James, read through Shards of Sin. Loved it, you guys really nailed this one. The dungeon crawl navigates perfectly between too large, too arbitrary and too much combat to be (to me anyways) perfect.
I did find that it suffers from the "make a perception check for everything" syndrome. I personally find it more interesting when the players know that something is there, but how to activate it is the challenge.
Have you guys considered created a Fatality deck, in line with the other decks?
The Fatality deck (also a iFatality iPhone App), would describe the killing blow for each type of attack (Piercing, Slashing, Bludgeoning, Magic).
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In golarion what happens when a paladin of a lafwul neutral god disobey an order from a LE cleric of that god?
Internal conflict. Paladins are lawful good, and a paladin of a lawful neutral god will follow his order's commands, NOT the general commands of the priesthood. Especially not evil priests in the order.
In other words, a paladin is not going to be in the same sub-group as the church that a lawful evil member of the church belongs to. There are many real-world religions that have different branches—and some of those different branches are essentially at war with each other. That could be a similar thing going on in a case like this.
But a paladin isn't going to belong to the same branch as the evil priest in the same religion, so he won't ever really be put in a situation where said evil cleric is ordering him around in the first place.
|
Creative Director
|
There are in fact shards of the Starstone floating around near-Golarion space, as per Distant Worlds.
They don't turn you into a god, they just distort space and cause weird incomplete and possibly unsolvable "trials."
And said shards are NOT Starstones. That's a completely different situation than having duplicate Starstones or something of the sort.
|
Creative Director
|
Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
I'm probably the most fond of the Lovecraftian critters though; the voonith, the yithian, the zoog, and the moonbeast.
ooh! The demons are cool too. And the linnorms.
OH! The dinosaurs!!!
etc.
|
Creative Director
|
First off, this is obviously needing some errata, and so you should make this post in the proper thread as well and hit the FAQ button.Like I did a year ago? ;)
Exactly like that.
Sorry it's not been fixed. Sometimes things move slowly.
|
Creative Director
|
Have you guys considered created a Fatality deck, in line with the other decks?
The Fatality deck (also a iFatality iPhone App), would describe the killing blow for each type of attack (Piercing, Slashing, Bludgeoning, Magic).
Hmmm... We have not. That's interesting. It'd be pretty much a completely rules-free set, I think; only descriptions of grisly deaths inflicted by the final blow.
Since it's not really all that rules-involved, and since it could easily drop into R-rated violence, it's unlikely we'll do something like this, but I do think it's an interesting idea.
|
Director of Game Development
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
Forgive me, but that'd be the tzitzimitl. :)
|
James Jacobs:
Sorry to ask more information on this topic again but:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
Are you forced to make the choice between standard attack or full-attack AFTER your first attack or can you make it before?
IE: If I wanted to, can I announce I am making a Full-Attack even though I am given the choice after my first attack.
Thanks again.
- Gauss
Only a jerk GM makes you stick to your announced actions once things change in the round. If, for example, you announce "I move 30 feet into the room and then grab the magic sword off the altar there!" and after moving 20 feet into the room you fall into a pit... it'd be lame for the GM to say, "Since you said you were going to grab the sword, you still have to try that and thus fail and waste your action down in the pit where the sword is out of reach."
AKA: You can decide to change actions in the middle of a round as things change. If you say "I full attack the giant" and then kill him dead on the first attack... you should be able to do other things instead of just stabbing the dead body a few more times.
James, the problem is that there is people that say "I can use manyshot then forego my following attacks and do a full move action". From my point of view that mean having a jerk player that want to get a feat benefit without paying the cost.
For me the thread about manyshot is a frustration reading (the reason why I haven't commented in it).- * - * -
Questions:
1) A Alchemist can benefit from arcane strike?
As the feat say you need to be capable to cast Arcane spells I think he can't but I am not sure.
2) "Power x can be dismissed as a free action", typical example, a barbarian rage. With the exception of speaking it is not possible to take free actions when it isn't your turn, so when activating powers that require a free action to be cancelled you use at least 2 rounds of the power (1), as you activate the power in one round and dismiss it during another round.
I find that perfectly agreeable when we are speaking of a barbarian rage as the main use of cycling through rage rounds is to use "once a rage" powers as "once a round" powers as soon as you can become immune to fatigue (plenty of ways to do that).
It become more of a problem when you are using things like the Adhesive (2) armor power from Ultimate Equipment.
So a twofold question:
2a) this round sequence is right?
- start of your round
* pay powers maintenance costs (1 round of rage, adhesive power, ecc) for powers that continue automatically:
*decide if you want to pay maintenance for powers that don't require an action to be dismissed
then
* use your actions and free actions, dismissing the powers if you want.
2b) if the above sequence is right, the wording of the adhesive power is right or the person that created it simply didn't considered the problem?
Notes:
(1) You can activate a power at the start of a round and dismiss it at the end of the same round but that mean you will not benefit from it when the enemy or your companions act.
(2) ADHESIVE
On command, the hands and feet of this armor’s wearer become incredibly sticky, granting her a climb speed of 20 feet. The stickiness grants the wearer a +2 enhancement bonus on combat maneuver checks made to disarm, grapple, reposition, steal, or trip when the wearer is using a natural weapon or unarmed strike to attempt the maneuver. The wearer can gain these benefits for 10 rounds per day. These rounds need not be consecutive, but they must be spent in 1-round intervals.
Ending the effect is a free action. Adhesive cannot be placed on armor with any version of the slick special ability.
Follow up question:
This question format is agreeable/readable for you?
I have a tendency to make long posts with extra explanations and sometime putting them in the middle of the text can make it hard to read.
|
|
4) When you enhance it, you can either do so as a weapon or a shield. You can do both. You pay for each separately, in the same way a spiked shield works.
How does a tekko-kagi work, functionally?
Being a hybrid weapon/shield sort of... thing, can it have shield enchantments placed on it as well as weapon enchantments (i.e.: a bizarre +3 defiant, flaming tekko-kagi)?
When you are enchanting a item that can be both a shield and a weapon what is the limit for the enchantments?
You can make it a weapon with +10 levels of enhancements and a shield with +10 levels of enhancements or you are limited to a total of 10 levels of enhancements between the two set of bonus?
Diego: We have missed you in that thread too. :D
- Gauss
|
|
2.) Are rake attacks in addition to whatever other attacks the grappling creature would get that turn?
2) Yes.
About grapple:
Maintaining a grapple is a standard action, so if you are the grappler and you maintain the grapple you get to deliver the grapple damage and your rake attack.If you are the grappled you can make a full attack, included using your rake attack.
It is that right?
Until recently I had little occasion to use grapple so I am a bit rusty on the relevant rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2.) Are rake attacks in addition to whatever other attacks the grappling creature would get that turn?
2) Yes.
About grapple:
Maintaining a grapple is a standard action, so if you are the grappler and you maintain the grapple you get to deliver the grapple damage and your rake attack.
If you are the grappled you can make a full attack, included using your rake attack.It is that right?
Until recently I had little occasion to use grapple so I am a bit rusty on the relevant rules.
|
|
Hey James, how would you handle this?
There's a domain power that fails to specify its range.
** spoiler omitted **
Would you happen to know what the intent was on that? I'd hate to assume it's melee-only, as you'd then require a separate feat (actually, a PAIR of feats) to be able to use that power without provoking an AoO. Personally, I'm guessing it was supposed to be 30ft like so many other domain powers and that line just got left out by accident. But that's just my guess. Have any insight?Thanks!
First off, this is obviously needing some errata, and so you should make this post in the proper thread as well and hit the FAQ button.
In the meantime... I'd say the range should be 60 feet. That's a completely arbitrary choice, though.
Unless I am mistaken:
* (SU) powers don't provoke* it is the wave, not the cleric that attack, so he wouldn't provoke.
So I don't see what is the problem. The cleric get a decent special attack without provoking an attack of opportunity, it seem reasonable.
Making it a ranged attack seem strong.
I am missing something?
Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
....whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers...the giant undead space skeleton.
I must have missed this one.
<goes to look at bestiary 3>
Forgive me, but that'd be the tzitzimitl. :)Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
Thanks.
A bunch of random questions:
1. Do you prefer hardcover or softcover?
2. Which celestial race is your favorite?
3. Which fiendish race is your favorite?
4. Should the "lawful" alignment be renamed "ordered"?
5. What is your favorite movie or movie series?
6. What is your favorite book or book series?
7. Do you play any other RPGs?
8. Are you a fan of monsters of the owlbear variety (two animals joined together)?
9. Why don't all dinosaurs have artwork?
10. When will there be a flumph-based AP (or perhaps more seriously, a distant worlds based AP)?
11. Will there be more Tanes?
12. Do Golarion deities have avatars or aspects of themselves, or do the heralds fulfil that role?
13. Do you have a favorite Golarion NPC/personality?
14. Do you ever get tired of all these questions?
Forgive me, but that'd be the tzitzimitl. :)Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
I love New World monsters. Especially the Tzitzimitl. I'm working on a campaign now where the world's sun been affected by the predations of a tzitzimitl and now the world is slowly freezing over. It's meant to be a Dying Earth campaign in a similar vein to Dark Sun but with an ice age, not a desert.
Now if only I could call it Dark Sun since that would be very appropriate :)
In another thread, Bob_Loblaw just said this: "I would like to see casters who tire themselves and can even kill themselves with casting too much."
Would you ever consider such a premise for Psychic magic? (obviously death would be an extreme case in such a system)
Now if only I could call it Dark Sun since that would be very appropriate :)
How about Dead Sun? ;D
In another thread, Bob_Loblaw just said this: "I would like to see casters who tire themselves and can even kill themselves with casting too much."
Would you ever consider such a premise for Psychic magic? (obviously death would be an extreme case in such a system)
I have something like this for magic already in my houserules. It is working quite well thus far, but it needs more testing.
|
|
Forgive me, but that'd be the tzitzimitl. :)Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
I love New World monsters. Especially the Tzitzimitl. I'm working on a campaign now where the world's sun been affected by the predations of a tzitzimitl and now the world is slowly freezing over. It's meant to be a Dying Earth campaign in a similar vein to Dark Sun but with an ice age, not a desert.
Now if only I could call it Dark Sun since that would be very appropriate :)
Fading sun.
Fading suns is the name of a SF game, but I think you can appropriate it.- * -
James, do you know the Fading suns RPG and what do you think of it?
Seeing the question about Hamatula strike, the Barbazu beard and the Asmodeus paladin you have considered redoing the Player companion about Cheliax?
And the one about elfs?
Both are more 3.5 than Pathfinder so redoing them to be more in line with Pathfinder rules and current Golarion canon would be a good thing.
I well and truly miss Dark Sun. That was a campaign setting that took chances and they paid off quite well.
I well and truly miss Dark Sun. That was a campaign setting that took chances and they paid off quite well.
it still exists here in 3.5 form. Would take a wee bit of converting to Pathfinder but I think it's well worth it.
I well and truly miss Dark Sun. That was a campaign setting that took chances and they paid off quite well.it still exists here in 3.5 form. Would take a wee bit of converting to Pathfinder but I think it's well worth it.
Athas.org is indeed awesome. Love that site.
|
Creative Director
|
James, the problem is that there is people that say "I can use manyshot then forego my following attacks and do a full move action". From my point of view that mean having a jerk player that want to get a feat benefit without paying the cost.
For me the thread about manyshot is a frustration reading (the reason why I haven't commented in it).
Which makes me think that the ACTUAL problem is that there are players out there who aren't respecting their GMs enough to let them make a call.
1) A Alchemist can benefit from arcane strike?
As the feat say you need to be capable to cast Arcane spells I think he can't but I am not sure.
2) "Power x can be dismissed as a free action", typical example, a barbarian rage. With the exception of speaking it is not possible to take free actions when it isn't your turn, so when activating powers that require a free action to be cancelled you use at least 2 rounds of the power (1), as you activate the power in one round and dismiss it during another round.
I find that perfectly agreeable when we are speaking of a barbarian rage as the main use of cycling through rage rounds is to use "once a rage" powers as "once a round" powers as soon as you can become immune to fatigue (plenty of ways to do that).
It become more of a problem when you are using things like the Adhesive (2) armor power from Ultimate Equipment.So a twofold question:
2a) this round sequence is right?
- start of your round
* pay powers maintenance costs (1 round of rage, adhesive power, ecc) for powers that continue automatically:
*decide if you want to pay maintenance for powers that don't require an action to be dismissed
then
* use your actions and free actions, dismissing the powers if you want.2b) if the above sequence is right, the wording of the adhesive power is right or the person that created it simply didn't considered the problem?
Notes:
(1) You can activate a power at the start of a round and dismiss it at the end of the same round but that mean you will not benefit from it when the enemy or your companions act.
(2) ADHESIVE
On command, the hands and feet of this armor’s wearer become incredibly sticky, granting her a climb speed of 20 feet. The stickiness grants the wearer a +2 enhancement bonus on combat maneuver checks made to disarm, grapple, reposition, steal, or trip when the wearer is using a natural weapon or unarmed strike to attempt the maneuver. The wearer can gain these benefits for 10 rounds per day. These rounds need not be consecutive, but they must be spent in 1-round intervals.
Ending the effect is a free action. Adhesive cannot be placed on armor with any version of the slick special ability.Follow up question:
This question format is agreeable/readable for you?
I have a tendency to make long posts with extra explanations and sometime putting them in the middle of the text can make it hard to read.
1) No. Alchemists use elixirs, not spells; there are some similarities, but they're not interchangeable. Also, alchemists are doing enough damage already. They don't need more damage.
2) You can dismiss a power in the same round you activate it.
2a) Nope. You can activate a power, enjoy its effects for your actions, and then at the end of your turn deactivate it as a free action if you so choose.
2b) Not all powers that use this kind of duration are equally good choices to use this kind of activate and deactivate tactic. Adhesive might not be one where it works well. Different abilities are different.
|
Creative Director
|
4) When you enhance it, you can either do so as a weapon or a shield. You can do both. You pay for each separately, in the same way a spiked shield works.
How does a tekko-kagi work, functionally?
Being a hybrid weapon/shield sort of... thing, can it have shield enchantments placed on it as well as weapon enchantments (i.e.: a bizarre +3 defiant, flaming tekko-kagi)? When you are enchanting a item that can be both a shield and a weapon what is the limit for the enchantments?
You can make it a weapon with +10 levels of enhancements and a shield with +10 levels of enhancements or you are limited to a total of 10 levels of enhancements between the two set of bonus?
A shield/weapon combo is treated as two different items (a shield and a weapon) for the purposes of all magical enhancements. Thus you could do a +10 weapon/+10 shield (equivalent) item. Technically, since it's stacking powers on a single item, your GM can require that one of those two enhancements (the weapon, since it costs more) to be 150% more (since a weapon and a shield sort of have body slots... that's a call up to the GM)... but also it's stacking a lot of money onto one item that, if it's lost or breaks, is less advantageous than having a separate weapon and shield situation.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2.) Are rake attacks in addition to whatever other attacks the grappling creature would get that turn?
2) Yes.
About grapple:
Maintaining a grapple is a standard action, so if you are the grappler and you maintain the grapple you get to deliver the grapple damage and your rake attack.
If you are the grappled you can make a full attack, included using your rake attack.It is that right?
Until recently I had little occasion to use grapple so I am a bit rusty on the relevant rules.
Sounds right to me.
It also passes the "real world" test. Grapple a tiger. Whether or not it's grappling you or you're grappling it, the tiger can use its rear claws to rake at you.
|
Creative Director
|
Hey James, how would you handle this?
There's a domain power that fails to specify its range.
** spoiler omitted **
Would you happen to know what the intent was on that? I'd hate to assume it's melee-only, as you'd then require a separate feat (actually, a PAIR of feats) to be able to use that power without provoking an AoO. Personally, I'm guessing it was supposed to be 30ft like so many other domain powers and that line just got left out by accident. But that's just my guess. Have any insight?Thanks!
First off, this is obviously needing some errata, and so you should make this post in the proper thread as well and hit the FAQ button.
In the meantime... I'd say the range should be 60 feet. That's a completely arbitrary choice, though.
Unless I am mistaken:
* (SU) powers don't provoke
* it is the wave, not the cleric that attack, so he wouldn't provoke.So I don't see what is the problem. The cleric get a decent special attack without provoking an attack of opportunity, it seem reasonable.
Making it a ranged attack seem strong.I am missing something?
Correct; supernatural abilities do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Those that require you to make a ranged attack DO, but not because it's a supernatural ability—because it's a ranged attack. In this case, you're making a CMB check, which is a type of attack, which does provoke an attack of opportunity. That too could and should be clarified in a FAQ or errata, but the main thing that needs to be cleared up is whether or not it's a melee or ranged attack, and if it's a ranged attack, what IS its range. The fact that it lets you PULL a target as well as push makes me think it's a ranged attack.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A bunch of random questions:
1. Do you prefer hardcover or softcover?
2. Which celestial race is your favorite?
3. Which fiendish race is your favorite?
4. Should the "lawful" alignment be renamed "ordered"?
5. What is your favorite movie or movie series?
6. What is your favorite book or book series?
7. Do you play any other RPGs?
8. Are you a fan of monsters of the owlbear variety (two animals joined together)?
9. Why don't all dinosaurs have artwork?
10. When will there be a flumph-based AP (or perhaps more seriously, a distant worlds based AP)?
11. Will there be more Tanes?
12. Do Golarion deities have avatars or aspects of themselves, or do the heralds fulfil that role?
13. Do you have a favorite Golarion NPC/personality?
14. Do you ever get tired of all these questions?
1) Depends entirely on what kind of book we're talking about, but normally I prefer hardcover.
2) Azatas.
3) Demons.
4) Nope. The alignment system is one of the most iconic and well-known elements of the game. Once something has inundated pop culture to the point that it's common knowledge enough to show up on shows like the Simpsons... changing it to something else is a silly move. AKA: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
5) Favorite movie = Alien. Favorite movie series = Godzilla.
6) Favorite book = The Dunwich Horror and Other Tales. Favorite book series = mythos fiction.
7) Yup. Non-Pathfinder RPGs I've played recently (as in the last few months) include Call of Cthulhu and Dungeon Crawl Classics. Non-Pathifnder RPGs I hope to play soon (as in the next few months) include Star Frontiers and Lamentations of the Flame Princess.
8) Usually no. I call them "deadline monsters," since they often feel to me like monsters the designer was pressed for time on and had to come up with a concept at the last minute and just took two random creatures and put them together. Boring and lame. Some of these monsters are cool, particularly those with tradition to back them up... but new monsters who exist only because they're two animals smushed together tend to not impress me.
9) Because we can only fit one piece of art on a page, and because dinosaurs (like all animals) are simple enough to fit two stat blocks on a page. I wouldn't MIND putting one dinosaur to a page, but there are folks who bristle at how much room dinosaurs take up in the game already (grrrrr). I'm not TOO worried though, since like animals, dinosaurs are real-world things and if we don't have art for one of them, it's an easy enough task these days to find out what they look like by looking in a dinosaur book or doing a search online.
10) Flumph-based: Never. Distant worlds based: Reign of Winter will have one adventure that goes to one of the planets detailed in that book.
11) Yes.
12) Golarion deities have avatars. They're mythic creatures, though, and as such we can't quite yet stat them up.
13) Yes. Ameiko Kaijitsu and Merisiel and Shensen and Treerazer all probably tie for 1st place there.
14) Nope. I actually quite like the short big list questions like this. I'm less fond of the wall-of-text rules questions, since those tend to make me suspicious that someone's trying to be SUPER pedantic about tricking me into ruling in their favor over some sort of rules bending optimization stunt that they'll then use as ammunition against their GM who has already told them what they want to do is not allowed... but maybe I'm just a bit too cynical when it comes to wall-of-text rules questions.
|
Creative Director
|
Forgive me, but that'd be the tzitzimitl. :)Hello James, which of the bestiary 3 monsters is your favourite and why?
That's like asking someone which of their children are their favorites. It's a hard choice to make! I'm fond of the role we got demodands into. I like graveknights and the whats-it-called from Central American mythology that has eclipse powers... the giant undead space skeleton.
I love New World monsters. Especially the Tzitzimitl. I'm working on a campaign now where the world's sun been affected by the predations of a tzitzimitl and now the world is slowly freezing over. It's meant to be a Dying Earth campaign in a similar vein to Dark Sun but with an ice age, not a desert.
Now if only I could call it Dark Sun since that would be very appropriate :)
Unless you intend to publish it... there's no reason you can't call it Dark Sun. Or something similar, like Nightsun or Darkstar or whatever.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In another thread, Bob_Loblaw just said this: "I would like to see casters who tire themselves and can even kill themselves with casting too much."
Would you ever consider such a premise for Psychic magic? (obviously death would be an extreme case in such a system)
That's not an element of the game we want in the game.
Casters have built-in limits to their powers. If you're seeing casters constantly dominating the games and the non-casters feel left out or marginalized, your ACTUAL problem is the 15-minute adventuring day. A fighter can hack and chop all day long, and a rogue can make sneak attacks as long... but that advantage doesn't come into play if you've trained your players to expect only one or two encounters per day. If you start doing more than that, the spellcasters will start to realize that they need to conserve and spread out their magic and suddenly things work a lot better. That's how it works in games I run, at least—I've not seen the huge disparity in power or fun between casters and non-casters.
If you don't WANT to use that solution, though... my suggestion would be to limit casters on a battle-by-battle basis. Give them a hard limit as to how many spell levels (or perhaps just spells) they can cast in a specific battle (this includes preparatory spells). Something like a number equal to their best mental ability score modifier, or their Hit Dice.
Alternatively, you could bring back something I really REALLY wanted in the game but it got pushed aside: "buff slots." Every character has a number of buff slots equal to their HD divided by 4 (rounded down, minimum 1). You can have a number of preparatory spells in effect at the same time equal to this limit. Then give the non casters 3 bonus slots, so that they get more benefit from things like haste and the like. This system never made it to playtest, so I'm not sure how it might work out in play, but not only would it give non-casters a boost, it also helps to uncomplicate the game (managing a dozen or more buffs at once does that).
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James, do you know the Fading suns RPG and what do you think of it?
Seeing the question about Hamatula strike, the Barbazu beard and the Asmodeus paladin you have considered redoing the Player companion about Cheliax?
And the one about elfs?Both are more 3.5 than Pathfinder so redoing them to be more in line with Pathfinder rules and current Golarion canon would be a good thing.
I've heard of Fading Suns but haven't looked into it.
I think a 32 page "redo" of the Cheliax companion is unlikely... but a 64 page book about Cheliax in the campaign setting line would be great! And I've always wanted to update the elves companion to the Pathifnder rules, but reprinting those 32 page things is tricky due to supply and demand issues... it costs a LOT to reprint, and something like that? Not sure folks want to re-buy it. We'll see.
Buff Slots is a neat idea, I may have to run it by my gaming group and see what they think.
Thank you, Mr. T-rex!
About this system, do the buffs still last the same number of rounds as they normally do, and do you have the option to overwrite old buffs with new ones should you run out of slots?
To clarify, I wasn't proposing it as a solution to any kind of imbalance. Like you, I don't have any problem with class disparity or even the 15 minute adventuring day. These problems are largely solved (in my experience) by a skilled GM using the tools given in the books with a lot of variation. They only crop up when you let the players use the same approach to problem after problem.
What I was wondering about was the "feel" of psychic magic. It seems thematically appropriate to me that psychics would become physically or mentally exhausted if they push themselves, perhaps something along the lines of the barbarian's rage. That's not power points in the psionic way, but lots of classes do have a pool of points for their thematic powers, that could perhaps work in tandem with more traditional slot-based casting. Pathfinder's original class design (esp Gunslinger and Magus) does tend to favor that kind of point pools it could make for an excellent happy medium between psionic and psychic.
In any case, my question would be better phrased like this: do you think that physical and mental endurance could be a theme touched upon by the psychic magic mechanics? In the way that scholarship is a theme of wizardry; not power points as previously implemented.
(also, add my support to the notion of buff slots)
|
|
In another thread, Bob_Loblaw just said this: "I would like to see casters who tire themselves and can even kill themselves with casting too much."
Would you ever consider such a premise for Psychic magic? (obviously death would be an extreme case in such a system)
That's not an element of the game we want in the game.
Casters have built-in limits to their powers. If you're seeing casters constantly dominating the games and the non-casters feel left out or marginalized, your ACTUAL problem is the 15-minute adventuring day. A fighter can hack and chop all day long, and a rogue can make sneak attacks as long... but that advantage doesn't come into play if you've trained your players to expect only one or two encounters per day. If you start doing more than that, the spellcasters will start to realize that they need to conserve and spread out their magic and suddenly things work a lot better. That's how it works in games I run, at least—I've not seen the huge disparity in power or fun between casters and non-casters.
If you don't WANT to use that solution, though... my suggestion would be to limit casters on a battle-by-battle basis. Give them a hard limit as to how many spell levels (or perhaps just spells) they can cast in a specific battle (this includes preparatory spells). Something like a number equal to their best mental ability score modifier, or their Hit Dice.
Alternatively, you could bring back something I really REALLY wanted in the game but it got pushed aside: "buff slots." Every character has a number of buff slots equal to their HD divided by 4 (rounded down, minimum 1). You can have a number of preparatory spells in effect at the same time equal to this limit. Then give the non casters 3 bonus slots, so that they get more benefit from things like haste and the like. This system never made it to playtest, so I'm not sure how it might work out in play, but not only would it give non-casters a boost, it also helps to uncomplicate the game (managing a...
Speaking of spellcasters limits, in another thread someone cited the old first and second edition rule that required to spend 10 minutes of time to prepare 1 level of spells. Under those rules a high level cleric/wizard cold spend a couple of days to refill all of his spell slots, so a caster was less eager to use all of his spells.
Maybe 10 minutes for each spell level is too much, but the basic idea isn't bad. It give an incentive to preserve resources. A difference in the preparation time between spontaneous and prepared spellcasters (with the spontaneous spellcaster spending less time to memorize the same number of spell levels) would reduce somewhat the perceived advantage of prepared spelcasters too.While absolutely non RAW it will be a interesting houserule, I think.
Not something that can be ported in the general Pathfinder rules at this time as there are too many mechanics that depend on the current memorization/preparation time.
|
|
James, do you know the Fading suns RPG and what do you think of it?
Seeing the question about Hamatula strike, the Barbazu beard and the Asmodeus paladin you have considered redoing the Player companion about Cheliax?
And the one about elfs?Both are more 3.5 than Pathfinder so redoing them to be more in line with Pathfinder rules and current Golarion canon would be a good thing.
I've heard of Fading Suns but haven't looked into it.
I think a 32 page "redo" of the Cheliax companion is unlikely... but a 64 page book about Cheliax in the campaign setting line would be great! And I've always wanted to update the elves companion to the Pathifnder rules, but reprinting those 32 page things is tricky due to supply and demand issues... it costs a LOT to reprint, and something like that? Not sure folks want to re-buy it. We'll see.
Put me up for a copy of each. probably the elf book would be a good campaign setting book.
And Cheliax with the new look of the campaign books? Drool ....
- * -
The feat in the Cheliax book need some work. They were made during the 3.5 -> Pathfinder transition and don't mesh well with the Pathfinder rules. I think they can be easily interpreted by a GM but people that want the RAW of them for PFS use will have problems using them.
Contributor
|
An Elf setting book, I think, that covers non-standard Elven cultures, such as those of Garund and the Steaming Sea (or even those of Tian Xia, though it's outside the Inner Sea), might be pretty interesting. There's supposed to be a Half-elf culture in Vudra, as well.
I think most players think Drow or standard Elf when considering elven culture and forget about the rest.
Of course, I cut my teeth on freelancing with an (unpublished) MERP supplement on Lindon, so I have a certain love for the subject (and not just Tolkien's version).
What are the chances (in the next few years) of the following?
1. Eldritch Horrors Revisited
2. A swashbuckling adventure involving Galt and Taldor (say, a cross of the Tale of Two Cities with the Three Musketeers, including the intrigue and depressing bits)
3. Exploring the Vaults of Orv
4. Vudra?
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Since you said never to a flumph based AP, what about an adventure or single book of an AP that strongly featured flumphs in some way?
If that would be possible, would it make more sense to include them in an adventure that was on another planet (like the part of Reign of Winter previously mentioned) or on a Golarion based adventure that potentially featured a threat from the dark tapestry?
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You and maybe 5 other people would buy it.Since you said never to a flumph based AP, what about an adventure or single book of an AP that strongly featured flumphs in some way?
If that would be possible, would it make more sense to include them in an adventure that was on another planet (like the part of Reign of Winter previously mentioned) or on a Golarion based adventure that potentially featured a threat from the dark tapestry?
There's well over 5 people on these boards alone who would like it, plus the hidden legions of flumph fans who aren't on here as well.
How much presence does a god have in the abyssal realm of a demon lord (Or other fiendish equivalent)? I imagine a cleric would still get their spells but would the connection be distant or unaffected?
In another thread, Bob_Loblaw just said this: "I would like to see casters who tire themselves and can even kill themselves with casting too much."
Would you ever consider such a premise for Psychic magic? (obviously death would be an extreme case in such a system)
That's not an element of the game we want in the game.
Casters have built-in limits to their powers. If you're seeing casters constantly dominating the games and the non-casters feel left out or marginalized, your ACTUAL problem is the 15-minute adventuring day. A fighter can hack and chop all day long, and a rogue can make sneak attacks as long... but that advantage doesn't come into play if you've trained your players to expect only one or two encounters per day. If you start doing more than that, the spellcasters will start to realize that they need to conserve and spread out their magic and suddenly things work a lot better. That's how it works in games I run, at least—I've not seen the huge disparity in power or fun between casters and non-casters.
If you don't WANT to use that solution, though... my suggestion would be to limit casters on a battle-by-battle basis. Give them a hard limit as to how many spell levels (or perhaps just spells) they can cast in a specific battle (this includes preparatory spells). Something like a number equal to their best mental ability score modifier, or their Hit Dice.
Hit points could be an "interesting" alternative to higher spell slots...
or maybe sacrificial spells; the caster save a lot of lives at the cost of his/her/its own.|
|
James, do you know the Fading suns RPG and what do you think of it?
Seeing the question about Hamatula strike, the Barbazu beard and the Asmodeus paladin you have considered redoing the Player companion about Cheliax?
And the one about elfs?Both are more 3.5 than Pathfinder so redoing them to be more in line with Pathfinder rules and current Golarion canon would be a good thing.
I've heard of Fading Suns but haven't looked into it.
I think a 32 page "redo" of the Cheliax companion is unlikely... but a 64 page book about Cheliax in the campaign setting line would be great! And I've always wanted to update the elves companion to the Pathifnder rules, but reprinting those 32 page things is tricky due to supply and demand issues... it costs a LOT to reprint, and something like that? Not sure folks want to re-buy it. We'll see.
I for one would definitely buy a redone for PFRPG book on Elves. Especially if it was in the new format for Companions.
In one of the early books, it talked about elves and that one of their things was shaping crystals. Also there is an oblique reference to this in the Drow article when it talks about Lithicrafting as "an adaptation of the same traits that allow surface elves to shap trees and crystals." I really latched onto this idea, unfortunately there has been nothing about this in any other books that touch on elves, not even the Elves of Golarion book. Was this idea abandoned actively, or has it simply fallen by the way side a forgotten aspect of the race? Alteratively is it covered in more detail in some book that I have simply missed?