Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Kirthfinder - World of Warriorcraft Houserules


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew

701 to 750 of 1,945 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Andoran

Cool. I can rebuild Cadogan and Fiachra tonight then. :-)


Probably not much need -- although Fiachra might want to look at some of the "how to cast 1e-style spells" stuff in the metamagic chapter (once the docs are up, check out the Volumetric Burst and Reflective Spell feats, and look at the metamagic notes for fireball and lightning bolt that follow).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Final 1st edition rules for the S(uperior) H(ybrid) I(nteractive) T(abletop) role-playing game have been sent to houstonderek (creative consultant) and TOZ (webmaster). Let me take this opportunity to thank everyone who contributed: especially Christopher Hauschild and, near the end, Alice Margatroid, James Harrison, and heliopolix. Also thanks to past and present playtesters (Jess Door, Silverhair, Andostre, Mundane, Psychicmachinery) and commenters (Mistah Green and others), and to Paizo for hosting this thread. Finally, a big thanks to everyone who showed an interest or who might be considering trying these variant rules at home.

I'll probably personally hold off printing these in case some sort of major omission/blunder/brokenness turns up, but barring that, these are the official 1st edition rules.

Happy Gaming!!!

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Stand-by folks, we're working out technical issues. Half the documents got stuck in the intertubes.


have you tried using a plunger?

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Kirth thinks the campaign map is too big and got hung up on something. He's going to parcel it out tonight so it'll fit. :)

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Ladies and gentlemen, Kirthfinder Final Mix is LIVE!

Andoran

Hooray!


Excellent stuff!


Downloading now!


So, are you still looking for proofreading comments and feedback on this version of the rules?

Andoran

O_o


Caedwyr wrote:
So, are you still looking for proofreading comments and feedback on this version of the rules?

All the proofing and feedback we've been getting was in anticipation of the April 1st release. You're 3 days too late, unless you've spotted something egregiously game-breaking that absolutely needs to be addressed.

Cheliax

Do you plan to update the game with new rules? Expansions, so to speak?


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Caedwyr wrote:
So, are you still looking for proofreading comments and feedback on this version of the rules?
All the proofing and feedback we've been getting was in anticipation of the April 1st release. You're 3 days too late, unless you've spotted something egregiously game-breaking that absolutely needs to be addressed.

Nope, nothing like that. I was just wondering if you would still find it useful to have people post any proofreading/minor errata issues they come across when reading/using the rules.


(Shrug) If you happen to spot something, feel free to post it. The only caveat is that there's no guarantee of another "edition" coming out anytime soon -- I'm pretty burned out now.


nightflier wrote:
Do you plan to update the game with new rules? Expansions, so to speak?

In my home game, I allow just about anything if it can be modified to fit the basic mechanics and general intent of the existing rules. ("You want to play a Pathfinder Summoner? Lemme look... yeah, it's fine. Approved." or, "You want to play an Inquisitor? Look, start with cleric and the Inquisiton domain, then multiclass cleric/rogue or cleric/ranger or cleric/rogue/ranger -- it'll get you to the same place, in the end.")

I'd encourage others to do the same.

The rules posted are to show people HOW we go about modifying things; they were never intended to represent all possible options.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As webmaster, I would not be opposed to correcting minor editing errors. However, it will not be done in a timely manner, subject to delays due to work and school taking precedence.

Andoran

The only thing that stands out is there being no line in the "good saves/bad saves" chart for rogues (Chapter 1). Obvious reasons for me noticing that last night when I went to rebuild Cadogan :-)


Ugh. Dunno how I could have missed that.
Rogues, as you might have guessed, should get good Reflex and Intuition saves, and poor progression towards Fortitude and Will saves.

Andoran

Oh, I know. Just being a pita :-)


The text at the top of page 9 in the Introduction.doc file is garbled/overprinted.

Also, are all the sub-sections under the Variations in the Core Rules (Introduction p. 5-7) considered optional rules or just some of them? Critical Failures and Critical Successes specifically mention that they are optional rules, but not the othe sub-sections.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Rogue line has been added to the saves table. Investigating the overprinted text, it may just be an issue with the View option.

Edit: Downloading the Introduction works fine, it's something to do with the View option. Possibly due to the document formatting, which I don't have the expertise or time to troubleshoot. My apologies.


Good to know that its just a problem with the view option.


Caedwyr wrote:
Also, are all the sub-sections under the Variations in the Core Rules (Introduction p. 5-7) considered optional rules or just some of them? Critical Failures and Critical Successes specifically mention that they are optional rules, but not the othe sub-sections.

EVERYTHING is considered optional rules -- that's the whole point of this project. Some rules (those sub-sections specifically called out as such) are even "more optional" than the rest -- in other words, "you really, really should discuss this with your group before implementing."


Gotcha. 4 legs good, 2 legs bad.


Caedwyr wrote:
4 legs good, 2 legs bad.

I have no idea what this means.


It's a bad joke on my part. (Some things are "more optional" than others is similar to the phrase "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" from George Orwell's Animal Farm. The phrase "more equal" is on its face, rather ridiculous similar to the phrase "extra dead" or other phrases which add additional degrees to categories/concepts/states that are normally have only yes/no options. Another phrase from Animal Farm is "Four legs good, 2 legs bad." Like I said, a bad joke.)

Andoran

Is your name Sheldon?


I really need to dust off my copies of Orwell again -- can't believe I missed the reference. Apologies. Just don't start calling me Napoleon, OK?

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Don't worry, we have worse things to call you. :P


Hey, just wanted to say congrats and fantastic job, Kirth.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hmm, random thought. Characters may take a 5ft. step in place of an attack of opportunity. This means when an attacker uses a combat maneuver without the appropriate feat, thus provoking, he risks the defender sidestepping his attempt completely by being out of reach. A very tactical choice with pros and cons. I like it!

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

*reads equipment document* Why can't I be playing my dwarven tower shield cleric in your game? :(


TriOmegaZero wrote:
*reads equipment document* Why can't I be playing my dwarven tower shield cleric in your game? :(

You can! But you'd need to spend a feat. Or take a level in fighter first.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yeah, but Kurik's already 4th level in my PF game.


I'd totally let you rebuild.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

See, now I'm torn between rebuilding Kurik or Falandar for this weekend.


Been awhile since we've had a cleric... then again, rangers are handy, too.


Sixth sense gives Dodge bonuses to AC during surprise round, against traps, and against critical confirmation rolls. Surprised characters lose Dex. Characters lose Dodge when they lose Dex. Should add this clarifier:

Special: You retain the Dodge bonuses to AC from this feat even when you are denied your Dexterity to AC.


Reading this over in more depth, a couple of my favourite changes are to how the alignment system is dealt with, and also to how experience is handled under Kirthfinder.


Hi Kirth
Question; Would it be reasonable ( as it's against rules as is) for a wizard to have a generalist's staff and a familier?
Would you have an issue with the wizard replacing or changing spells in his staff as he levels ( at the same or half rate a sorceror would)?
Anyway hope you are well-I look forward to playing soon
God bless,
james


JamesHarrison wrote:

1. Would it be reasonable (as it's against rules as is) for a wizard to have a generalist's staff and a familier?

2.Would you have an issue with the wizard replacing or changing spells in his staff as he levels (at the same or half rate a sorceror would)?

1. That's perfectly rules-legal -- just not free. Pick the staff or familiar, then select the Arcane Bond feat (p. 13 of Feats) and pay the mojo to get the other one, too.

2. I'd probably allow that, but it's a GM judgment call, not a specific rules entitlement.

I'd apply the logic from answer (2) more generally as well -- it's OK to allow stuff that isn't specifically spelled out, as long as the players and GM agree, and as long as no negative impact on game balance is observed as a consequence.


Cool!
Hum on the rules legal front under bonded object for wizard it states: "Once you choose one of these options, it is
permanent and cannot be changed, nor can you gain
an additional option through a feat or other class
feature." I think that's there to stop Diligent prep + feats= awesome wizard: but the clarification is extremely helpful! I can continue mage building as planned :D
Oh and being able to update staff abilities means you can plann for "today" and not the long run which makes playing with a staff much more fun (although I'll ok it with the Daniel:D) - specifically I want Major Image in the staff, but while 3rd level wanted Silent Image - which would be redundant later


JamesHarrison wrote:

"Once you choose one of these options, it is

permanent and cannot be changed, nor can you gain an additional option through a feat or other class feature."

I'd meant to delete that after fixing the feat, or at least amend the wording to "nor can you gain an additional option for free..." or something. Thanks for the heads-up!


Cool :D
I've come across something else I'd like clarification on (as someone wants to use it i think):
Under bluff the table gives:
Browbeat 10 + HD + Wis modifier
Demoralize 10 + HD + Wis modifier

But under the description it mentions:
The DC of this check is equal to 15 + the target’s Will save bonus + the target’s Charisma modifier

Should the DC be the second one? (I assumed so and the table was wrong... and the "15" represents the fact cloaks of resistance etc. don't apply)

:D

Osirion

Excellent stuff! I downloaded several files yesterday and I can see a *lot* of work went into this effort!

**big applause**

I particularly like that these house rules are tied to a home brew campaign setting and not generic. Everything seems to fit together seemlessly. Very cool! Like many, I have worked upon my own house rules now and then, and this great work just re-enforces to me the merits of using a setting to help shape and justify the changes to the game.

So congratulations to Kirth et al on the completion of this opus!

:-D


Hi Kirth -A trio of Questions for you:

question1: Does a Monk need to make Concentration checks (the DC10-2xspell level) to use Ki powers - It mentions they do not need to cast defencivly; but not if they need to use concentration at all..I assume thy do?

question2: If you two weapon fight with two daggers and use them thrown can you apply a strike via "two weapon strike" (I assume so, but it might only be for melee)

question3: Could a monk use Weapon Form with thrown weapons? I assume not as this is not "instead of an unarmed attack" but it could do :S... what about a reach weapon (where the unarmed attack would not be viable) I assume it would work with that so possibly with thrown :S

Anyway God Bless,
James

PS We playtested properly on Saturday to get the hang of some of the rules before we start in a few weeks - it's really fun to play!


JamesHarrison wrote:

(1) Does a Monk need to make Concentration checks (the DC10-2xspell level) to use Ki powers - It mentions they do not need to cast defencively; but not if they need to use concentration at all..I assume they do?

(2) If you two weapon fight with two daggers and use them thrown can you apply a strike via "two weapon strike" (I assume so, but it might only be for melee)

(3) Could a monk use Weapon Form with thrown weapons? I assume not as this is not "instead of an unarmed attack" but it could do :S... what about a reach weapon (where the unarmed attack would not be viable) I assume it would work with that so possibly with thrown

1. No -- monks are paragons of concentration. I need to update the text, though.

2. Good questions! I honestly never thought of that. Let me evaluate the potential for abuse and get back to you on that.
3. Yes, and yes. And Weapon Form works with projectiles, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

UPDATE:

Folks, I have a confession to make. I'm seeing a lot of text that needs to be cleaned up, and some areas in which the rules could be streamlined a lot, and some places where the skills rules need work, and at least one case where one new coherent rule could replace several contradictory sub-systems.

In other words, it seems like I'm not quite done after all.

I think the rules are mostly playable now, but they're not quite where I want them for hard copy.

Apologies -- I'd thought I was done.

701 to 750 of 1,945 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew / Kirthfinder - World of Warriorcraft Houserules All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.