Search Posts
Hey all, I'm attempting to use GIMP to take the Kingmaker maps, layer the player's blank hex map, and reveal only sections of what can be explored. I'm having difficulty matching up layers, and selecting only sections to reveal. Does anyone out there have GIMP experience who can help me?
So I’m getting ready to run my version of the Kingmaker campaign after a summer hiatus from gaming, and our first session is in two weeks. It’s set in our homebrew campaign setting, and I’m making some changes to the story. In the dark fey realm of Avalor lives the pale reflection of the Vadani witch Vecna, before she was slain and returned as a foul undead creature. Vecna Dsalti, a daughter of a nymph princess and she is reaching out from the Vale of the Whispering Wood to the Vallenwood, and from there, to the lost and slumbering kingdom of Ruendell. The Lord Marshal of Ressen Tauth has issued writs allowing exploration of the Greensward, and defeating the organized bandits under the Stag Lord. I’ve rolled up random treasures, a month of weather, noted a bunch of wilderness descriptors, and made what changes are necessary to the first part of the campaign to fit with my campaign world. I have writs for the characters, and I plan on some fair amount of roleplaying in Ressen Tauth before they head out, specifically • Scene – meet Marcus Voller, the herald of Ressen Tauth. Marcus is a wry, intelligent man who is pragmatic (and perhaps a bit sarcastic), and speaks with a clipped, germanic accent. • Some sort of indication of bureaucracy? The rustwormer goblin infestation! Marcus personally petitions them since the Lord Marshal’s Court has yet to hear of the problem, and will personally pay them 800 gp. He has relatives in Kayr Sargyn who tell of the problem on patrols. • Scene – Liathan Telmansdottir is flirtatious wife of Helmun Bloodsinger, one of the Howling Wraiths who are currently in the Nolven Hills • Scene – just before meeting with the PCs, the Lord Marshall cuts off trade with Paeglianto and expels their ambassador for indiscretions with his neice, the Lady Athiva Sellen. Any other suggestions or input?
They are indeed very much like elk-ish minotaurs! I basically took a were-elk, and made them true breeding creatures many generations later (monstrous humanoids), so that's why they have the DR 5/silver. Their stat adjustments were based on the were-elk hybrid form as well. The feats were what Elk had in the Pathfinder magazine, but I did change one of their feats, as I recall. The hoof attacks I could take or leave, to be honest.
Hi all, I'm looking to replace centaurs in my Kingmaker campaign, and I came up with Large bipedal elk men. Does this look CR3-ish to you? Thanks! Eldren
N Large Monstrous Humanoid
I'd like to thank our player Gavin for being brave and taking the plunge -- he was a little dissatisfied with his 2nd level duergar cleric, and when he aske to try one of the new classe, I allowed him to swap out for another character – he took a 2nd level tiefling witch with a viper familiar, and the healing and cauldron hexes. He didn’t exactly outshine the other characters and his actions contributed to the party goal, he identified potions, cast inflict light wounds on a dretch, tried to cast shocking grasp (on a dretch, which is immune to electricity -- oops) and healed the party with his hex and cure light wounds spell. While its too soon to say after one session, the only thing I didn’t like is the fact his familiar was a non-entity. Because his viper only had 8 hp, he was afraid to use it extensively. Healing Hex seemed to function pretty much as a replacement for his former cleric’s channel energy ability (1 use), and he was more effective as a healer than the druid, but not as much as a cleric would be. My initial feeling from the playtest is a low-level witch should have the option to have their familiar (which strikes me as a key class ability) to be more prominent or useful. I would recommend either allowing automatically, or through a hex, the option of having the familiar have equal hit points to the witch. That would allow low-level witches to use their familiar without fear. More to come next week -- his witch leveled up to 3rd level, so he'll be trying some 2nd level spells ...
Hi all, A quick question that came up in play tonight that a player of mine and I disagree on. I'd appreciate some feedback. Under Masterwork Weapons on page 149, it states "the masterwork quality adds 300 gp to the cost of a normal weapon (or 6 gp to the cot of a single unit of ammunition" Is that 6 gp per arrow, or 6 gp per 20 arrows?
So, we kicked off our new campaign with the final Pathfinder rules, and the game felt a bit ... different. On the player side, the party bard felt more useful, the extra hit points made characters a bit more durable, cantrips were used a fair amount, and the party was able to go through a fair number of encounters before retreating to rest. On the GM side, I found the xp and treasure system interesting. I tracked the encounters, and kept an eye on the treasure I was handing out on the fly, and while I should have handed out 2000 gp of treasure, I only gave 1600. It's neat to see in the middle of the session whether or not I should give the party a boost, or reign back on the swag. My rulebook is getting a bit of a pounding in our sessions, flipping to rules a lot until we get used to spells and other effects. It's holding up so far!
Hi all, I’m now going through the nitty gritty of the rules, and I have a couple questions on some hints that some things are different from 3.5, but I’m not entirely sure. First, the feat Strike Back says that you can ready an action to strike at a foe with reach who attacks you. 3.5 (clarified by the FAQ, I think) allowed you to do this without a feat. Is this an intentional change? The Arcane Trickster’s Surprise Spells ability allows them to add sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage vs flat-footed opponents. Does that mean a rogue/spellcaster can’t naturally sneak attack with a spell? The rules don’t seem to address this issue. Again, 3.5 (clarified by supplements) allowed this action. Lastly, the cleric domain powers often state you can “touch a creature” to grant a benefit. Can the cleric touch themselves as a valid target? Thanks Jason & Co!
Hey all! I saw a post on Paizo that linked to the Cartographer's Guild, and I have to say it's a great site to help you make a professional map. They recommended and have a tutorial for GIMP, a free drawing program, which let me develop this ... I'm still plugging away, but I should have a professional map before our next gaming session ...
In our game, we have used reincarnate about 5 times over 10 years, and every time it has caused headaches and confusion. The main issue is when you change race, the foundation of your character is changed, causing wierdnesses that make lots of unanswered questions and leave the character less than optimal. This becomes worse when a reincarnated character changes from or to a race with racial hit dice or a level adjustment. Now, that being said, reincarnate has brought a lot of fun into our game. We had a human rogue who changed to a satyr, and his character changed in concept. We had a half-orc reincarnated to a foul-mouthed elf, we had a bugbear brute with power attack who changed into a goblin (with a big guy’s attitude). A lot of these changes involved retraining of feats and class levels, or savage-species treatment of racial hit dice. What I suggest is rather than bandaging reincarnate, which is a rebuild, simply allow a rebuild from the ground up … Reincarnate
With this spell, you bring back a dead creature in another body, provided that its death occurred no more than one week before the casting of the spell and the subject’s soul is free and willing to return. If the subject’s soul is not willing to return, the spell does not work; therefore, a subject that wants to return receives no saving throw. Since the dead creature is returning in a new body, all physical ills and afflictions are repaired. The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be reincarnated, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death. The magic of the spell creates an entirely new young adult body for the soul to inhabit from the natural elements at hand. This process takes 1 hour to complete. When the body is ready, the subject is reincarnated. A reincarnated creature recalls the majority of its former life and form. It retains its alignment, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. The two highest ranked skills of the dead character grant the new body a new +2 racial bonus to those skills, if the new incarnation did not have those racial bonuses already. The class that the reincarnated character had the most levels in becomes an additional favored class for the new incarnation. The new body is effectively a new character, except for the preceding effects. For a humanoid creature, the new incarnation is determined using the following table. For nonhumanoid creatures, a similar table of creatures of the same type should be created. Roll below, and if you roll an incarnation with a starting level that is equal or higher to the dead character, roll again to ensure the new incarnation is at least one level lower than the previous creature. If the dead creature is 1st level, and cannot roll an incarnation of a lower level, it suffers a -2 to its generated Constitution instead. The new incarnation starts at its starting level, which includes any racial hit dice or at least one level in a given class, and levels up in class levels one level each day, until it reaches a level of one lower than the dead creature, at which point it can advance as normal, gaining experience points normally. It’s possible for the change in the subject’s ability scores or race to make it difficult for it to pursue its previous character class. Regardless, the character may choose any starting class or skill set as it is effectively a new character. A creature that has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can’t be returned to life by this spell. Constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead creatures can’t be reincarnated. The spell cannot bring back a creature that has died of old age. D% Incarnation Starting Level
The reincarnated creature gains all abilities associated with its new form, as it is a new character, including forms of movement and speeds, natural armor, natural attacks, extraordinary abilities, and the like. A wish or a miracle spell can restore a reincarnated character to his or her original unchanged form.
The concept of allowing wizards to duke it out with floating swords at a distance is very cool, and removes the idea of wizards being reduced to crossbows at 60 paces. However, the ability as written has two issues --- first, it’s limited to only generalist wizards and clerics with the magic domain, and second, the way it is written, it is too powerful at 1st level, allowing floating greatswords and Intelligence bonuses to damage. So, what I recommend is changing Mage Hand to the following: Mage Hand
You point your finger at an object and can lift it and move it at will from a distance. As a free action, you may draw a weapon from your person. As a move action, you can propel the object as far as 15 feet in any direction, though the spell ends if the distance between you and the object ever exceeds the spell’s range. If you choose to, concentrating as a standard action, you may use mage hand to make a single strike per round with a melee weapon of up to 5 lb, using your caster level as your attack bonus, and dealing regular weapon damage. You may attack with a weapon on the round that mage hand is cast. And then, I would suggest changing the class abilities for generalist wizards and magic domain clerics to: 1st Level -- Hand of the Apprentice (Su): As a standard action, you may use mage hand as a spell-like ability at will. Unlike the normal mage hand spell, you may use it to wield a magical weapon of up to 5 lb.
Our group has playtested the Beast Shape spells, primarily through a druid’s wild shape ability. One of the things that came up in the Alpha playtest that hasn’t been addressed are that beast shape doesn’t detail increased base movement. Wild shaping into a wolf should grant extra land movement at some point for the aspiring spellcaster As well, certain animal and magical beast abilities are missing – although I don’t think every ability out there should be listed in the Beast Shape spells, I am thinking we are missing acid spray (digester), amphibious (toad), attach (dire weasel, stirge, weasel), blindsight (porpoise), blood drain (dire weasel, stirge), disease (dire rat), hold breath (sea cat, crocodile, porpoise), ink cloud (kraken, octopus), keen scent (dire shark, shark), leap, powerful charge (triceratops, rhinoceros), rage (dire badger, dire wolverine, badger, wolverine), sprint (cheetah), stampede (bison), superior low-light vision (giant owl), and swallow whole (tyrannosaurus, dire shark, purple worm, remorhaz). Also, we were told there would be more polymorph spells to deal with changing into monstrous humanoids – are those coming?
Guys, Something that has come from our game is the issue of what happens to a thrown splash weapon -- on a miss, it lands in a random direction 1 square per range increment thrown. This has led our players to purposely throw from far away, as to miss their friends. This 'predictable miss' chance should be changed to a flat 1d3 squares, I would think ...
We have rules for grappling spellcasters, shooting in to a melee, jumping from a chandelier into a grapple, being immersed in lava, but nothing for passing an object from one character to another. I’d recommend adding this to the list of actions possible as a move action, and the ‘receiver’ need do nothing but be willing to accept the object, have a hand free.
Firstly, your section on “What Hit Points Represent” on page 141 is dreadfully short. All of us who have read the Gygaxian spiel on what a hit point is understand the abstract nature of hit points, but this short paragraph doesn’t say enough for new people who play this game. I recommend describing hit points meaning stamina, luck, skill, the ability to turn a solid blow into a glancing one, and so on. Secondly, in your section on “Massive Damage”, this is a fixed DC Fortitude save that really should scale. Having to make a DC 15 Fortitude save when you exceed 50 hit points of damage really means at high levels not rolling a natural “1”. Please set this saving throw up to scale, of DC 15 + 2 per 10 hit points damage that exceed 50. It adds a small level of danger to higher level games. As well, where is the (frequently used) optional rule that massive damage thresholds change with different sized creatures? Something I also had an issue with for a long time is that dying creatures have a linear loss of hit points, and the stabilization check is not based on a d20 roll, making it not very intuitive, or exciting (as exciting as your dying character can get, in any case). If one of your compatriots is at –3 hit points, you have all the time in the world, right? I would recommend that stabilization checks be changed to Fortitude saves. It means that characters of higher level are more likely to stabilize, but that’s okay. On the flip side, if a stabilization check fails, you could lose more than 1 hit point. I offer the following: Stable Characters and Recovery
In the interests of protecting people from being torn to shreds by housecats, by flocks of raven familiars pecking small children to death, and from goblin children running amok, I recommend the Phil Athans rule be adopted by Pathfinder, meaning any damage rolled that ends up being less than 1 point of damage is reduced to 1 point of nonlethal damage. The wise and learned Sean K Reynolds talks about it here - http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/philathansrule.html
I love Combat Maneuvers. The mechanics are simple and elegant. The first time we used it was in the first adventure of Curse of the Crimson Throne – someone tried to bull rush the gnome Hookshanks in the fishery in Edge of Anarchy – we called for a roll, told him he succeeded, and everyone sat around in stunned silence for a second realizing that was all the mechanic required – no touch attack, no opposed roll, just a target roll. Perfect. However, I know there has been some argument on whether the CMB mechanic should be DC 15 or DC 10 plus opponent’s CMB, but aside from that, using Combat Maneuvers our group has run into numerous problems with circumstance bonuses or conditions more than the DC. Does being flat-footed affect a grapple? Does disarming someone who has cover deserve a modifier? How about tripping someone under the effects of a Tanglefoot bag, and nauseated? Grappling someone who is flanked? These things all came up in our regular game, and the rules are unfairly silent on this subject. As well, the mechanic of a target equal to 15 + your opponent’s CMB was a bit clunky. We’d call out “I rolled a 26 – is that good?” It didn’t feel intuitive. When Neceros put up a Pathfinder character sheet, it had a box on there for a CMB target number, which struck me – why not set up an Armor Class value for maneuvers? We have Armor Classes in the game that are used in specific instances (being flat-footed, or touch), so adding a specific Armor Class for maneuvers isn’t unreasonable, or hard to work out. If you took a base AC of 10, added in Dex and Deflection modifiers (like touch AC), added Size modifiers as a positive effect (not negative like touch AC), and then added Strength modifiers and Base Attack Bonus, you would have an effective AC number. By making it an AC value, you could apply most of the conditions that affect Armor Class (Dex penalties, being flat-footed, cover, etc), or effects that alter Strength or Dexterity. If we did a Maneuver AC as above, here are some sample numbers that would replace the target CMB number currently in place (with the target 15 built in). (CR 1) Wolf – CMBT 17, Maneuver AC 14
I am of the opinion that the existing CMB target is too high, but not radically so. If you look at my suggestion above, the Maneuver AC values are slightly below the current CMB target, which I think is fine. There ought to be some small hope that a 3rd level character could hope to escape from an Ogre’s grapple. I originally discussed this subject at the thread below, and I’ve revised my argument based on that feedback …
A loooong time ago, in an Alpha playtest thread, someone brought up the ten foot pole, and how it was possible to buy a ladder, turn it into ten foot poles, and make an infinite amount of money. Everyone thought this was amusing, and Jason said he would deal with that. Can I recommend that the description of a 10 foot pole describe a take-down or collapsible metal pole? That would solve that whole argument in 20 words or less ...
In the rules, there are random stats for starting adventurer ages, but what about characters who want to be middle-aged, or old? The rules are silent on options for starting an older character, and this is an area that widely differs from GM to GM and game to game. I’d recommend a clarifying comment in the rules. The flip-side, of course, is that players could manipulate their mental stats with an older character ...
In our group, and in others I’ve seen, there is a popular tactic – throw an alchemists fire on a creature, and then while it is ‘burning’ pepper it with oil flasks, which burn as alchemists’ fire, and so on. I’ve always thought this is slightly cheesy, and should probably be clarified in the Oil description to “once it is thrown, there is a 50% chance of the flask igniting successfully, or damaging an already burning creature”, otherwise after you hit a creature with alchemist's fire, all further oil flasks are just as good as the alchemists' fire in question.
One of my observations is a clear area where the game has been improved, either from 3.0 to 3.5, or 3.5 SRD to Pathfinder, is the removal of fixed DC skill checks to scaled effects. In the SRD, these fixed skill checks are often challenging at a certain play level, but become redundant at higher levels, causing portions of the game’s structure to be cumbersome. A prime example is the original Tumble DC of 15 to go past an enemy – a challenge at 1st level, but an annoyance to roll at 15th. Pathfinder clearly fixed that by making Acrobatics checks DC 15 + the opponent’s base attack bonus, but that improvement should be taken across the board to address a number of skills… Diplomacy – Diplomacy monkeys often dominate the game at higher levels, with automatic successes. For example, a DC 25 to adjust a Hostile creature is simplicity at higher levels. While I like the adjustments to Diplomacy for Pathfinder, there should be some scaling here. Perhaps +1 per HD to the DC? Heal – I am thrilled that Treat Deadly Wounds has been added to Heal, but DC 20 is hard at low levels, and simplicity at higher levels, making the ‘window’ for this effect limited to 4th to 8th level. Spellcraft – Casting defensively under the old Concentration skill becomes far too easy at high levels, and becomes ludicrous. I’ve had squads of spined devils laugh at using their SLAs with ridiculously high skill bonuses. I believe that Spellcraft now needs to scale up, being a check that includes opponents BAB, just like Acrobatics.
Okay, having looked over the Pathfinder feats, they are a huge improvement over the 3.5/SRD versions. However, while you have added lots of combat feats, you have added proportionally little in the way for Spellcasters. I’d recommend adding some more feat options for them. I’d suggest adding a tree feat for each school of Spell Focus, like Augment Summoning for conjuration. As well, some feats just are suboptimal, and have been scorned in our game. The power level and versatility of feats needs to be kept relatively even. Here are my suggestions: ACROBATIC (etc) – Nice scaling effect added. CAREFUL TARGETING - why is this gone from the Alpha? I thought it was an excellent idea. CLEAVE – The concept for this feat is great, but it is now weakened in power so it is being ignored in place of other feats. In our playtest, our 6th level paladin with a greatsword contemplated taking this feat, but all it gave him was the ability to move and make two attacks. When standing still, this feat is the same as full attack at 6th level, and decidedly less usefui when the character gains his third attack. I do like the utility of the feat vs the need to drop a creature in 3.5. I recommend allowing Cleave to be used as a standard action, not a full action. DEADLY AIM - good feat! We playtested an 8th level one-shot, and an elven ranger with this feat made very good use of it, doing fair ranged damage against his foes (-5 to hit, +5 damage, specifically). DODGE – Nicely done! This feat is now useful at higher levels. ENDURANCE – This has always been the poor man’s feat. I’d suggest adding another benefit to it, such as stabilization checks have an additional 20% chance of succeeding, or that nonlethal damage is halved against characters with this feat. FAR SHOT – This is very misleading in name now – shots don’t go farther. I suggest using the feat as printed, but add the ability to use a ranged weapon up to 10 or 15 range increments away. GREATER BULL RUSH/DISARM/GRAPPLE/TRIP/etc – These increased feats are great, but they are a very weak effect for a feat. If you add a further +2 to these Maneuvers, in addition to their effects, I think they are worth taking. IMPROVED TRIP – This should do damage from the fall if DC is exceeded, or grant the free attack if you beat the CMB by 10 more. LEADERSHIP – This is a great concept, but has caused nothing but chaos and trouble in every game we have used. The feat should be kept, but kept under control. I suggest having Leadership get you a cohort, and not followers (perhaps a second feat would allow that). As well, the leadership score function is really a lot of verbiage for what is usually a follower two levels below the character. In addition, with the removal of XP costs, an item creation cohort is going to be very popuiar. I’ve tried writing an alternate Leadership feat, but it’s not something quality I can offer. MARTIAL WEAPON PROFICIENCY – This feat is a hard one. I’ve tried taking it, but for the characters who need it (spellcasters, rogues, etc) it’s a weak feat. Perhaps offering all Martial Weapons, or 1 martial weapon per level as a benefit of this feat? OVERHAND CHOP – A great idea, but why have it for only the first strike? This adds some unnecessary bookkeeping, keeping track of Overhand Chop and it’s tree feat Backswing. I recommend adding a general benefit to all attacks. (Actually, we mistakenly played that way with Overhand Chop, and our player is now very frustrated to keep track of first attack, etc). POINT BLANK SHOT – This feat has been worded in such a way that it isn’t clear that it can be used for spells. I’d recommend adding the wording to clear this up and allow it. SCRIBE SCROLL – The last alpha had rules for making magic items in the field. I’d love to see this added back to scribe scroll at the very least, or have another feat that allows tinkering while on watch, or what have you. TOUGHNESS - a winner now that it scales. It’s a high choice for all my players. TRACK - Jason said bring it up again, so I am. I recommend in the interests of backwards compatability and allowing other people to Track, bring this feat back and give it the benefit of adding +5 to Survival checks to follow tracks. WEAPON FOCUS – I’d slightly reword this feat to allow it with any specific Combat Maneuver as well. WEAPON FINESSE / AGILE MANEUVERS – I believe these feats would greatly benefit from being combined. Giving someone the ability to use Dex modifiers with light weapons and with Combat Maneuvers is not unbalancing for one feat. And here are my recommendations for feats to be added: ADAPTABLE ARTIFICER
NIMBLE TARGET [GENERAL]
PERSISTENT SPELL (METAMAGIC)
SPELLCASTING ADEPT [GENERAL]
TRACK [GENERAL]
Okay, it’s time to look at Use Magic Device. I have played a number of games with bards, sorcerers, and factotums who have used Use Magic Device. It has always been my feeling that at low levels, this skill is not worth taking. Scrolls have a scaling DC, but wands don’t. All the DC’s are in the high teens or 20’s, meaning the skill is difficult at low levels, and simplicity at high levels. Finally at high levels, it comes down to not rolling a 1. The chance of a misfire is almost negligible, and the misfire requires a second low DC attribute check. Here are my recommendations, based on this: Like Disable Device, there should be a misfire if you miss the DC by 5 or more. No secondary check, not just for activating blindly, that’s it. Next, have activating blindly be 15 + caster level of the item. Getting a tree token to work should be a lot easier than a holy avenger. Using a scroll should be probably have it’s DC reduced to 15 + caster level, so low level characters have a chance of making this skill work. Lastly, allow Use Magic Device to emulate an Item Creation feat, at DC 35. This gives high level characters a good use for the skill.
A couple of suggestions on Spellcraft. Right now, with Spellcraft including the old Concentration skill, it is a very powerful skill to have, and needs some examination. I strongly recommend the following additions or modifications: First, identifying spells being cast is 15 + spell level. I recommend the following official changes. If a specific component cannot be viewed (verbal, somatic, or material), the DC should increase by +4 for each component not observed. Eschew materials should add the +4 as well. It’s worth noting that Spellcraft checks to identify spells being cast no longer have the -1 per 10 feet away. Secondly, Spell Like Abilities should have a DC of 25 + spell level to identify due to the lack of components. And secondly, casting defensively doesn’t scale for opponent’s ability, but Acrobatics does? If tumbling is DC 15 + opponent’s BAB or DC 20 + opponent’s BAB, then casting defensively should be DC 15 + spell level + opponent’s BAB
I’ve detailed in my ongoing playtest numerous times that the ability to use Appraise to determine the value of items or to identify magic items is simply too easy. Please increase the DCs for all of these effects by 5 to make the skill useful, but not an automatic success. Right now, Joe Farmer can identify items worth up to 500 gp, and the chances of identifying a magic item without the spell Identify have an 80% success chance. With Identify, it's automatic. (This would, by association, be a suggestion to increase the DC of tasting potions by 5 as well under Perception). For numerous examples, see my playtest thread - http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/playtest/archadesOngoingPlaytestReports
As in my first tirade about fixed DCs, Treat Deadly Wounds needs to scale to be useful in a game. I applaud the creation of this function of the Heal skill, but I would recommend a few changes. First, make the Heal check have potential repercussions for failing by 5 or more, and have the subject of the surgery take damage if the skill check is blown. Why, you ask? Because then you can take away the limitation of once per day, and eliminate some bookkeeping. Next, set the DC to some variable amount – I’d recommend adding to the DC the number of hit points the character is reduced from maximum. Lastly, I’d also advocate allowing Heal to revivify creatures that have died the round before. This was a clear win situation for the game when the Revivify spell was added in the Spell Compendium (and Pathfinder added Breath of Life). Adding this function to the Heal skill would increase the survivability of characters immensely.
I posted this originally in the General section, and now seems like the right time to bring it up ... One of the places that D&D falls down is in the basic premise of Craft or Profession. Either it doesn’t meet the stated economic scale, or it doesn’t serve the characters at all because making a high-price item is beyond the care or effort of a character. So, let’s look at economic scale. D&D (and thus Pathfinder) implies an untrained labourer gets 1 sp per day, or 3 gp per month (and their upkeep might be 2 gp per month, so they eke out a small living above and beyond the daily grind). That’s fine there. It then says that skilled labourers can earn 1 gp per day, or 30 gp per month. That seems fine too, right? And then it scales up from there. Let’s look at Perform – if a troubadour can make a DC 15 check, he can earn 5 sp per day. A Perform check of DC 20 earns 1.65 gp per day on average, and a Perform check of DC 25 earns 3.5 gp per day. No issues versus the economic scale above. So, let’s look at Craft. A 1st level character can easily get a +11 to Craft (+3 trained, +3 skill focus, +1 rank, +2 MW tools , +2 for Int modifier). So, under the SRD check, they can earn half their skill check in gp per week – that’s 10 gp per week, or about 1.5 gp per day. Fairly close to the economic baseline. Now let’s take a look at a 10th level character, with a +25 in Craft (+3 trained, +6 skill focus, +10 ranks, +2 MW tools, +4 Int modifier). Under the SRD check, they earn 17 gp per week, or 2.5 gp per day. Again, reasonable to the economic baseline, right? But that’s a 10th level character. 10th level wizards are flying around, 10th level barbarians have burning fists, and 10th level experts earn 2.5 gp per day. Worse yet, a 10th level expert (cobbler) makes the same amount as a 10th level expert (lawyer). That’s not very reasonable. Now take that 10th level character example above – let’s say they are an armorer commissioned to make a suit of full plate worth 1,500 gp. Converted into sp, that’s 15,000 sp. The DC is 19, which is an automatic success, and on average the armorer will roll an 10 (rounded for simplicity). That’s 190 sp per week, or complete it in 15 weeks. I’m not sure 3 months is reasonable for a full time armorer, although if he sells his plate, he’s earned a hefty profit of 1,000 gp, which is significantly higher than 2.5 gp per day. Take another example – an adamantine dagger is 3,002 gp. It would take a 10th level character 158 weeks to make. A little long for a dagger, regardless of what it is made of. So, with the SRD, there are a number of issues to deal with a) There is no difference in profession to deal with different incomes b) There is very little range of income for someone invested in craft, and it doesn’t scale well compared to Perform c) When the economics start scaling up, the craft skill becomes unwieldy for length of time to craft things. So, while D&D economics is certainly a hot topic, here is how I would address it with the Craft skill: CRAFT (INT)
A Craft skill is specifically focused on creating something. If nothing is created by the endeavor, it probably falls under the heading of a Profession skill. Check: You can practice your trade and make a decent living. You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the craft’s daily tasks, how to supervise untrained helpers, and how to handle common problems. (Untrained laborers and assistants earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.) If you practice a low-risk craft (cook, groom, animal trainer, farmer, etc) and can make a DC 15 check you can earn your Craft check in gp per month. If you fail your check, you earn nothing this month. If you practice a medium-risk craft (armorer, weaponsmith, mason, architect, etc) and can make a DC 20 checkm you can earn twice your check in gp per month. If you fail your check, you earn nothing this month. If you practice a high-risk craft (alchemist, shipwright, etc) and can make a DC 25 check, you can earn 4x your check in gp per month. The basic function of the Craft skill, however, is to allow you to make an item of the appropriate type. The DC depends on the complexity of the item to be created. The DC, your check result, and the price of the item determine how long it takes to make a particular item. The item’s finished price also determines the cost of raw materials. In some cases, the fabricate spell can be used to achieve the results of a Craft check with no actual check involved. You must make an appropriate Craft check, however, when using the spell to make articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship. A successful Craft check related to woodworking in conjunction with the casting of the ironwood spell enables you to make wooden items that have the strength of steel. When casting the spell minor creation, you must succeed on an appropriate Craft check to make a complex item. All crafts require artisan’s tools to give the best chance of success. If improvised tools are used, the check is made with a –2 penalty. On the other hand, masterwork artisan’s tools provide a +2 circumstance bonus on the check. To determine how much time and money it takes to make an item, follow these steps. 1. Find the item’s market price in gold pieces. 2. determine whether you are making a low-risk, medium-risk, or high-risk craft item, as above. 3. Pay one-half of the item’s price for the cost of raw materials. 4. Make an income check as above to represent a week’s worth of work. If the check succeeds, your income roll determines progress towards the market value of the item. If the result equals the price of the item, then you have completed the item. If the result equals double or triple the price of the item, then you’ve completed the task in one-half or one-third of the time. Other multiples of the DC reduce the time in the same manner. If the result doesn’t equal the price, then it represents the progress you’ve made this week. Record the result and make a new Craft check for the next week. Each week, you make more progress until your total reaches the price of the item. If you fail a check by 4 or less, you make no progress this week. If you fail by 5 or more, you ruin half the raw materials and have to pay half the original raw material cost again. Create Masterwork Items: You can make a masterwork item: a weapon, suit of armor, shield, or tool that conveys a bonus on its use through its exceptional craftsmanship, not through being magical. To create a masterwork item, you create the masterwork component as if it were a separate item in addition to the standard item. The masterwork component has its own price (300 gp for a weapon or 150 gp for a suit of armor or a shield) and a Craft DC of 25. Once both the standard component and the masterwork component are completed, the masterwork item is finished. Note: The cost you pay for the masterwork component is one-third of the given amount, just as it is for the cost in raw materials. Repair Items: Generally, you can repair an item by making checks against the same DC that it took to make the item in the first place. The cost of repairing an item is one-fifth of the item’s price. Action: Does not apply. Craft checks are made by the day or week (see above). Try Again: Yes, but each time you miss by 5 or more, you ruin half the raw materials and have to pay half the original raw material cost again. Special: You may voluntarily roll against a higher-risk DC to increase your progress check. This allows you to create the item more quickly (since you’ll be multiplying your check against more gp to determine progress). You must decide whether to increase the DC before you make each weekly check. You can choose to make an item with only one-quarter the value of the item in raw materials, but you suffer a -10 to the check. To make an item using Craft (alchemy), you must have alchemical equipment. If you are working in a city, you can buy what you need as part of the raw materials cost to make the item, but alchemical equipment is difficult or impossible to come by in some places. Purchasing and maintaining an alchemist’s lab grants a +2 circumstance bonus on Craft (alchemy) checks because you have the perfect tools for the job, but it does not affect the cost of any items made using the skill. So, with the above example, it removes the DC chart, simplifies the skill, and scales better at higher levels. A 1st level character with a Craft of +12 can on average 24 gp per week in progress towards a suit of armor, making the above suit of full plate in 62 weeks. A 10th level character with a Craft of +25 could make a high-risk check to get an average progress of 140 gp per week, or complete the suit in 10 weeks.
This is a general playtest observation of Aid Another, which relates to SRD and 3.5 more than pathfinder. One of the things that is the problem with Aid Another is the fact the effects are minimal, the DC doesn’t scale, and it slows down game play. And if someone fails their DC 10 check, there is no penalty, further rendering the need for a dice roll an annoyance rather than a game-building rule. Whether the roll is to aid another in a skill, or to aid another in combat, the DC is 10, which means the odds of making the roll are almost guaranteed, meaning the roll only slows down the game. The second part is that the effect is minimal – at 1st level, a +2 to a skill or to hit is huge, but by 10th level this ruleset is discarded as useless. I propose the following improvement to the SRD ruleset. If a character chooses to aid another, and it is a valid skill or circumstance to allow more than one person to aid, it adds half its ranks (minimum +1) as a stackable bonus to the skill user. That way, when the party’s diplomat decides to persuade the gate guard to let them by, the two other party members with ranks in Diplomacy aiding his Diplomacy check are useful, and there is no roll to slow things down. Further, I would pass this mechanic to aiding in combat. If someone wants to aid another, they can grant half their BAB (minimum +1) to an ally’s attack roll or AC. Again, no annoying roll, and the effect scales to be useful through all levels of the game.
Hey all, So the SRD had a Jump modifier of -6 for every 10 feet of movement less than 20. That is gone from Pathfinder, and gladly so, because I’ve seen too many dwarves not even able to jump 3 feet. However, with the removal of this penalty, it means a monkey, which is a tiny animal, with it’s +8 racial bonus in Balance translating to a +8 racial bonus in Acrobatics, would have a +11, and could easily jump 21 feet, or 10 times it’s height. Even if you tone down the racial bonus, or even eliminate it, it still has a +3 to Jump, and can jump on average 13 feet (or 6 times its height). If we measure it up to scale, that would be like a human rolling an Acrobatics check of 60, or 36 at worst, to get the same size to distance ratio. I would suggest that rather than going back to speed to determine jumping rate penalties, that size affects the jump, bonus speed affects the jump, and leave it at that. But please, take small and large creatures into consideration for a modifier.
Right now, I love the Fly skill. I so wish we had this when I was running a half-dragon ranger/dervish from 1st to 17th level. However, I think this skill needs a bit of tweaking. Firstly, the Fly check to avoid losing altitude is a fixed DC. As my other numerous posts about skills, I think that scaling DCs are important for usability throughout all levels of the game. I recommend it be re-set to DC 10 + damage taken. Secondly, this was discussed in the Alpha playtest, that a dragon with a huge number of skill points will ‘break’ the fly skill and turn on a dime, with ranks taken rendering the maneuverability bonus moot. Size should be taken into consideration with the Fly skill, simply because if you set aside game mechanics, a Gargantuan creature and a Fine creature with the same turn rate will need different amounts of finite space to maneuver. The Fine creature, regardless of its’ maneuverability, will be able to do everything it needs within a single 5 foot square, where a creature with a 50 foot wingspan cannot, no matter how agile. Please add in modifiers for Size.
CONJURERS – I think the powers offered are not evocative of a conjurer. A bonus to AC and acid darts make the conjurer as offered feel more like an artillery spellcaster, which I would think is the opposite of the theme we are trying to evoke. For the specialist power, an untyped bonus to AC is powerful and as I said above, I feel it is not evocative of the school. I offer the following general power that's toned down a bit: Specialist Bonus: Any conjuration spell cast is considered to have a total duration of 1 extra round. For every five levels, your durations increase by 1 extra round, to a total of 5 extra rounds at 20th level. The first level power, acid dart, is almost identical to the evoker power, and I would think the specialist abilities should offer variety to make the different classes more interesting and replayable. I’d suggest the following replacement: 1st Summon Object (Su): A conjurer can summon any object weighing up to 1 lb per 2 caster levels to his hand within 30 feet. If the object is possessed by another, they may make a Will save to negate the effect. This ability is a conjuration (teleportation) effect. The printed 8th level power, dimensional steps isn’t horrible as a power, but it’s a repeat of a spell that anyone can take (dimension door) at 5th level. I suggest an effect that modifies spell use rather than repeat a spell effect: 8th Teleportation Master (Su): Any conjuration (teleportation) spell cast can transport double the number of targets allowed beyond the caster, and can be used offensively to transport a single unwilling creature within 30 feet that fails their Will save. The 20th level power is good as written, and gives a 20th level conjurer a permanent ally. It's not the most powerful capstone ability, but it's not horrible.
Just a few things that have come up in our game from playtesting, or just idle speculation... On Familiars – if animal companions and paladin steeds get bonus feats when they gain extra hit dice, why don’t familiars? That would make familiars far more versatile, whether they took bonuses to Acrobatics, Skill Focus, Flyby Attack, or simply Toughness. On the Bonded Item issue, this ability fails to address a number of issues. 1) Can you build custom items? If not, if I take an amulet, my choices on what I can make are limited. If yes, then that should probably be clarified, otherwise it falls to DM Fiat... 2) Can I change my custom item down the road? If I start out with said amulet, and decide my first thing will be an amulet of natural armor, that’s great. And if I want to add shield 1/day to it, that’s great too. But what if I want it to be an amulet of proof against detection and location, instead? Or I get tired of my amulet, and I want a magic staff of fire ...
Another note in anticipation of the Spells discussion ... Okay, so the spell Zone of Truth came up with our players in the game last night, and one of the players pointed out that the spell isn’t a useful tool to players because as a 2nd level spell, it *might* cause someone to tell the truth, but if they make their save, the caster will never know, rendering the spell a source of misinformation. Our player who brought it up suggested that Zone of Truth might work better as an “anti-Glibness”, giving everyone in the area a -30 to Bluff. That way, someone who fails their save, it will be pretty darn obvious that they are lying, and someone who makes their save still has to get past a Sense Motive check. Thoughts?
It's early, but I want to sound out an idea... This is a general playtest observation of Aid Another, which relates to SRD and 3.5 more than Pathfinder, but since Pathfinder uses the ruleset as-is, my comments apply. One of the things that I feel is the problem with Aid Another is the fact the effects are minimal, the DC doesn’t scale, and it slows down game play. And if someone fails their DC 10 check, there is no penalty, further rendering the need for a dice roll an annoyance rather than a game-building rule. Whether the roll is to aid another in a skill, or to aid another in combat, the DC is 10, which means the odds of making the roll are almost guaranteed, meaning the roll only slows down the game. The second part is that the effect is minimal – at 1st level, a +2 to a skill or to hit is huge, but by 10th level this ruleset is discarded as useless. I would propose the following improvement to the SRD ruleset. If a character chooses to aid another, and it is a valid skill or circumstance to allow one or more personsto aid, it adds half their ranks (minimum +1) as a stackable bonus to the skill user. That way, when the party’s diplomat decides to persuade the gate guard to let them by, the two other party members with ranks in Diplomacy aiding his Diplomacy check are useful, and there is no roll to slow things down. Further, I would pass this mechanic to aiding in combat. If someone wants to aid another, they can grant half their BAB (minimum +1) to an ally’s attack roll or AC. Again, no annoying roll, and the effect scales to be useful through all levels of the game. What do you think?
Here's a draft of my thoughts for the Combat chapter when it comes up. I'd love some input or refining of these ideas ... I love Combat Maneuvers. The mechanics are simple and elegant. The first time we used it was in the first adventure of Curse of the Crimson Throne – someone tried to bull rush the gnome Hookshanks in the fishery in Edge of Anarchy – we called for a roll, told him he succeeded, and everyone sat around in stunned silence for a second realizing that was all the mechanic required – no touch attack, no opposed roll, just a target roll. Perfect. However, I know there has been some argument on whether the CMB mechanic should be DC 15 or DC 10 plus opponent’s CMB, but aside from that, using Combat Maneuvers our group has run into numerous problems with circumstance bonuses or conditions more than the DC. Does being flat-footed affect a grapple? Does disarming someone who has cover deserve a modifier? How about tripping someone under the effects of a Tanglefoot bag, and nauseated? Grappling someone who is flanked? These things all came up in our regular game, and the rules are unfairly silent on this subject. As well, the mechanic of a target equal to 15 + your opponent’s CMB was a bit clunky. We’d call out “I rolled a 26 – is that good?” It didn’t feel intuitive. When Neceros put up a Pathfinder character sheet, it had a box on there for a CMB target number, which struck me – why not set up an Armor Class value for maneuvers? If you took Touch AC, and added in the opponent’s Strength modifier, and added size modifier as a positive value rather than a negative value, you could call it a character’s Maneuver AC. If it were an Armor Class mechanic that CMB rolled against, you could apply most of the conditions that affect Armor Class, or effects that alter Strength or Dexterity would automatically affect CMB attempts. If we did a Maneuver AC (10 + Dex modifier + Str Modifier + Size Modifier + deflection modifier + dodge modifier), here are some sample numbers that would replace the target CMB number currently in place (with the target 20 built in). (CR 1) Hookshanks Gruller, Gnome Rogue 1 – CMBT 19, Maneuver AC 13
I am of the opinion that the existing CMB target is too high, but not radically so. If we want to keep maneuvers from dominating the game, the DC needs to be somewhat prohibitive. Otherwise, we are playing WWE, not D&D. But, under the existing system what 3rd level character could hope to escape from an Ogre’s grapple? My observation is the AC mechanic I’ve presented is too low – but I still think the mechanism is good, maybe add in a +4 to up the Maneuver AC to an acceptable target. Thoughts?
I personally love the new rogue talent function – it allows the versatile rogue to live up to his abilities. That being said, I would believe that a few things should be changed. First, if you are going to have a talent mechanic to give rogues minor class abilities, why isn’t trapfinding built into the talent mechanic? There are all kinds of rogues, and not all are trap-busting dungeon crawling archaeologists. I’d recommend moving this ability to a Talent, and have it scale with level, so it only needs to be taken once. NEW TALENTS Next looking at Talents, most are combat related, or movement related. What about an ability that serves “Face” rogues, or gives rogues non-combattant powers? How about: Fast Talker (Ex): This ability allows a rogue to make a Diplomacy check as a standard action at a -20 to their check. Jack of All Trades (Ex): This ability allows a rogue to make any skill check, even if it is limited to trained only. Lucky (Ex): This ability allows a rogue to re-roll any one d20 check once per day. They may to reroll one roll that you have just made before the game master declares whether the roll results in success or failure. You must take the result of the reroll, even if it’s worse than the original roll. Observant (Ex): This ability allows a rogue to automatically check for traps or secret doors if they pass within 10 feet of them. This skill check is automatically assumed to take 10. REVIEW OF EXISTING TALENTS Bleeding Attack seems too powerful, and our playtesters have seen it as a ‘no-brainer’ which tells me it is head and shoulders above the other talents available. I’m not sure what to adjust though. Perhaps allow a Fortitude save to avoid the effect? As well, I believe that Combat Trick needs to repeat the limitation that ithis talent can only be taken once. A lot of playtesters have misread this rule. Weapon Training should probably clarify it can only be taken once as well.
|
