Overall the errata was a failure.To you maybe. To the vast majority of others, things got an improvement. Are there now more useful items in the book than in the previous printing? No. It doesn't matter what other people think, they're wrong if they construe a book that has less useful pages than pre-errata as a success.
Why would I spend 50 bucks on a hardcover when the majority of its content is almost useless? The goal in errata for broken thing (broken as in terrible or overpowered) should be to change the item to a state where it keeps the fluff of the thing while giving a useful benefit. Yeah, not even 1% of the material was changed. Some overpowered stuff was deleted from the game, lots of underpowered stuff is still present and wasting page space. Overall the errata was a failure.
PFS already can do it without messing with the options for everyone else. I don't believe that the changes made to the Jingasa succeeded at improving the "health" of the game or by the desires of "everyone else." The changes are an obvious knee jerk reaction as opposed to a pre-meditated and game conscious change. The goal in errata for broken thing (broken as in terrible or overpowered) should be to change the item to a state where it keeps the fluff of the thing while giving a useful benefit. Did they do this for Jingasa? No. They instead created a new item that has no reason to exist in the world of Golarian or Pathfinder. Did they do this in a multitude of other erratas that people have complained about? No. Not for most. The errata makes books less valuable by making less and less of the pages contain material that people would use. Why would I spend 50 bucks on a hardcover when the majority of its content is almost useless?
PFS already can do it without messing with the options for everyone else.(This is something that Pre-written adventures often lack since they assume a party of PCs that haven't heavily specialized.) I've avoided PFS like the plague. A high AC character are generally countered by enemies with high CMB and maneuvers to take advantage of it, DR, spell casters who don't use wimpy spells, multiple distracting enemies screening for their higher level masters, and decent terrain. How often do PFS scenarios employ that?
I don't like taking the average for monster CMB because things with average or middling CMB don't do combat maneuvers. Brute Ogre with Dirty Fighting and a Improved Combat maneuver feat can beat your CMB on a 10, which is perfect. Give em a Long spear so they can do it from 20 ft away. So a CR 9 (APL+2) encounter I'd run to give the players a decent challenge would be 2 modified Ogre Brutes, a level 6 Sorcerer who tricked them into servitude, and a level 5 Fighter Archer bodyguard of the Sorcerer. The Sorcerer would use the Ogres and archer as cover and use their spells to support his allies or hinder his foes (Create Pit, Haste, Levitate on self to keep out of melee, ect), Archer would target squishy PCs to keep them either out of combat LOS or make it dangerous to exist, the two Ogres would basically stand ahead of the two smaller allies and do their best to keep you guys out of melee with their support while using superior melee range to hurt you guys/crowd control. Trip and Disarm would be the likely feats for the Ogres. Not all fights would be like this, but a few, the goal is to make a player feel good about their choices, but prevent them from cake walking everything. To balance this out some fights would be against either lots of mooks or a few melee power houses, none of whom can penetrate your mighty guard. Sometimes you have the opportunity to feel like a God among men, sometimes the fights swing the other way and you need to rely on your allies to make it through. (This is something that Pre-written adventures often lack since they assume a party of PCs that haven't heavily specialized.)
He seams pretty weak to touch attacks, combat maneuvers, enemies who care not about combat maneuvers, spells, and terrain. I fail to see how this heavily specialized character is a problem. My math on your posted build is only about 28. Maybe it's that high when you have combat expertise and fighting defensively up, but that's a big change. Dude you can't just say "my defenses are X and my offenses are Y" when they physically can't be both at the same time. So yes, you are in fact weak against combat maneuvers unless you choose to have no offense for the turn. Strange that you assume a spell caster is just instantly in your melee range for you to molest. Are you literally fighting these guys in blank rooms 4v1? Feather Step boots were fine, they maybe were under costed at worst. Additionally terrain means more than just rough terrain. Blocked charge lanes, cover, enemies being above you, and heck enemies screening are all terrain. Yes scenarios are broken, we all already know this. When enemies don't have the ability to fight anything but AC that does not mean the PC is a problem. This all distracts from the primary problem though. Paizo would rather remove an item from the game than spend the effort to fix something. I know that sometimes it's hard to imagine that this is supposed to be an imaginary world, but it is. Why would anyone in that world create an item like the Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier? It's expensive, it's worse than a cheap ring, and it can only be used once. Did they just look at the Ring of Protection, think "I can do better!" then proceed to poop out an inferior and significantly less useful product?
Where did that -6 penalty for combat expertise and fighting defensively go? He seams pretty weak to touch attacks, combat maneuvers, enemies who care not about combat maneuvers, spells, and terrain. I fail to see how this heavily specialized character is a problem. Well outside of Fates Favored existing.
Where did that -6 penalty for combat expertise and fighting defensively go?
Yeah the Godhand is absolutely super cool!
Purchased and very happy with the base class! I don't have any complaints on that front, real A+ work on par with my favorites from Gonzo 2 and some of your other works. The archetype Magehand... not so much. The Magehand idea is great and the execution is almost solid, but it runs into these problems. 1. It doesn't trade anything to gain spells. 2. The spell casting section makes the class seem like a prepared caster, but the charts imply the class is a spontaneous caster. 3. Almost anything it does trade is an about even trade. 4. Full BAB class with access to 6th level spells. Even as a spontaneous caster I think the Magehand archetype is well above the curve for a 6t level caster and is definitely a stronger pick than a base Godhand.
I think it's funny that so many people are arguing against meaningful changes in errata and prefer changes that make the game overall worse by decreasing diversity, limit role play, and make their books worth less overall.
That still sounds like a much better alternative to removing it from the game. It would have saved them a lot of space if they just replaced the Jingaza with "super cool looking hat that can be sold for 2500g" instead of the waste of page space that's there currently.
James you keep mentioning that the errata was a positive thing. How so? From what I understand this errata did very little to make bad items viable and did a lot to make good items into bad items. Is your definition of positive "more reason to just funnel gold into your big six"?
"What's a Paladin"
Name these "dozen useful hats", because after the Cap of the Free Thinker and Jingasa were nerfed I can't think of a single one worth wasting the cash on. So obviously the best option is nerf everything as opposed to buffing the bad items? Paizo had the opportunity to nerf Jingaza in a perfectly reasonable way (like removing the luck bonus to AC) while buffing other items and thus create an increase in diversity. Instead they essentially removed Jingasa from the game whilst leaving other options equally as s~+@ty as they were previously.
changes are all ultimately a good thing. Why do you think this is about creating powerful characters? You really shouldn't obsess over making overpowered characters. There's so much more that this system has to offe outside that unhealthy obsession.
Problem isn't so much as balance, but when one choice becomes so good, that it effectively closes out all other choices, because it's now a "must have" The original Crane Wing is a textbook example of this. That is 100% false. Items getting removed from the game (as many of these essentially were) is not ultimately a good thing. At most they needed to be nerfed, not outright destroyed.
It's almost like you need to roleplay to benefit from role play! If you want your Paladin to have legitimate authority talk to your GM. Don't assume. We all know about people who assume right?
If you wanna be an Inquisitor of a certain sect then you may want o actually talk to your GM about how to do that instead of just walking into a crime scene on a random session and demanding to see the evidence. Establish yourself before you become a fool.
So is buying paizo products only to be told nothing you wanted it for is usable anymore. Yet somehow you managed to take the most popular and enjoyed items in the book and threw them out with the bathwater too. I just think it's strange that the first response to finding out an item is popular is "guess we better destroy it" as opposed to "why are people spending gold on this item as opposed to saving for another +1 to their big six?" It would have made way more sense to use errata to buff all these items people just pretend don't exist and sprinkle some nerfs on the ones that really needed them. Yeah Jingasa was a bit too good, but just removing the luck bonus to AC would have been enough to keep it relevant. Instead you made it have absolutely no place as a player option.
I heavily suggest using the automatic bonus progression.
Ok, so you can choose to unload a barrage of Finishers against a single target, save up through methods then unleash a finisher suited to ruining a tough enemy (Fighting defensively to stall then unleashing a super touch finisher), or to build it up against the enemy minions, Sentai Style, before unleashing a big finish on the bad guy. I like how the mechanic was executed to give so many permutations :)
So I was looking at the Henshin Hero and I was wondering what was the rationale behind having the Finishing Move have no Tension cost? Is the finisher supposed to be the equivalent of Weapon Training or Favored Enemy as a primary damage class feature?
Its incidentally more meta to assume you wont fface underwater combat and skip !making preparations for it so you can maximize other areas.
Since Gonzo 2 already has such an extensive review I'll put this into my review queue above it! Though any reviews I work on will have to come after June 8th, my final final of the semester.
Just to restate my position as a consumer and occasional freelancer I think the idea of a living campaign or at least some sort of 3PP organized play is a great idea. I also think that if it's implemented even halfway decently it could do a lot to help get more people into 3PP in game stores. I also think that if it only uses spells, feats, and archetypes from 3PP that the living campaign will be an utter failure as the best and most interesting things in third party land are the unique subsystems and classes. People aren't gonna be lured in by "Bravery Feats" no matter how high quality they are. What they will be lured in by is the the mysteries of the Masquerade Reveler, the Iron Man suits of an Aegis, the shining white Necromancers honoring their ancestors, the airships buzzing through the skies, the Gladiators battling to the cheers and jeers of an unseen audience, or the Element Enhanced Martial arts of a Mystic. That will be more difficult since some systems don't play well with others at all, but those don't have to be included on the list. Also a small part of me hopes that some books with alternative skill rules will be allowed, such as Dragon Tiger Ox Wire Fighting acrobatics, since base Pathfinder acrobatics are absolute ass Also as far as I saw only one writer (he is not the head honcho at DSP) seemed truly against the idea. All the others seemed either for it or skeptical, but not not outright against the idea.
I like the idea of "seasons" where we vote on stuff like setting books and splatbooks to be allowed. We can have a High Seas season for example and theme it with Cerulean Seas, Vehicle rules from Skyborn, stuff from Razor Coast, stuff from Freeport, and a variety of 3PP crunch books for Ocean and port adventures. Sci Fi season with Psionics, Technology supplements, ect It could be a good way to manage content. Several 3PP that do small adventures could make the play materials and we could use some existing adventures if so allowed. It could make them a lot of money if everyone running actually buys said adventures. I don't think the idea needs to be immediately derided and discarded, but it will need some serious planning in order to make the idea presentable to 3PPs.
I agree with Ssalarn. A book like that one with 1000 spells has no interest from me. Meanwhile I'm absolutely in love with the Battle Lord class that exemplifies what people mean when they say "I want a martial with strong agency" while also having solid weaknesses instead of being a ball of stats. One book is more of the same while another is something I wanted executed in a manner that I never even considered.
With a book that contains such thematically diverse classes I believe it's to be expected for readers to go into the book for very specific things. For me it's the Battle Buttler, Henshin Hero, Magical Girl, Architect, Dynamancer, and class archetypes. I can't wait to get my hands on this in May!
Restoration is not regenerate. Lay of Hands is not regenerate. Eventually you run out of Paladin by not leaving enough of a viable body to survive.That's is at once creepy and really flavorful. I could imagine a party come upon a celestial surrounded by unconscious children that it is scalping, and the poor thing having to convince them that it is enslaved. By that logic Gator animal companions should tear off a limb everytime they deathroll. When a Worg bites you you should take Con/Dex/Str damage only able to be recovered through regenerate, ect.
Intentionally being obtuse.
Actually if Ultimate Intrigue hadn't said casting Evil descriptor spells is an evil act, regular paladins could have cast Evil spells but grey paladins couldn't. Because unlike clerics and druids, paladin spell casting is not limited by alignment in the core rulebook.That's probably because they're aren't any Evil Paladin spells. For reasons that should be extremely obvious. There is a feat for Paladins to add 4 spells to their spell list with few limits.
It's actually incredibly unreasonable. They likely have no idea who you are and what you will ask them to do. For all they know you intend on using the spell to have them slaughter innocents, trick a pious follower of a good aligned deity, or commit other evil acts.
The most evil thing about outsider binding is how much it can negatively impact the play experience of everyone else at the table in my experience. Bard Bro? Take a back seat, my succubus got this. Rogue Bro? My Invisible Imp will take care of the scouting, take a back seat. Fighter bro? I have like 4 Bearded devils, you can pop a squat.
I'ma buy this when I can
Link to SKR interview. I just found it. :) Thank you :)
I can't access a link well on my phone, but the Sean interview with Louis J Porter is very enlightening.
Actually it was SKR's job to do that, Jason only had to look at the original rule, the dev suggested changes, and the rationales for the changes. At no point was it necessary for Jason to look at the original post, unless he wanted to. So yeah, I can't blame Sean for quitting. He joined the company as a Golarian dude, got forced into the core team, then got forced into being the PR guy, then got FAQs forced on him. Can't blame him for leaving.
I'd hate to derail the thread but what did the SKR reveal specifically?The quote may be Jacobs, but between the design choices we've seen in Pathfinder and everything SKR revealed after leaving the company, the sentiment seems to apply to at least some of the people in the design team as well.Truth. I rather doubt the Caster Martial Edition would be addressed by a Pathfinder 1.5 edition when Paizo's position on the disparity is "It's a myth propagated by people with an agenda."As far as I'm aware, James Jacobs was the person who said that, not any individual on the design team and James Jacobs is superceeded by the design team in regards to mechanics (if this weren't true CRB clerics wouldn't be able to get power from concepts). Look up Louis J Porter's interview with SKR on his Transparency Agenda video cast. It's got moat of his reveals. My favorite reveal was that Jason did no enjoy looking at FAQs, yet every FAQ decicion went through him. Because of this FAQs were very slow and SKR could only get him to look at one per week, oftentimes less. The only reason FAQs got published as often as they did was because Sean had a lot more power to annoy Jason than any of the new hires, hence why we get less FAQs now that he's gone.
Actually a Druid or Cleric would be MORE powerful with those rules for character creation as they have little incentive to max their casting stat.
I've considered a 16 14 14 12 12 10 stat array (and allowing a player to lower any of the stats, but they wont gain any points out of it) At that point dumping a stat is just a choice for roleplaying. Also this array helps MAD characters without giving SAD characters too much an advantage.
In my play experience I've found the use of DSP material in general to provide a very varied and fun play experience. For the most part the players have more ways of interacting with their environment, doing cool stuff in combat, and working within a campaign world. For the most part the ceiling is lower and the floor is higher in terms of balance compared to Paizo printed material. Stuff that we've done to further tune our game world include -Limiting Path of War to the 1-6 initiating archetypes. Though that's more because of the classes published in Path of war itself, not the maneuvers. We're considering giving the archetypes access to 1-9 initiating. -Allowing other 3PP options besides those found in DSP. In particular I like things from Little Red Goblin Games, Amora Games, Rite Publishing, and Kobold Press. Though as with any supplement, I always suggest looking it over and deciding how well it fit in your campaign world before allowing it. -Some Spheres of Power. Spheres has some major problems with specific spheres (Creation, Conjuration, Weather, and a few more), but in general has good ideas and allows the creation of a lot of character concepts hard to create from Vancian or Psionic style casting. -Altering some of the challenges. Some bestiary monsters need alteration if you plan to eliminate full casting as they may essentially jump in CR as the toolbox your players usually has to deal with them has lowered its ceiling.
Psionics Augmented: Soulknife has some really beefy Blade Skills to help the Soulknife a bit along with a suggestion to give the benefits of the Gifted Blade archetype for free.
Use Unchained Rogue.
At this juncture I come out of lurk mode and remind everyone. Just because there is a class power disparity does not mean the players know/care/or even try to use it. If a player never takes invisibilty sphere then whos rogue is being invalidated? When discussing this topic with someone and it seems "they're playing a completely different game" it's likely they are playing a completely different game.
|
