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

Kirthfinder - World of Warriorcraft Houserules


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew

751 to 800 of 2,270 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>

One idea I'm leaning towards:

Make a "caster level" skill -- instead of calculating your caster level as your full caster level, or as your monk level - 3, or as this level plus half of that level and maybe +4 if you have the Practiced Spellcaster skill, etc.

Your caster level would be equal to your number of ranks. Your concentration checks would simply be skill checks for this new skill. Penetrating SR would be a skill check for this new skill. Etc.

Caster classes would get bonus ranks, just like rangers get bonus ranks in Survival.

Thoughts?

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I'd thought I was done.

Bwahahaha!

Edit: Re: Caster Skill.

An interesting idea. May borrow it for my 3.5 revision, and I like that it would standardize CL across all classes. I still like the 'CL = HD' houserule I've read on other forums, but if you won't go for that, I can accept this compromise.

Shadow Lodge

Sorry if these have already been mentioned, but I had corrected them myself and not posted about it. Both are in the Ranger document.

1. Under 'Bonus Skills', the word Knowledge is misspelled.

2. Under 'Favored Class', in the 'Favored Enemy' entry, category is misspelled.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I still like the 'CL = HD' houserule I've read on other forums, but if you won't go for that, I can accept this compromise.

This works out the same, assuming your non-caster classes devote 1 skill point/level to the casting skill: 1 rank per HD is what you end up with. I just need to come up with a name for it!

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Hence why I am comfortable with it as a compromise. :)

Can I suggest that Practiced Spellcaster grant 4 ranks in the to-be-named skill? Thus multiclassed characters have the option to spend feats instead of skill points to keep up.

Hmm, is a pity Spellcraft is already taken. Mysticism?

Shadow Lodge

The Facebook crowd has suggested an 'Invocation skill check'. Is that in use anywhere else in the rules?

Shadow Lodge

Possibly 'Incantation'?


Well, if you're dropping the "Caster Level" mechanic, can't you re-use it as "Caster Skill Level?"

(Although, I did like the Facebook suggestion of "Chutzpah.")


I've just been calling it "Concentration" -- one area of a skill being merged into caster level from 3.5e -> Pathfinder. "Invocation" and "Incantation" are both pretty cool words, though!

As a side note, in 1e, the school of evocation was "Invocation/Evocation," so there's some potential for confusion there. Also, "incantation" implies chanting or verbal components -- magic through words.

I suppose "Spellcasting" as the name of the skill is pretty straightforward, but it's kind of boring, too.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Can I suggest that Practiced Spellcaster grant 4 ranks in the to-be-named skill? Thus multiclassed characters have the option to spend feats instead of skill points to keep up.

Just take Open Minded and use the extra skill points to buy ranks.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Thaumaturgy was the other one I liked. Can't remember if it is in use, and it is close to theurgy.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Thaumaturgy was the other one I liked.

Another cool term, but the "Thaumaturgist" is a core rules conjurer prestige class in 3.5.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Just take Open Minded and use the extra skill points to buy ranks.

Bah, you and your use of existing options instead of printing redundancies. :)


I think the distinction between Thermaturgy and Thermatagist is far enough that it will not cause any confusion :D
I suggest not having it as a class skill for anyone - that way skill focus can give you +3 to your concentration rolls, spell penetration etc, but not ever dive you +1/2 level virtual skill points which would mean an 8th level Sorcerer coulden't have a caster level of 12 etc.

I think it would be good if feats like combat casting scaled not with BAB but with concentration (as could spell penetration, making it a more focused than just skill focus to cover both)

It will be good to see what this turns into :D

Would rangers etc get a skill rank in the skill - or would they have to choose there investment: perhaps 1/2 classes could get a skill rank every even level? Meh, that over-complicates things.

God Bless,
james


I really like the caster level skill idea. Since Thaumaturgy/Thaumaturge etc have been used before, what about something more general, like "Gravitas"?

I noticed that the Ranger and the Monk have different spell progressions. Would it be reasonable for Monks to have the same progression as the Rangers?


Thaumaturgy hasn't been used before - Thaumaturge has; gravitas sounds good - thurmaturgy has a strong magical feel to it :D
Or like spellcraft you could have Spell-Potential (or Spell Gravtas) so it's in an obvious part of character sheet
(Or spell power, spell control etc.)

Edit: Thinking on rangers and bonus spells - is there some interaction with bonus spells and the domain lore: would you get to know both your domain spell and your bonus spell... or a choice of one of them... The first has some power advantage over the second, but they still arn't going to be mighty spell casters, just pleasantly flexible


tshakah wrote:
I noticed that the Ranger and the Monk have different spell progressions. Would it be reasonable for Monks to have the same progression as the Rangers?

I'm leaning more towards dropping rangers back to the monk progression, but giving them designated bonus spells -- they're the only class that lacks them now.


So far, "Concentration" (as in 3.0 and 3.5) or "Spellcasting" (K.I.S.S.) are in the lead, as far as I'm concerned.

One thing to keep in mind is that currently, all skills have standard English names. The Sleight of Hand skill, for example, is not called "Legerdemain" or "Prestidigitation." So there's a precedent to keep skills names standard and simple, and not go off into Latin or Harry Potterish or whatever.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
JamesHarrison wrote:
I suggest not having it as a class skill for anyone - that way skill focus can give you +3 to your concentration rolls, spell penetration etc, but not ever dive you +1/2 level virtual skill points which would mean an 8th level Sorcerer coulden't have a caster level of 12 etc.

As long as base CL is specifically called out as equal to ranks in Concentration and not the total skill bonus, I don't think it will be a problem making it a class skill, unless the +3 bonus is not meant to be used in PF for such checks. (I see that current PF rules for Concentration checks do not add 3, so PF casters are 3 behind 3.5 casters.) Eh, yeah, I can see not making it a class skill for anyone.

JamesHarrison wrote:
I think it would be good if feats like combat casting scaled not with BAB but with concentration (as could spell penetration, making it a more focused than just skill focus to cover both)

I'm all about having feats that scale with what is important to them, be it BAB for combat feats, skill ranks for non-combat feats, and caster level for metamagic feats.

JamesHarrison wrote:
Would rangers etc get a skill rank in the skill - or would they have to choose there investment: perhaps 1/2 classes could get a skill rank every even level? Meh, that over-complicates things.

I imagine you'll get a bonus rank for every advance of theurgy you have.


For spell capacity you used Spell capacity based of the Wizards High Arcana lore - would it make sense therefore to use "Spell Power" from the same lore - it is straightforward and covers why it is used for penetration/duration which Concentration doesn't. Alternativly the high arcana could be changed to "Greater Spellcasting"

<As a Side note the high Arcana Spell power seems weak compared to improved spell capacity etc... It seems like it should be a greater bonus, +2 at least>


TriOmegaZero wrote:
JamesHarrison wrote:
I suggest not having it as a class skill for anyone - that way skill focus can give you +3 to your concentration rolls, spell penetration etc, but not ever dive you +1/2 level virtual skill points which would mean an 8th level Sorcerer coulden't have a caster level of 12 etc.
As long as base CL is specifically called out as equal to ranks in Concentration and not the total skill bonus, I don't think it will be a problem making it a class skill, unless the +3 bonus is not meant to be used in PF for such checks. (I see that current PF rules for Concentration checks do not add 3, so PF casters are 3 behind 3.5 casters.) Eh, yeah, I can see not making it a class skill for anyone.

Or adjust the DC by 3, or whatever. But the point regarding the effects with Skill Focus is well-taken -- I'd originally figured on just adding a caveat in the Skill Focus description, but James' fix is more elegant (albeit slightly counterintuitive).


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I imagine you'll get a bonus rank for every advance of theurgy you have.

Too complex, to have bonus skill ranks tied not to class level, but also to metaclass multiclassing features. Instead, some classes get 1 rank per level, some don't -- if I get theurgy from one that doesn't, I don't mind sucking it up and spending the one lousy skill point. Given the consolidation, most classes have way too many skill points anyway, which is another thing I'd like to revisit.


Too many, he says!


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I'm all about having feats that scale with what is important to them, be it BAB for combat feats, skill ranks for non-combat feats, and caster level for metamagic feats.

I made some scaling feats for these - Thay were a work in progress but would definatly need redoing with "concentration/spell power" on the horision.

Spoiler:

Spellcraft/Spell Focus
0+ / +1 DC
6+ / +1 DC, +2 Concentration
11+ / +2 DC
16+ / +2 DC, +4 Concentration

Spellcraft/ Greater Spell Focus
0+ / +1 Caster level
6+ / +1 Caster level, +2 DC 1/day
11+ / +2 Caster level
16+ / +2 Caster level, +2 DC 2/day

Spellcraft/Spell Penetration
0+ / +1 Overcome SR
6+ / +2 Overcome SR
11+ / +3 Overcome SR
16+ / +4 Overcome SR

Spellcraft/Greater Spell Penetration
0+ / -
6+ / reroll 1/day
11+ / reroll 2/day
16+ / reroll 3/day


Thoughts?


JamesHarrison wrote:
Thoughts?

This is an example of where making Concentration/Spellcasting NOT a class skill works against us. If it is a class skill, you take Skill Focus and instead of an insipid flat +3, you get benefits that scale with your investment. Skill Focus then supersedes Combat Casting and Spell Penetration, with the bonuses scaling from +3 to +10 as your casting ability improves.

Again, we'd need a note that CL = actual number of ranks, not including "virtual ranks." Also, we'd rework the check to dispel magic (currently you roll 1d20+level vs. DC 11 + CL of spell; instead you'd roll Concentration/Spellcasting vs. DC 20 + CL of spell, with the extra +9 assuming you have +3 from class skill and +6 from your attribute bonus and/or enhancement bonus from an item.


+10 concentration seems good,
I've not played at high level, but would +10 spell Penetration be to much?
or is it vastly needed?


JamesHarrison wrote:
I've not played at high level, but would +10 spell Penetration be to much? or is it vastly needed?

It takes the place of all the "penetrate spell resistance" spells that proliferated in 3.0 and 3.5. I suspect most of the people who made heavy use of those spells did so because Spell Penetration at a flat +2 didn't cut the mustard.


In witch case roll on it being a class skill. It also makes playing a spellcaster less feat intensive for "bread and butter" and more able to pick up cool things<arcane reserve? Metamagic?>: The wizard and bard in our group both have the combat casting feat - now skill focus (spellcasting etc.) will do that, and alleviate the need for spell penetration later (additionally skill focus is easier to get e.g. the half elven adaptability picks it up)


Kirth Gersen wrote:
I'm leaning more towards dropping rangers back to the monk progression, but giving them designated bonus spells -- they're the only class that lacks them now.

Ah okay, that makes sense

Kirth Gersen wrote:
So far, "Concentration" (as in 3.0 and 3.5) or "Spellcasting" (K.I.S.S.) are in the lead, as far as I'm concerned.

I think I prefer spellpower/casting over concentration, as that seems confusing with concentration checks, and also as monks are paragons of concentration, that would make them awesome, right?

I'm being hounded by a friend to suggest "Dweomercraft", although I realise that it isn't a standard English word. Rolls off the tongue nicely though :p. /dwiːmə(r)ːkɹɑːft/

Wiktionary definition


tshakah wrote:
I think I prefer spellpower/casting over concentration, as that seems confusing with concentration checks

Intentionally so, since that's the main use of the skill checks in play.

P.S. Dweomer = spell, so "Dweomercraft" = "Spellcraft," which is already as skill. Also, I want to make it clear that this is the ability to focus your will to dominate distractions and cast full-force spells, not your finesse in thinking about magic stuff.


Hum a Balor is CR 20 and has SR 31... a Hard Fight could put a 15 level mage up against it - with Skill focus and class skill (and Int 18) his Spell penetration would be 15 ranks + 3 class skill + 4 Int + 7 Skill focus: +29 and would only fall at the SR on a 1... <Although he'd still potentially be killed by the Balor> so this might be to much...

Compaired to not a class skill = +22, overcoming the SR on a 9, which seems more reasonable: the SR does something <Assuming Skill focus taken, on a 12 otherwise>

Hum, I'm not convinced either way now - If Combat casting and Spell Penetration individually scaled (and more so than the +3 skill focus would give you) then it would be good for it not to be a class skill (and thus skill focus wouldn't be the go to skill boost, but something nice that could do two things for the price of one)

Rangers, Monks, rogues, Paladins Etc. I would give them a free rank in "concentration" <although that is my least favorite of the names, as other potential use confusions> up to 10th level then stop - they could put more into it but it wouldn't be a Skill tax that they could miss <as per your bonus skills stated purpose>


JamesHarrison wrote:
Hum a Balor is CR 20 and has SR 31... a Hard Fight could put a 15 level mage up against it - with Skill focus and class skill (and Int 18) his Spell penetration would be 15 ranks + 3 class skill + 4 Int + 7 Skill focus: +29 and would only fall at the SR on a 1... <Although he'd still potentially be killed by the Balor> so this might be to much...

That's not how it would work, though. Either the wizard would be rolling 1d20 + 15 ranks + 7 Skill focus = fail on a 1-8 (40%), or else we'd keep the straight skill check (1d20+29), but all SRs would be adjusted upward by, say, 7 or so, so the Balor's SR would be 38, and the wizard would fail on a 1-8 (40%).


I like the first solution - not scaling SR is easiest. then a 20th level wiz. would be awesome at it (+30vs 31) but that would be a 20th level wizard!


Equipment: Longspear - its actual description varies from the previous description under "multiple options"

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
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.

*reads dwarf racial write-up* Now I REALLY want to play Kurik. :/


I believe it is possible to make an almost invincible monk here (admittedly only at 18th level) - if a monk takes evasion and elusive target as sutras, then they can attempt a reflex save against any attack and always pass thanks to the greater evasion.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Please note that Elusive Target is an Immediate Action, of which you only have one per round.


Alice Margatroid wrote:

Just had a quick look at the Wayfinder article (thanks, Caedwyr!) - an interesting class, but it seems to me that the Kirthfinder barbarian does all of that and more. But here's my attempt at making a "true lycanthrope" class (for lack of a better term!)

It's very roughly done, but you get the idea.

True Lycanthrope
** spoiler omitted **...

@Alice Margatroid or anyone else interested: Another class you might want to look at for inspiration is the Taskshaper from Rite Publishing. It's available on d20pfsrd.com.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Please note that Elusive Target is an Immediate Action, of which you only have one per round.

That make sense. The question I have is:

Should Elusive target stack with evasion?
I'm unclear reading the rules weather it does or not.. I think it doesn't (as an attack doesn't "usually" allow a save for 1/2 damage, and evasion mentions attacks which "usually" allow a save for 1/2 damage)...
However Improved evasion and greater evasion seem to work with it (they have no such stipulations)... But should they
If they do combined Greater Elusive target feels significantly weakened - so Kirth what do you think?

Thanks and God Bless,
james


JamesHarrison wrote:

Should Elusive target stack with evasion?

I'm unclear reading the rules weather it does or not. I think it doesn't (as an attack doesn't "usually" allow a save for 1/2 damage, and evasion mentions attacks which "usually" allow a save for 1/2 damage). However Improved evasion and greater evasion seem to work with it (they have no such stipulations)...

The rules are unclear on that, because I hadn't thought of it. I'll go back and re-read.

For future reference, the following is the official Kirthfinder system for resolving rules ambiguity:

1. Does it create a broken exploit that ruins the game?
If yes, don't allow it. If no, go to step 2.

2. Does it contradict an existing feat or ability that already does that?
If yes, think about rolling it into that other feat/ability, or providing a synergy entry somewhere, so that you don't have two competing sub-systems. If no, go to step 3.

3. Call a vote for how your group will handle it in-house.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

For the Concentration rewrite: "Spellcasting Prowess".


I might just call the skill "Spellcasting" and be done with it.
For now, it's written all over as "Concentration" as a placeholder.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Kirth,

I looked over a few of the documents. I am not able to be as detailed with feedback right now but I can point out some issues.

For skills you rolled drive, administration, and linguistics into knowledges and professions but you still list them separately in the class right ups. Since they now count in the profession and knowledge (all) category you do not need to list them separately anymore.

For the feats you still list Bones mystery (in the spells, feats, and cleric feats document), this also is the same for the mercy mystery in the cleric feats description (should be the life mystery)

Was not adding a sorcerer and battle sorcerer archetype for the paladin intentional, they would seem to have good synergy.

You seemed to have removed first blood but it is still listed in some of the feats in the feats document and a lot in the equipment document.

For some of the mysteries you gain greater spell focus at 11th level and in others 9th, is it intentional that they are different?

A lot of the mysteries revelations still refer the cleric, wizard, and oracle level which I think are cut and paste errors.

In the incarnate "planar body" it should be "a" planar adaption spell not “an”.

The life and oracular mysteries do not seem to be on par with the others, I don't know if you would want to flesh them out more (life could get some undead fighting powers, for the oracular mystery I like some of the void powers from the dragon empires player guide).

For the rogue swarm dodger description, I am a little confused with the improved evasion power since you seem to be able to already avoid damage with the regular evasion ability.

The 3rd day of rogue's luck happens at 17th level rather than 16th level in the table, which does not match the description.

For rogue, advanced combat talents and advanced skill talents do not match their descriptions.

Sabotage item could be clarified, the table makes it seem each task is a separate attempt but the descriptions allows for one attempt with different effects depending on how much you beat the DC by.

For ranger did you consider giving things like snow vision, dust vision, and mist vision rather than cold resistance, heat resistance, and sea sickness immunity? I guess I like rangers to be able to guide through snow storms, sand storms, and thick fog rather than rolling around naked in the snow or running through the Sahara desert in full plate mail with cold and heat resistance.

For the small sword is there a reason you get finesse with the simple proficiency but not with martial and exotic?

For the Archon martial path in sorcerer, you refer to "greater" sudden metamagic (quicken), how is that different than sudden metamagic?

Also if you take the sudden metamagic feat and choose the sudden spell how often would you be able to use it (I would assume it defaults to the +1 category (3 x a day) but a + 0 level metamagic feat is not addressed).

Thanks,

Chris


Christopher,

Thank you! I ahould have know better than to try and finalize the docs without you checking them first! I'll take care of your comments as soon as I'm able. In response to your specific questions:

Small sword is a 1-handed finessable weapon with Simple proficiency. With martial/exotic proficiency, it's a light weapon, which means it's automatically finessable (if the Weapon Finesse feat desn't currently specify this, I'll have to update it).

Greater Sudden Metamagic was initially a different feat from Sudden Metamagic.

Thanks again!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

You are right, the weapon finesse feat does mention it.

Thanks,

Chris


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Also under silver, pandemonic, you may want to reword the begining section so say something like "including penetrating damage reduction and the addition to Craft DCs. They can penetrate damage reduction as if chaotically-aligned"

Also the Hurricane wind strength in the table likely should be 75-174 (rather than 75-154)

Thanks,

Chris

Osirion

First off, congratulations to all involved on the Herculean effort!

If you're still considered a "spellcasting" skill, I'm intrigued by applying this idea to spell-like abilities for monsters (maybe giving automatic ranks to certain types like magical beasts, dragons, etc.)

Would such a skill differentiate between arcane and divine, as the standard caster level system?

Finally, may I suggest "esoterica" ('secret knowledge' for arcane) and "gnostica" ('mysteries' for divine). If I had to vote for a previous suggestion, it would be Theurgy.

I probably won't have time to go over things with a fine-toothed comb, but if I have anything to contribute I'll chime in!


Welcome back to the boards, Jal -- it's been a few years since we've talked! Missed you.

In answer to your questions, yes, I do intend to make a spellcasting skill, and it would indeed apply to SLAs in addition to spells, and it would not differentiate between arcane and divine (because I'd want mystic theurges to not have to take two skills, or druids who happen to have a few spell-like abilities, or whatever). Part of that is elimination of needless sub-systems and general skills consolidation, and part is just that casters have been kicked enough already in these house rules.

"Esoterica" would be a good in-game name for the Spellcraft skill, and "Gnostica" for the combined Knowledge (planes/religion) skill -- but that said, they're exactly what the Spellcasting/Concentration skill is NOT. My vision is to have Spellcraft for the tinkering and knowledge and mysteries stuff, and Spellcasting/Concentration for the sheer grunt work of getting a spell off in the middle of an adventure and actually making it take effect (i.e., penetrate SR).

Osirion

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Welcome back to the boards, Jal -- it's been a few years since we've talked! Missed you.

In answer to your questions, yes, I do intend to make a spellcasting skill, and it would indeed apply to SLAs in addition to spells, and it would not differentiate between arcane and divine (because I'd want mystic theurges to not have to take two skills, or druids who happen to have a few spell-like abilities, or whatever). Part of that is elimination of needless sub-systems and general skills consolidation, and part is just that casters have been kicked enough already in these house rules.

"Esoterica" would be a good in-game name for the Spellcraft skill, and "Gnostica" for the combined Knowledge (planes/religion) skill -- but that said, they're exactly what the Spellcasting/Concentration skill is NOT. My vision is to have Spellcraft for the tinkering and knowledge and mysteries stuff, and Spellcasting/Concentration for the sheer grunt work of getting a spell off in the middle of an adventure and actually making it take effect (i.e., penetrate SR).

You know, in the context of Vancian magic, Concentration isn't such a bad name for a spellcasting skill.

A bit more confusing, but how about renaming Spellcraft to something else (or folding it into Arcana) and taking Spellcraft for your new skill?


Jal Dorak wrote:
A bit more confusing, but how about renaming Spellcraft to something else (or folding it into Arcana) and taking Spellcraft for your new skill?

Spellcraft does include Knowledge: Arcana in these rules. It keeps the "Spellcraft" name for the sake of familiarity, and because "craft" suggests tinkering (which it covers), and desn't suggest "sheer force of will in hurling a spell."

751 to 800 of 2,270 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 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.