might apply to custom character creation, it looks like I can base a custom character off of any character listed in any of the books under Section 1 of the product list. This includes using the characters names and maybe a short little bio (an original summery, not a direct copy) and basing the stats, powers and cards of the characters off of the original characters' abilities. I would NOT be able to use any character artwork from the products that isn't in the Community Use Package or posted on the blog somewhere, but I could draw my own fanart of the characters to use as long as it isn't basically a direct trace of the original art. I could then use the ACG character sheets as templates to make my own character sheets for the custom characters since those are part of the Community Use Package. Is all of this accurate or am I way off base on some (or all) of this?
3) Another question related to my project: One of the We Be Goblins! characters is an alchemist. This class hasn't been used in the ACG yet, but it will be part of the new set and its playtest is approaching. I have some ideas on how I might make an alchemist, but if I see the playtest alchemist would it be okay to use it for inspiration for a custom character as long as it is different enough? This could also apply to possible custom characters based on the Magus, Swashbuckler, and other new classes. I would think this would be a no (or at least a "please don't"), but I figured I'd ask anyway.
4) As far as adapting scenarios from existing Pathfinder RPG products (like trying to adapt We Be Goblins!), what is okay? The only time the Policy talks about the plots of the products is for use in "campaign journals and play-by-post or play-by-email games" and doesn't mention anything about adaptions for other fan-made creations. Would trying to turn Pathfinder RPG modules and adventure paths into ACG scenarios be okay through the Policy or would it require a license?
Those are all of the questions I have right now. Anyone else have any thoughts?
Mike Selinker wrote:
Playing by the rules (and how we play), you have a pool of cards at the end of the scenario. Your entire group is required to make decks from this pool. You may draw Basic cards from the box only if there are no cards available to fill all the card slots.
Fair enough. That's my official answer, then. Thank you.
Mike Selinker wrote:
The game is not meant to simulate "shopping" between scenarios. There are plenty of home rule variants for that if you want that sort of thing, and aren't too worried about maxing out your characters too quickly.
And to clarify, I'm beyond wanting to simulate "shopping" between scenarios. I understand that many locations simulate that during scenarios. At this point, I'm just trying to find a way to make sure characters don't get worse because they get rid of cards during a scenario and other characters happen to have extra junk cards of the same type, forcing them to take those instead of filling the empty slots with cards of comparable power and relevance for their decks. Yes, it might be a situational case that doesn't come up very often, but it can still happen.
If you want to do it that way, and your team is ok with it too, then its fine. But in my opinion, that is a house rule.
Yes, with Mike's statement I acknowledge that it would be for sure, 100% a house rule. Sorry for the somewhat derailment of the topic, but thank you for discussing.
I think you have to take what your group has. You may trade. But you can only go to the box if what your whole group has available can not let you construct a valid deck. The can not means there is no viable option to do so.
Right, but if your first choice is that you may trade and you decline to do so, then you can not construct a valid deck from what your whole group has available because you are not trading and therefore those cards are not available to you. This is why I said it's debatable and that discussion does not give a definite answer from a developer on this particular issue.
I'm fine with not opening up the box to freely rebuild, but being force to take junk from other players seems counter to the nature of the game. Example: I lost a weapon because it was banished during the last game (either to close a location or from a monster effect or something). I need to fill the slot. I'm Dex based and don't have weapon proficiency, but the only extra weapon cards are melee weapons that have a penalty for non-proficiency. That's crap if you're forced to take one of those cards.
Edit: So how I think it should work, I would say you have a choice at the end of a scenario. Do you want to trade, yes or no. If you pick yes, all of the groups cards are available to you and your cards to then if you so choose. The later rule of "construct a valid deck from the cards your group has available" is applied and you have to use any possible cards before being able to go to the box for basic+ cards. If you pick no, you cannot trade cards. You can't get extra cards that other players gained and the extra cards you gained are not available to them. If you have any empty card slots, you go to the box using the basic+ rule.
Unless, of course, Sajan goes with the Drunken Master role and can (IIRC) recharge that potion of healing with a Powers feat...
If that feat is taken, then it might be a balanced trade-off. Sajan doesn't automatically get to recharge potions, he has to make a check so it's not guaranteed. And again, the Cure spell gives an extra card. So I'd say it's a toss up at that point, since if you do make the recharge, that is basically an extra card as well.
Scribbling Rambler wrote:
Of course, you can only grab that basic card if there are no available spells when the party pools cards at the end.
I see this as being somewhat debatable, due to this line:
"Start by combining your discard pile with your hand, your character deck, and any cards you buried under your character card; you may then freely trade cards with other players."
It says you MAY freely trade cards with other players. At this point you're not forced to, so as long as your character alone has an open slot, he should be able to pick a spell he wants from the box. Of course, the line you are referencing is then:
"If you can’t construct a valid deck from the cards your group has available because you don’t have enough of certain card types, choose the extra cards you need from the box, choosing only cards with the Basic trait."
So then, is it truly that you MAY trade, or does the later line mean that you have to trade if you have an empty slot that someone else's junk card can fill? Personally, I would prefer that you aren't forced to take other players' scraps if you don't want them.
But also then, by theory, you could work the system so that you can trade cards so that you open up free slots so you can get any basic card you want to replace it. Say for example, you like your potions. You used one in the last game, which opened up a slot for your items. But you also acquired a crowbar during the scenario, so your item slots are now full. You MAY trade, so you trade your unwanted crowbar for someone else's unwanted extra piece of armor. They didn't need the item and you didn't need the armor, but now you have a free item slot to fill with what you want.
This might need some clarification if it hasn't already been given. Personally, I think you should be able to freely rebuild your deck in between scenarios from the box as long as you stay within the Basic+ restriction for your current adventure. Kind of like going to the shop in between quests. Makes sense to me, anyway.
A once per session spell isn't that bad. A Cure spell is Basic so you can have one of those once per game. It's better than putting a Potion of Healing in an item slot since Cure is a d4+1 instead of just a d4. And you can use something else if you think a different basic card might be useful for a specific scenario.
Zoltán Mészáros wrote:
True. I was kind of surprised when I saw the low number of spells that Seoni has. I though, but sorcerers get to cast more spells per day than wizards! Why does Ezren have so many more spells than her?? But I figure the number of spell cards are to represent spells known and Seoni's auto-recharge is meant to represent her being able to cast those few spells many times.
Anyway, that's a tangent. I do agree that some light adjustments to card feats could be fine, but don't really think skills should be changed, unless new specialized skills are created in future sets. Then I'd be okay with one of those being added to some characters.
Yes, if a spell requires you to make an Arcane check for its effect and you don't have the Arcane skill, you roll a d4 as your skill die instead of any stat and then it is banished with no chance of recharge. Even a fighter can do this if he wanted to.
I'd be really excited about Wrath of the Righteous, but that brings up the Mythic question... which is not automatically a dealbreaker (could give Mythic Paths in lieu of roles, maybe?) but is certainly something you'd have to take into account.
I said this in another thread, but I think it's a little more relevant to this discussion:
"It'd be awesome if there is eventually a Mythic expansion or two released. Expansions made with Adventure levels 7 through 12, playable as expansions to come directly after Rise of the Runelords, Skull & Shackles, and/or any other base sets that come out later. There can be new role cards that can be added to any character in addition to the role card gained after Adventure level 3, based off of the Mythic Paths from the Mythic Adventures book: Archmage, Champion, etc. Probably have two or three versions of each path for a total of 12 or 18 role options. In addition to new power feats, they could also add extra skill and card feats to characters. Just a thought. Might need some new high level Mythic adventure paths in the RPG to base them off of first, though."
So yeah, one option I'd like to see for the next main expansion would be a Mythic expansion. I don't follow Adventure Paths very closely (don't get to play Pathfinder RPG more than maybe once a week, and it's usually always a friends homebrew world that I play in), but I'm guessing Wrath of the Righteous might be a good set for the above concept?
Another option I would like to be considered is to actually NOT have a February 2015 base set! Well, I guess having a Mythic expansion also wouldn't really be a "base set" since it would theoretically continue after a base set, but this would be even less of a base set. I think it would be nice to give a little bit of a break from base sets and release a few Modules in ACG form instead. They would pretty much work like the $20 adventure packs, but there would only be one or two releases, depending on if it's one of the smaller or larger modules. They would have adventure numbers between 1 and 6 for each pack of cards and would instruct you to play it after a specific Adventure X of Rise of the Runelords or Skull & Shackles. Browsing the Modules, I think The Dragon's Demand and The Harrowing could both work nicely for this. Heck, you could even do We Be Goblins! as a stand-alone set! Complete with playable goblin characters.
Chad Brown wrote:
Would you prefer to see some overlap in characters, lots of overlap in characters, or no overlap in characters? (I realize that there are dozens of shades of grey here; I'm personally curious about the first-thoughts answer as well as the discussion.)
Hmmmm, I might be in the minority here, but depending on how they're handled, I think having four or so re-made characters per big set (AP) would be fine. I'd wait until we start the playtest and see how the Skull & Shackles returners work out first to really make my mind up, though. I would think the characters would be best handled with leaving their skill and card feats the same but giving them (almost) entirely new sets of powers and roles.
As for the characters, I'd like to see different ones not just the iconics, even if they have to be made up.
Non-iconics could be nice, too. Maybe base them off of NPCs or Archetype/Prestige class "iconic" artwork. This way we might get some non-halfling bards, non-gnome druids and wizards with blessings as Calthaer mentioned. More variety, basically.
Vic Wertz wrote:
I'm not saying we'll *never* release new content for high-level characters, but we don't currently have anything planned.
It'd be awesome if there is eventually a Mythic expansion or two released. Expansions made with Adventure levels 7 through 12, playable as expansions to come directly after Rise of the Runelords, Skull & Shackles, and/or any other base sets that come out later. There can be new role cards that can be added to any character in addition to the role card gained after Adventure level 3, based off of the Mythic Paths from the Mythic Adventures book: Archmage, Champion, etc. Probably have two or three versions of each path for a total of 12 or 18 role options. In addition to new power feats, they could also add extra skill and card feats to characters. Just a thought. Might need some new high level Mythic adventure paths in the RPG to base them off of first, though.
Hmmm, you're basically giving all allies an armor card's ability. Makes me wonder if this is more of an honorable leader kind of character or a somewhat evil meat shield kind of ability.
If this is a role card ability, I personally think four power feats for one new ability is a little much. I would say remove the 3 damage progression and change the final feat to ( or bury the ally to reduce all damage dealt to you to 0). I think this would bring the ability more in line with most armor cards. I don't think it would be very OP (as I even think changing the banish to bury is fine), as long as the character doesn't get something like 6+ allies and have other powers centered around them as well.
If you have a power stating, "Add +1 (+2)(+3) to checks with the electricity trait" or something then that bonus will be added to the end, the +3 being correct for your example.
The skill bonuses are added on top of any bonus added to the relevant stat.
Let's use Seoni to illustrate this. She has the skill Arcane: Charisma +2. If she has skill feat boxes checked up to +2 for her Charisma, then she will be rolling d12 +4 for her base Arcane checks. She also has a power stating, "For your combat check, you may discard a card to roll your Arcane die + 1d6 (+1)(+2) with the Fire trait and the Attack and Magic traits. This counts as playing a spell." If she spent two power feats to boost damage this ability, she is now using 1d12 + 1d6 + 6 for her "spell blast" ability.
No, you do not have to and you cannot immediately encounter the villain, even if you want to. If you want to encounter the villain right after you "closed" the location on the same turn, you would have to use an effect to give you an additional exploration.
And yes, if you fail the first check, you still have to attempt the second even though the monster will be undefeated no matter how well you might do on the second check. So if you failed the first check and only took one or two damage, you may also take more damage from failing the second check.
Nope, looks like you did it right. I'd say if you still had that many cards in the blessing deck and the villain is the only card still in play, you deserve a good rest. Lem with a Cure spell can do a similar self-healing tactic since he can swap it out for another spell at the start of each turn. If the Apothecary location was in play, the same tactic could have been used by any character. Sometimes bulldozing through locations can pay off, especially if you can mitigate the consequences. And sometimes you get lucky with Henchmen/Villains being close to the top of the location decks. If this is happening too often, you might want to adopt a "Henchmen/Villains on the bottom or near the bottom of the location decks" set-up like what was discussed in This Thread.
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
Sorry to bring this thread back, but I found it when searching for what kind of action Inspired Spell should be. Personally, I don't like how these abilities have been re-written. Yes, my mythic magus will be sad that she can't use Wild Arcana as a swift action anymore, but I think that is perfectly reasonable. I just don't like how these abilities are FORCED into a standard action now and restricted to "1 standard action" (or less) casting time. I think it would be better (in a flexibility kind of way) if the activation of the ability was a free action, but you had to then cast the spell as normal with its listed casting time. This would let Feather Fall be cast in a pinch if it's not prepared or known. Let the cleric cast Restoration a few extra times after a particularly vicious fight when you know there will be more to come. And let a crucial lower level spell be cast as a swift action, if the caster has Quicken Spell. The way it is written now could also cause some problems when trying to use a magus' spell combat with Wild Arcana. I would like to see them re-worded to something like this:
Inspired Spell (Su): As a free action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one divine spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot. The spell must be on one of your divine class spell lists (or your domain or mystery spell list), must be of a level that you can cast with that divine spellcasting class, and you must still expend the spell's normal casting time (unless modified by the Quicken Spell feat). You don’t need to have the spell prepared, nor does it need to be on your list of spells known. When casting a spell in this way, you treat your caster level as 2 levels higher for the purpose of any effect dependent on level. You can apply any metamagic feats you know to this spell, but its total adjusted level can’t be greater than that of the highest-level divine spell you can cast from that spellcasting class. This does not increase the casting time when spontaneously casting spells.
Wild Arcana (Su): As a free action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot. The spell must be on one of your arcane class spell lists, must be of a level that you can cast with that arcane spellcasting class, and you must still expend the spell's normal casting time (unless modified by the Quicken Spell feat). You don’t need to have the spell prepared, nor does it need to be on your list of spells known. When casting a spell in this way, you treat your caster level as 2 levels higher for the purpose of any effect dependent on level. You can apply any metamagic feats you know to this spell, but its total adjusted level can’t be greater than that of the highest-level arcane spell you can cast from that spellcasting class. This does not increase the casting time when spontaneously casting spells.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I'm guessing that it is safe to assume that Arcane Surge and Recalled blessing should both be standard action limitations as well?
It is strange that a re-wording hasn't been done for these as well. You can apply the same re-wording above to these abilities (aside from the metamagic part).
Anyway, it's just a thought. Hope this doesn't come off as rude or anything like that.
Are you remembering that you have to have a card with the Divine trait to do your healing? And that you have to discard that card after you finish? Those would be the only things I could see that you might be "missing" since you already mentioned sacrificing your free exploration. Personally, I think that's a pretty hefty cost for the healing power. I thought that having to sacrificing your free exploration AND discarding a card was a little too much of a cost in the playtest, but I can see how even as is, it can be very valuable in a solo game.
Having said that, I think the number of players does affect how powerful the ability can be. In a solo game, like how you're playing, it can be very powerful because you don't have to worry about healing other characters and you are the only character "wasting" an exploration. The free exploration can be a much more valuable commodity for a larger game (like my group of 6 players).
From an RPG standpoint (I know, this isn't the RPG game), it is unclear why a shield wouldn't be effective in stopping or reducing fire damage, e.g..
Actually, in Pathfinder RPG a shield or piece of armor doesn't help at all in reducing fire damage unless it's magical with fire resistance added to it. And I believe armor with fire resistance does exist in the card game as well.
I understand you don't remove them, I was just pointing out that if you feel you cannot keep a character deck built that is not in play, you obviously believe in the sanctity of the available card set, and the available card set is (at least I don't see how this couldn't be the case) skewed if you play a 3 character game with the add-on vice a 3 character game without the add-on.
Obviously? Still, I don't see how you came to this conclusion. I just don't believe in restricting cards, especially with the example situation I presented. Having more cards is perfectly fine and dandy. And again, it's part of the rules.
If you guys worked some magic to keep the basic/elite/normal (non-basic, non-elite) ratio of cards the same with or without the add-on, well, I'd just be surprised you could work it out.
I really wouldn't be surprised at all if the ratio is balanced with or without the add-on pack. It's very simple math and shouldn't be hard to work out. Like you said, it's just a ratio.
Cool. Just wanted to be absolutely sure before I got too excited about the thought of giving 2d12 to my party members' d6 Wisdom checks, as that's the die everyone other than Kyra rolls in my group. And 1d12 isn't too shabby for some of our other crappy scores either (no one in the group has an Intelligence better than d6 and two characters have a d4).
Yeah, I saw just about all of those (mainly the taking damage section and the ghost example) while browsing the revised rulebook PDF and the FAQ and felt a little silly. Guess that's what I get for taking too much stock in forum discussion without putting it all in context. Hopefully everything gets cleared up in "Rulebook 2.0" as now I am also anxiously anticipating it....
Sorry to bring this back up, but Sunday my group finished Adventure 2 and we have currently only gained 2 power feats. If we indeed will only get one more power feat before we get our role cards, then I will in fact NOT be forced to take the Light Armor power! That makes me happy. It might sound weird, but I hope we will still have power feats left un-checked at the end of Adventure 6. It makes the characters more customizable when everyone doesn't get every power and has to pick which ones they want.
Okay, so this is a little early since it won't really come into play until Adventure 4, but I just wanted to make sure that I understand some of the Blessing based power feats on the character role cards. Some of the characters prefer a specific god's blessing and have power feats that provide a boosted effect when using them. The ones I'm talking about are like Lem's: "When you play Blessing of Shelyn, add d12 instead of the normal die."
So I just want to make sure I'm reading this right and not missing some extra "you" speak. If Lem takes this power, whenever he uses a Blessing of Shelyn, no matter if he's using it on himself or another character, that player will add a d12 instead of the normal die for the check. Is this correct or is it intended that he only be able to use a d12 instead of the normal die when he is using the blessing on his own checks? It is worded differently from stat specific blessing boosts like Lini's: "When you play a blessing to add to your Wisdom check, add d12 instead of the normal die." (the your check stipulation is not included in the god based blessing boosts)
Our group has been seeking out the preferred blessings for the characters who like specific gods in preparation of eventually getting their role cards and I already have two or three Blessings of Shelyn in my Lem deck. If I'm interpreting the power correctly, I will be taking it as my second power after getting the role card, the first being the ability to use his inspiration on himself (Virtuoso). Otherwise, it might go down on the priority list.
And on a side note, Lini's and Valeros' (Weapon Master) skill based blessing boosts seem extremely weak as they only bring the die up from a d10 to a d12 for the extra blessing dice.
Captain Bulldozer wrote:
1) Failing a check to defeat a monster (this includes most henchmen and villains) results in combat damage, even if it was not a combat check you failed.
This actually does not seem to be the case. As Vic said in This Thread, it's only combat damage if you are making a combat check. He also says that it's the monster that triggers the damage, not a combat check. You can fail a non-combat check to defeat a monster and you will still take damage from it following the standard rules for taking damage (subtract your result from the check goal), but it will not be considered combat damage. In most cases, it should say what kind of damage the failed check results in, like mental damage for a Siren. But some monsters don't specify the damage they do when you use a non-combat check, such as with Iesha Foxglove and some other villains. If it doesn't, I would think the damage would be considered "untyped" and the only way to reduce it would be with abilities that cancel all types of damage. This still seems to be a bit of a weird area in the game.
Yep, how a character dies is very simple, as it is stated with the first sentence of the Dying section on page 13 of the rulebook as Lostblade quoted and agraham2410 put very nicely in a single sentence.
And yes, dying sucks, especially if you are far along in an adventure path. Pretty much all of your progress is lost and you have to build a new character from scratch (which can be a rebuild of the character that just died). You would then be behind in feats and powerful cards compared to the rest of your party. The cards aren't that big of a deal since you can catch up pretty quickly and the rest of the group can help out with giving you better gear, but the feats are the big problem. Pretty much the only way to catch up and have the same number of feats as the rest of the party again is to replay every scenario with the new character.
How death works can hurt the fun of your game, making it really tedious to catch a character up or just suck it up and be behind if you don't want to deal with replaying the game. Or catching up a character could provide some fun replay value for some people. If you feel that you may be part of the former, you probably shouldn't let this ruin the game for you. A few people have been thinking of alternate, less harsh rules for death, like in this thread.
Personally, I would probably just make a player rebuild a new character deck, but let them gain the same number of feats of each type that the rest of the party has. I would probably also not let them pick them same character that just died. I think that would be enough of a penalty and would make it a little more thematic. Players would be especially wary of death if they really like their current characters.
Under Between Games on page 19 of the rule book (pretty much the very last set of rules, excluding side bars, before it gets into examples and deck lists):
"If you want to start a new character, you may, but it’s important
Yes, it doesn't exactly say you "cannot" do it. It's your game, so I suppose you can do what you want. But it is important. And even if you think the part about having 4 or 6 max characters at one time is a way around it (such as, "I can leave my solo character deck together since I have the add-on pack and the group is only going to be 4 characters"), I personally still wouldn't recommend leaving any cards out of play. This could cause problems if important boons are taken out of the game, such as not having enough cure spells available because your solo character has the Divine skill and you want to make sure you can heal yourself well so there's only a few (if any) cures left for the group play (granted, I don't know off hand how many Cure cards are in the game total, it's just an example).
And no, nothing in the "logic" of what I said suggests that a solo character shouldn't play with all of the add-on pack cards. I was saying you should NEVER make cards unavailable for a game. You're trying to suggest that I'm trying to restrict the cards you're playing with? How did you get that from what I said? I'm confused by this.
Interesting idea. I may have to try it out sometime. You could also maybe give bonus points of some sort to the number of cards remaining in the blessing deck. Not sure how much. Maybe 100 gp per card? Maybe 100 x Adventure number (50 gp for starter scenarios). Time is money after all.
As far as the spell value, I think scroll price if fine for the most part. But if there is a living character in the party with the appropriate spell casting skill for the spell (arcane or divine), you should add the cost it takes to add a spell to a wizards spellbook in addition to the cost of a scroll of a spell since that is the only numerical value for learning a spell in Pathfinder. These are the amounts for each level:
0: 5 gp
From the FAQ:
When Sajan uses his power to make a combat check without using a weapon, is it a Dexterity or Strength check?
Dexterity. When using this power, Sajan's combat checks benefit from cards like Blessing of Erastil and Belt of Incredible Dexterity, but not from cards like Blessing of Gorum or Belt of Giant Strength.
Resolution: On Sajan’s character card and both sides of his role card, change the first power under his hand size to the following:
There are a few ways you can handle this:
1) You can disassemble and reset your character and the game to play the same character (or a new one) with the group play. Probably the simplest thing to do. Just start over with the group after you are done playing solo.
2) You can keep your leveled-up character intact and play with the group with the same character, upgrades and all, playing from the beginning again with a group of new basic characters. There would be a few things to keep in mind in this case. For any scenario you have already played solo, you will not get the reward for completion for doing the scenario again. But you can still hunt for better cards during the scenario and keep anything you gained that way. Also, make sure the rest of your group will be okay with you being more powerful than them. It could also make the game even easier than it already is.
3) You can keep your leveled-up character intact and play with the group with the same character, but start them off at the same spot as you left off in solo play. Now what I'm about to suggest isn't part of the rules and may even go against the rules, but you can give the rest of the characters in the group all of the rewards from scenarios they missed. I probably wouldn't recommend this since the rest of the group would miss out on a lot of gameplay and that even though they are getting the rewards, they may still be behind you on power due to not being able to gain cards during play with the scenarios.
4) You can keep your leveled-up character "intact" for solo play, but play a "new" character from the beginning with your new group. I say "intact" because you will actually still need to disassemble the character in this case (so all cards are available for the group sessions), but you can record your deck list and feats gained in solo to go back to when you want to play by yourself again. I'd highly recommend the Free Character Sheets for this if you don't already use them (actually, I'd recommend them in general if you aren't already using them). Then just play a new character, which can actually be the same character as you play in solo if you like. Make sure that while playing in the group campaign all players also use the character sheets so that if you come to a stopping point with the group, you can make sure all of the deck lists are recorded and disassemble the decks so you can play solo again or with another group. Yes, this can involve a lot of book keeping and extra prep and post work before and after sessions, but it makes the game much more flexible to play. You can also use this method for multiple solo runs with different characters.
Basically in any case, you are either going to have to choose to keep your solo character deck intact and play with that character as he is or you will need to disassemble him (either permanently or after recording his information) to start fresh. You NEVER keep a character deck intact and just not play with those cards during a new session. Those cards need to be available for play to play the game properly.
I hope that is helpful. Have fun!
I'm excited, too! But I think I'm even more excited about the upcoming playtest for the new set. Trying out the new classes and new versions of old characters and seeing how the card game is going to handle guns? Can't wait!
And no, I don't think subscribers are the last to get the product. I'm told that my local game store owner wasn't able to get Adventure 2 in stock until mid-November. Hope it doesn't take him that long to get Adventure 3....
Yeah, since I'm playing a Magus in a Mythic game right now, I had to pick this up when it went on sale. But it makes me a little sad that a lot of the spells that I really want to get Mythic versions of are from the APG: Ball Lightning, Firefall, Sirocco.... Is a follow-up book (or two or three) in development for the spells in the rest of the hardcover books?