This is just a couple odd things that have hit my mind since looking at the PRPG...
Alright, I have to say, I'm not an expert on horses. I worked with them a little when I was younger but I won't claim years of ranch hand experience with the beasts or anything like that. Still, I noticed something strange, apparently a horses hooves aren't it's primary attack... I'm sorry, but I have seen an upset horse and let me tell you something, their teeth are not their primary mode of attack. So I'm incredibly curious as to why on earth is their bite attack their primary and their hooves secondary?
On another note, I finally saw the changes for the Remove Curse/Poison/Disease spells and while I can see the reasoning behind it, well... it just seems too much. Or too little for a 3rd level spell. A caster level check against the poisons DC? It becomes far too easy to make that a wasted spell than anything. Wasted spells and conditions you cannot get rid of in such a manner do far more to encourage a 15 minute adventuring day than to move away from. What's done is done however so I ask this, what would you do to make those spells, well, not suck. Let's face it, they suck, I as a DM have no intention of making poisons, diseases, or curses a major part of my campaigns any time soon and if I wanted them to be more deadly I'd raise the DC to slightly more realistic levels (let's face it, a nip of arsenic will drop you be you a football star or a pocket protector wearing nerd).
One of my players suggested using it in such a fashion: have the spell allow the caster to make a heal check instead (much more likely to be higher than a level check) against the DC of the poison/disease/or curse and perhaps provide a bonus of some sort. Any thoughts?
...
Alright, I have to say, I'm not an expert on horses. I worked with them a little when I was younger but I won't claim years of ranch hand experience with the beasts or anything like that. Still, I noticed something strange, apparently a horses hooves aren't it's primary attack... I'm sorry, but I have seen an upset horse and let me tell you something, their teeth are not their primary mode of attack. So I'm incredibly curious as to why on earth is their bite attack their primary and their hooves secondary?
...
When the horse was upset was it kicking with its hind legs? That is pretty common actually, but a horse using its front hooves is something they have to be trained to do. Otherwise from what I know they really do bite those that get in front of them.
I am no horse expert so maybe others can say more, but that is what I have always read anyways.
On another note, I finally saw the changes for the Remove Curse/Poison/Disease spells and while I can see the reasoning behind it, well... it just seems too much. Or too little for a 3rd level spell. A caster level check against the poisons DC? It becomes far too easy to make that a wasted spell than anything.
The older versions (which automatically worked) in turn meant that, once the party had access to these spells, there was little point in using curses or diseases. The next day, the cleric would memorize the appropriate spells, cast them in the morning and the Dread Plague was solved. Now, if four members of your 5th level party are infected with a DC 20 disease, it's likely to be an ongoing problem likely to last several days (and possibly be life-threatening), rather than a 20 second "I memorize remove disease and we go on to the next plot point".
This is just a couple odd things that have hit my mind since looking at the PRPG...
Alright, I have to say, I'm not an expert on horses. I worked with them a little when I was younger but I won't claim years of ranch hand experience with the beasts or anything like that. Still, I noticed something strange, apparently a horses hooves aren't it's primary attack... I'm sorry, but I have seen an upset horse and let me tell you something, their teeth are not their primary mode of attack. So I'm incredibly curious as to why on earth is their bite attack their primary and their hooves secondary?
Wild horses DO bite each other. Actually, they're usually going for one another testicles...
Otherwise you are right, a horse's reaction to danger is usually to kick and stomp (or kick with its hind legs, especially to avoid having its testicles bitten-off). Actually, a horse's reaction to danger is usually just to run away, as they are flight animals...
"Attacking" isn't a natural reaction for most horses; therefore, we train them to do so. Historically, some where trained to bite but I agree that the bite shouldn't be a primary attack. Besides, forcing your horse to bite only puts it at risk of injuries.
On a side note, one major mounted maneuver isn't part of the horse statistics; the horse's ability to pivot around its hind legs and "slam" a flanking creature. I guess in Pathfinder it would be closer to a Combat Maneuver where the opponent is shunted sideways and potentially receive damage/fall prone etc.
Crowd control is one of the major benefit of being mounted in "real life". I know that RPGs can only emulate reality so far without loosing on playability, but I wish that mounted combat was more than "moving wicked fast in a strait line" or yet another way to deal damage.
'findel
Whether a particular attack is primary or secondary doesn't have anything to do with what sort of attack the creature prefers to use. It's just that all bite attacks are classified as primary attacks (so the creature's bite doesn't have a built-in penalty), and hoof attacks (as well as several other types) are secondary attacks (so the creature's hoof has a built in numerical attack penalty).
It makes building monsters easier. It also means the order that a monster makes its attacks has ZERO effect on the modifiers to each attack. If, for example, the horse Bestiary entry says:
Melee bite +2 (1d2), 2 hooves +0 (1d4+1)
It doesn't matter if you roll its attacks as bite/hoof/hoof, hoof/bite/hoof, or hoof/hoof/bite... bites are always at +2, hooves are always at +0.
This is a change from 3e where some creatures attacked with claw/claw/bite and others attacked with bite/claw/claw, and the order that those attacks were built into the stat block determined which was primary or secondary (and thus which had the -5 multiattack penalty or not).
So just because a horse's melee line lists bite first instead of hoof doesn't actually mean the horse bites before it stomps, or if it has only one attack it just uses the first-listed bite instead of second-listed hoof.
Well that's what I'm referring to. It doesn't make sense to me that a horses bite would have a better chance of being felt through armor than it's hooves. It just seems that the bite *should* have that penalty while the hooves *shouldn't* or did I read you wrong.
I also noticed another disturbing change that has irked me. Apparently with getting rid of racial favored classes humans loose one perk and become that much weaker compared to the other races. Any idea what's up with that, no offense but while a feat and a skill point are nice shouldn't they get the half-elf ability "Multitalented" or something to make up for that nerfing?
On another note, I finally saw the changes for the Remove Curse/Poison/Disease spells and while I can see the reasoning behind it, well... it just seems too much. Or too little for a 3rd level spell. A caster level check against the poisons DC? It becomes far too easy to make that a wasted spell than anything.The older versions (which automatically worked) in turn meant that, once the party had access to these spells, there was little point in using curses or diseases. The next day, the cleric would memorize the appropriate spells, cast them in the morning and the Dread Plague was solved. Now, if four members of your 5th level party are infected with a DC 20 disease, it's likely to be an ongoing problem likely to last several days (and possibly be life-threatening), rather than a 20 second "I memorize remove disease and we go on to the next plot point".
I understand this but couldn't there have been a middle ground between making diseases and poisons and such dangerous via the nerfing of spells and making a 3rd level spell nearly useless? I'll admit once you're able to cast those spells it rendered such status effects useless but then they castrated a 3rd level spell without any compensation. No bonus to that caster check, it's more like allowing them to make a second saving throw or something, it would have been a good chance to make the heal skill a more worthy investment.
It's like saying the Empire State Building is too big and reducing it to a four story office building. At least in my not so humble opinion.
Well that's what I'm referring to. It doesn't make sense to me that a horses bite would have a better chance of being felt through armor than it's hooves. It just seems that the bite *should* have that penalty while the hooves *shouldn't* or did I read you wrong.
I also noticed another disturbing change that has irked me. Apparently with getting rid of racial favored classes humans loose one perk and become that much weaker compared to the other races. Any idea what's up with that, no offense but while a feat and a skill point are nice shouldn't they get the half-elf ability "Multitalented" or something to make up for that nerfing?
yes. I was referring to this as well. One could argue that a horse's primary attack, in other word its attack that does not wield a penalty, should be its hoofs rather than its bite.
Actually, I'd rather see a horse stats including ONLY those two hooves attacks and an alternate kick attack similar to the crocodile's tail slap. Bite attack should require a trick or even a feat, as this involves further training...
then again, the game needs to provide what make it fun and easy(er) to play. Yet, I'd argue that the hooves should be a horse primary attack rather then its bite...
'findel
|
I also noticed another disturbing change that has irked me. Apparently with getting rid of racial favored classes humans loose one perk and become that much weaker compared to the other races. Any idea what's up with that, no offense but while a feat and a skill point are nice shouldn't they get the half-elf ability "Multitalented" or something to make up for that nerfing?
A)the human hasn't been nerfed at all. Nerfing can only happen with final editions. The BETA was a playtest ruleset that wasn't meant as a final ruleset. The Human lost absolutely nothing from 3.5 and the pathfinder RPG so there was no nerf. In fact the flat human gained a +2 to place in any ability score.
B) As for the rest of your post about an extra feat and a skill point not being enough. I will merely say that for every person you bring me that agrees with you I can find one who disagrees and many that think that humans are the *ONLY* class worth playing. I disagree with them as I disagree with you. I think the human class is balanced just fine amongst the rest of the classes. But there was no Nerf to the human.
This does remind me of one game I played where my warhorse gained a reputation for being carnivorous as it kept getting criticals with its bite. It killed a number of things that way, it was hillarious. Oh those poor goblin who thought they could steal my horse!
A)the human hasn't been nerfed at all. Nerfing can only happen with final editions. The BETA was a playtest ruleset that wasn't meant as a final ruleset. The Human lost absolutely nothing from 3.5 and the pathfinder RPG so there was no nerf. In fact the flat human gained a +2 to place in any ability score.
The final rules set? Very well, humans gained a +2 to any stat, that's alright and personally I think that was the push they needed to bring them in line with the other races. However they lost their favored class advantage. In 3.5 humans were the race allowed to pick any class as a favored class, it was a sign of their flexibility, adaptability and their ambition. Now every race can do that. *That* is loss by giving everyone more. Which is why I think they should have Multitalented as well.
B) As for the rest of your post about an extra feat and a skill point not being enough. I will merely say that for every person you bring me that agrees with you I can find one who disagrees and many that think that humans are the *ONLY* class worth playing. I disagree with them as I disagree with you. I think the human class is balanced just fine amongst the rest of the classes. But there was no Nerf to the human.
Then we'll agree to disagree. In 3.5 the racial stat modifiers amounted to +0. Races got +2 to one stat and -2 to another. Mathematically that would be seen as +2-2=0 PRPG bumped it up one which meant it was only fair to give humans and half breeds +2 because everyone else got +2. However all the races are now flexible with their favored class bringing them in line with humans which results in +1 gain for all races and no gain for the humans.
As for people playing humans, I don't doubt it, I play humans most often myself even if they are weaker mechanically. Hell, I did so in 2nd edition when there was little doubt they were weaker.