Would bardic performances help?
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't need more confidence in banning things I think are overpowered or not a good fit for OP. A few years ago, the VOs and I went through a process of determining what existing things should be removed from the campaign, including synthesist summoner and the like. I don't anticipate having to do another rebalance in the foreseeable future.
For all future releases, we have teams of VOs that go through all released products. They complete a summation form and forward to me. I then receive John's input on what he thinks of the recommendations, speak to other Paizo staff as needed, and I then make a final ruling on whether something is included in PFS or not. Once I have made my final decision based on the totality of feedback, I update Additional Resources accordingly.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I agree with David, while he suffers from post traumatic animal companion stress disorder (kidding.. mostly ^^) a good number of sins and troublesome subsystems are for the lack of another word, systemic.
Some were introduced to feed a number of sacred cows in the name of backwards compatibility, others ... well let's just say that high level playtests are hard.
Other books introduced a lot of new material, and include quite a number of very flavorful options like the summoner (really lovely concept), unfortunately sometimes those really throw balance out of the window.
And some lovely options would need to much more rules text (and maybe a serious nerv ) before they could be allowed in the campaign.
That said, it seems that everyone involved knows when to ban things, the recent .. thing from giant hunters handbook seems to be a good example... it would be everywhere.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That said, it seems that everyone involved knows when to ban things, the recent .. thing from giant hunters handbook seems to be a good example... it would be everywhere.
I am sorry, but was there a recent change about what is allowed from Giant Hunter's Handbook?
|
That said, it seems that everyone involved knows when to ban things, the recent .. thing from giant hunters handbook seems to be a good example... it would be everywhere.I am sorry, but was there a recent change about what is allowed from Giant Hunter's Handbook?
I presume he is referring to the effortless lace, which several people have pointed out could enable yet more stat dumping for power.
His point is that recently a good deal of thought has been put into how people might exploit things before approving them. It - along wih the steal size spell - were never allowed in the first place instead of needing to be removed retroactively.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
That said, it seems that everyone involved knows when to ban things, the recent .. thing from giant hunters handbook seems to be a good example... it would be everywhere.I am sorry, but was there a recent change about what is allowed from Giant Hunter's Handbook?I presume he is referring to the effortless lace, which several people have pointed out could enable yet more stat dumping for power.
His point is that recently a good deal of thought has been put into how people might exploit things before approving them. It - along wih the steal size spell - were never allowed in the first place instead of needing to be removed retroactively.
Yup, I was just to lazy to look up the exact name of the item, I don't intend to get the book. And that new a approach seems to be working perfectly, if only they could get access to books before they go to the printer...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't need more confidence in banning things I think are overpowered or not a good fit for OP. A few years ago, the VOs and I went through a process of determining what existing things should be removed from the campaign, including synthesist summoner and the like. I don't anticipate having to do another rebalance in the foreseeable future.
For all future releases, we have teams of VOs that go through all released products. They complete a summation form and forward to me. I then receive John's input on what he thinks of the recommendations, speak to other Paizo staff as needed, and I then make a final ruling on whether something is included in PFS or not. Once I have made my final decision based on the totality of feedback, I update Additional Resources accordingly.
In other words, the answer to the OP's question, sadly, is no.
|
I think the point is that the Core Campaign does not modify the standard PFS campaign in any way (with two small exceptions). The standard PFS campaign will continue has it has. The Core Campaign is a new and different thing. The Core Campaign need not influence or change anything about the standard campaign or how it is run.
(The two small exceptions: one, it's possible that more people will come to standard campaign games already having played or GMed the scenario they're playing, as they may have played it in the Core campaign. Two, the number of GM stars your standard campaign GM has results not only from standard campaign gaming, but also Core campaign gaming. I anticipate that the latter will have absolutely zero impact.)
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't need more confidence in banning things I think are overpowered or not a good fit for OP. A few years ago, the VOs and I went through a process of determining what existing things should be removed from the campaign, including synthesist summoner and the like. I don't anticipate having to do another rebalance in the foreseeable future.
For all future releases, we have teams of VOs that go through all released products. They complete a summation form and forward to me. I then receive John's input on what he thinks of the recommendations, speak to other Paizo staff as needed, and I then make a final ruling on whether something is included in PFS or not. Once I have made my final decision based on the totality of feedback, I update Additional Resources accordingly.
Can I ask you what you think is going to happen with PFS and unchained?
Banning the original summoner in favor of the new one would help a lot.
John, Erik, and I have already discussed it. We have three separate teams of VOs reviewing that book to provide feedback. Once we receive their feedback, the three of us will discuss further, and I will make a final decision on how we approach Unchained for PFS. The book will only be legal for the existing mode and will not be available for Core mode play.
|
|
For all the talk about Druids, Summoners, and Gunslingers being OP, I rarely see any of them at my tables.
Summoners in particular are very difficult to play right. One of the reasons summoners are OP is that it's very easy to do your Eidolon wrong, and it's very easy to do it wrong in a way that makes it more effective. They're overpowered as written, but also players make legitimate mistakes that make them more so.
"Companion" classes mean more things to keep track of, which I think leads players to eschew them a bit. Especially if you think about how it looks/feels in-game. You have this dinosaur following you around everywhere, which is great in combat, but doesn't it make the mission briefing kind of awkward? "Oh, sorry, Venture-Captain Valsin, my pet velociraptor just took a dump on your carpet." May people don't care about this, but I do often have a hard time wrapping my head around this in-game. Practically speaking, you have to know and run (sort of) two characters to play one of these classes.
As for gunslingers, I'm not sure they're as overpowered as people always say. However, lots of people also don't like guns in their fantasy, so that drives them away from that class. (I personally don't agree; Golarion is what it is, and it's different from the assumptions that came out of AD&D/1e that leads the hobby to thinking how D&D-like games are "supposed" to be.)
|
"Companion" classes mean more things to keep track of, which I think leads players to eschew them a bit.
I'm not sure how that makes Players not use them?
As for gunslingers, I'm not sure they're as overpowered as people always say. However, lots of people also don't like guns in their fantasy, so that drives them away from that class. (I personally don't agree; Golarion is what it is, and it's different from the assumptions that came out of AD&D/1e that leads the hobby to thinking how D&D-like games are "supposed" to be.)
I'm not a fan of guns (or technology) in D&D/PF, but I think if the Gunslinger targeted normal, full AC, it wouldn't be as much of a mechanics issue. Also, keep in mind that while guns have always existed in D&D and in PF, even before PF became it's own game, actual guns hadn't been very present. They existed in this far off, unknown land, which allowed people that liked them to play there and use them and those that didn't to go on without them. Now, though, everyone and their little doggie has a freakin' gun or three, and the one small balancing factor against using guns (the price per shot) has been thrown out the window. It also doesn't help that Paizo's other fix to the DM problem was to make a terribly overpriced and highly ineffective defensive item, which sadly makes a DM's monsters even weaker just so it can be a tiny bit stronger against guns, and really doesn't apply to PFS.
|
|
I think the point is that the Core Campaign does not modify the standard PFS campaign in any way (with two small exceptions). The standard PFS campaign will continue has it has. The Core Campaign is a new and different thing. The Core Campaign need not influence or change anything about the standard campaign or how it is run.
This is inevitably untrue, unless they plan on presenting new Core Chronicle Sheets for each and every scenario/Module out there. If not, then it's going to lead to Core Chronicle material influencing Normal PFS Chronicles to make allowances for special rewards for Core Play. I guess we will see when Core becomes 100% official (the guide is out, all questions answered)?
|
|
I think the point is that the Core Campaign does not modify the standard PFS campaign in any way (with two small exceptions). The standard PFS campaign will continue has it has. The Core Campaign is a new and different thing. The Core Campaign need not influence or change anything about the standard campaign or how it is run.This is inevitably untrue, unless they plan on presenting new Core Chronicle Sheets for each and every scenario/Module out there. If not, then it's going to lead to Core Chronicle material influencing Normal PFS Chronicles to make allowances for special rewards for Core Play. I guess we will see when Core becomes 100% official (the guide is out, all questions answered)?
Why would they make special rewards for core play when there is a major incentive from a player perspective to play modules that provide non-core rewards? Any material, boon or equipment beyond the CORE assumption is still legal for core play if and only if it appears on a chronicle sheet.
Half of the point of CORE is to allow people more opportunities to play.