|
You might have more luck with this question on the Dreamscarred Press boards:
http://dreamscarredpress.com/dragonfly/ForumsPro/viewforum/f=2.html
Search Posts
I have three reasons: 1) Casters shouldn't all have to take Spellcraft to cast on the defensive/not lose a spell when hit with damage or in a storm. As is, you're intentionally gimping yourself if you want a Cleric or Druid who casts off simple faith or a Sorcerer who casts "from the hip." There has been talk of moving this use of concentration into a different system entirely, which is fine, but then there's still... 2) Backwards compatibility. Concentration is very important to the Expanded Psionics Handbook, and the Tome of Battle makes good use of it as well. While most of the skill consolidations are a simple enough fix ("It says make a Tumble check? Well, roll your Acrobatics."), Concentration was basically eliminated, which means you would have to shoehorn gaining Psionic Focus or using Sapphire Nightmare Blade into other skills that don't really fit and/or aren't class skills for most of the classes that would want to use them. 3) To a lesser extent, Concentration is also useful to rogues who might want to use their skills in combat, at least hypothetically. Since Pathfinder also seems to be in the business of shoring up the weaker skills, it would be a good idea to change the rules for interruption to apply to all actions, which suddenly makes AoOs against movement a much bigger deal to avoid (which makes sense: "Oh, you tried to run by my fighter but got hit in the face with a greataxe? Sorry, that knocks you on your ass"). This would make it a useful skill for everyone.
*bump* Sorry, but I think this is important. Getting around Arcane Spell Failure is just not worth spending the amount of effort 3.5 and the Pathfinder Beta require.
As-is, the fighter's a bit meh, even with the Pathfinder changes. Extra combat feats just aren't that cool; of boy, I deal +2 damage. However, if there were a slew of high-prereq tactical feats, not only would fighters have cool options in combat, but they would be able to pull off all sorts of things that no one else could (they could at least get a couple of these tactical feats, whereas everone else would have to settle with one). Thoughts?
With the removal of Concentration, Spellcraft becomes a necessary skill for the Sorcerer to max. If he doesn't take it, he won't be able to cast defensively, and any goblin with a readied action can interrupt his spells with a bowshot. Now, while my preference would be to return Concentration (since removing it a) screws up Pathfinder's backwards compatibility with both the Expanded Psionics Handbook and the Tome of Battle, and b) means you can't have a sorcerer who doesn't understand the minutia of how his spells work without seriously underpowering yourself), in lieu of that, I think it is necessary to let the Sorcerer apply his Charisma modifier to spellcraft checks (though he still has to use his Intelligence modifier when deciphering magical writing and so one). This could be accomplished with a new class feature at 1st level: Intuitive Understanding: Magic strikes a concordant note with your soul, and you "get" it like a musical savant might "get" a piano. You may add your Charisma modifier to Spellcraft checks instead of your Intelligence modifier. You must use your Intelligence modifier when making spellcraft checks involving magical writing.
A few tweaks: Pg 51: (School powers): These should probably be listed along with the Wizard class description, since they are exclusively part of his class abilities. pg 194-5: (Abjuration school): Their level 1 ability seems kinda pointless. Also, their abilities seem altogether too concerned with personal safety against energy attacks. The whole point of playing an Abjurer is to can protect multiple people against all sorts of threats, not just yourself against one (one that isn’t even all that big a deal at higher levels). Personal safety is well and good, after all, but fairly pointless if it’s all you can do. Throwing an aegis over everyone, though, is very useful (as long as it isn’t a piddling +1 to +5 AC at the cost of your standard action each round. If the wizard is going to have to dedicate his concentration to holding up a protective aura, it should be more impressive than making the dragon’s worst attack miss). pg 195: (Conjuration school): Summoning Master: It could be argued that I could summon a creature just before going to bed, have it guard us, and then summon a second creature the next morning, giving me two for that day (as well as a guard for a second night). I’m not sure if this is overpowered per se, but it’s still something of an exploit. It does mean that the Wizard would never have a good reason to not use this just before going to bed, because then he’d pretty much always have a creature at his side as well as another loaded and ready to go if things got heavy. pg 196: (Illusion school): Invisibility Field: combat at higher levels is fast, brutal, and as frequent as the party feels like. As such, I don’t see a high-level party fighting for much more than 15-20 rounds in a day, which means an Illusionist can easily be invisible for all of them. This doesn’t particularly concern me, only that it’s so easy for them to do. If they had to use a swift action every round to maintain the invisibility, or if it functioned as invisibility rather than greater invisibility, it would give a definite downside to using this as your regular MO. pg 196: (Necromancy school): Deathless: this is a type of creature in Eberron, and for that reason I would suggest changing the name here to avoid confusion. pg 195: (Transmutation school): Fluid Form: isn’t Flight with speed 120 feet strictly better than Climb with 60 feet? Also, a maneuverability rating isn’t listed for the flight gained. pg 196-7: (Universal school): Hand of the Apprentice: just a nitpick on the wording: “You must concentrate on the hand each round or it returns any items it was holding to you and then winks out.” This means the same thing but doesn’t have the weird image of, “it winks out. Wait, no, it winks back, returns your sword, as if it had forgotten, and then winks out,” that the current syntax implies. Metamagic Mastery: This ability is much more powerful than the comparable Sorcerer metamagic ability, which is just unfair given that if anyone should be good at using metamagic, it’s the Sorcerer. The wizard gets to use this many more times per day that the sorcerer does, and he doesn’t even have to pay for the increased spell level! He should at least have the time increased and have to lose a prepared spell of the appropriate level. As written, he could Quicken 9th level spells, or even make them last 24 hours if he’s using the Persistent Spell feat from Complete Arcane (he could even use the same trick that the Conjurer is using and make one 9th level spell persistent before he goes to bed and another upon waking on days when he knows he’s going to face a BBEG).
Here are just a few minor suggestions I had about this or that Bloodline ability. In general, I'd like the feat lists to be expanded a bit, but I don't have any hard suggestions just yet. Pg 43: (Abyssal) Claws: Still not entirely sold on the idea of sorcerers being encouraged to enter melee combat, but that they progress is nice. Also not sold on Strength of the Abyss, though it’s an interesting idea for roleplaying purposes. Pg 43: Arcane): Metamagic Adept: The time increase is still unnecessary, but now that all sorcerers can cast a Quickened spell right off the bat, it’s not such a big deal. New Arcana: It would be pretty cool if the sorcerer could pick any spell to add to his spells known, though he would have to pick it up at the highest level it’s listed for if it’s not already on the Sor/Wiz list. Pg 45: (Celestial): Ascension: Doesn’t this just scream “unlimited use of Wings of Heaven”? I mean, it’s not like all-day flying is hard to get at 20th level, and it fits the ability so perfectly. Pg 45: (Destined): Within Reach: This could use a better name, like “I can’t go out this way!”, “This Isn’t How I Die!”, or something like that. (As a corollary, it would be good if save-or-dies in general to simply drop you to -7 or so and bleeding. That way, the DM can actually use them against the PCs, and the PCs can get hit by them without having to roll up a new character or go through the hassle of getting rezzed). Pg 46: (Draconic): Breath Weapon: I’d like to see this more closely resemble actual breath weapons. Perhaps it could deal ½ sor level in d6s, but he could use it every 1d4 hours at 9th level, every 1d4 minutes at 17th level, and 1d4 rounds at 20th level? Pg 47: (Fey): Laughing Touch: This should be a [Mind-effecting] effect, if not have a save. Pg 48: (Undead): One of Us: This could be worded better: it seems to be trying to say that you don’t have to rot, but technically all it says is you don’t have to look like you’re rotting even though you are.
This isn't as big a deal as it was in 3.5 now that sorcerers can use Quicken, but still, why keep it? Why is it a bad thing for sorcerers to be good at metamagic?
This single change will go a long, long way towards bringing parity between the sorcerer and the wizard. Staggered casting says "training-wheels caster," the guy who doesn't want to play around with serious magic whom you point at a problem and have him fireball it away, and that is not the image the sorcerer should have. At the very very least, please give the sorcerer his bloodline spells known when he gains the new spell level. Otherwise, he only has the one spell choice, which means he basically has to wait yet another level before he's casting his max-level spells truly spontaneously.
Howdy, all. I'm running a Pathfinder game right now, and one of my players really wanted to play a bard but wasn't going to ever use her Inspire abilities. She's very evil, and more than a bit insane, and the whole making people fight better thing just really wasn't for her, so I cooked up these quick-and-dirty alternate bardic songs for her. The campaign isn't going to make it past 11th level, so I didn't bother with the progression past that point, but I figured I'd post this anyway, just to give people ideas. This bardic music progression totally replaces the bardic music in the beta (but no other class features of the bard). Also, “will save” = 10 + ½ Bard level + Cha mod, but “will save vs perform” = perform check result. Anyways: 1st: countersong (as Beta),
In any case, I know this isn't perfectly balanced, and I'm not suggesting it be used as written. I'd just like to get the wheels turning on other possible bardic musics, so bards can choose.
Given that all the casters get at-will cantrips, I'd be in favor of letting the Rogue's Minor Magic give him a cantrip at will. (Though in this case, Major Magic should probably jump to 3 times per day, if not 4, since it's only technically worth 720 gp according to the item creation guidelines vs the at-will-cantrip's 900).
Currently, this ability is basically totally useless. "Under rare circumstances, you take a bit less damage from a rare circumstance which is rarely dangerous anyway." My suggestion is to change it so that 4th level monks can slowfall any distance as long as they're within arms reach of a wall, and let the listed distances reduce damage from freefalls (so a 4th level monk takes freefalls as if they were 20 feet less, a 10th level takes freefalls as if they were 50 ft. less, and a 20th level monk doesn't take freefall damage at all). This A) is actually kinda useful, B) in't the least bit overpowered, C) doesn't especially effect backwards compatibility, and D) is really really cool (if I do say so myself). Thoughts?
Why don't they have this?
Timeless Body is a cool ability, conceptually, but the only time it's really going to be useful is if you start at 17th level or above and play a monk who rapidly gained levels and then waited thirty years to adventure again. I don't think there'd be any balance reason to not have it retroactively remove aging penalties. Also, it would be perfectly fine to let the ability also prevent you from dying due to old age, since that's only ever useful for roleplaying purposes (the image of the thousand-year-old human monk who's still goin' strong is just *so cool*). (This also applies to the Druid's Timeless Body).
Ok, I like that the bard has offensive uses for his bardic music as well as party buffs. However, what if you have a bard that doesn't care for one or the other set? I'd like to see a choice progression for bardic music, kinda like Rage Powers.
The paladin's spellcasting is so pathetic you have to remind people that they have it at all, and they still promptly forget about it. The spells they get are also usually not very useful, even the 4th level spells. So, I propose we let them cast spontaneously off their whole list, like Beguilers or Warmages. Also, it would probably be good to change their caster level to "paladin level -3." Finally, let's remove Remove Curse, Neutralize Poison, Break Enchantment, etc from their spell list, since that's what the LoH specials are for (though specify that they are still treated as having those as "spells on their list/spells known" for all other purposes). Thoughts?
It kinda annoys me how Paladins can only call their mount once per day. I mean, the mount is cool, but is it really so powerful that we need to keep it on such a tight leash? What exploits arise from letting them have their mount whenever they want instead of having to marshal it carefully?
Perhaps it would be good for Paladins to get Mettle sometime after 10th level?
As it stands, you'd have to be a fool of a druid to not take Natural Spell. It's the example people use of things which violate "Feats Should Be Nice, Not Required." As such, I'm for either removing it (if we think it's too much to be able to cast spells while in the form of a fire elemental), or just letting them do it automatically.
As written, these abilities leave sleeping Paladins vulnerable for some reason. I certainly agree that a sleeping Paladin shouldn't confer these benefits on his companions, but he also shouldn't lose his fearlessness, immunity to compulsions, or DR (especially DR) just for catching some ZZs.
You know, I think it would probably be ok for this ability to erase past age penalties. I mean, there are really only so many ways for this to go: 1) Character reaches Timeless body when old, it confers no (or greatly reduced) benefit.
Now, the difference between #1 and #2 is certainly pretty big. However, #2 is entirely possible, and the game doesn't seem to be discouraging it in any way. So, all not removing past penalties does is penalize players in position #3 for picking #1, even though #1 is far more likely of the two options. I mean really, how believable is it that someone got to 17th level by the time they were 30 and then did nothing for twenty years? I can certainly see it happening, but it's a fringe case and certainly shouldn't have significant mechanical preferencing. Also, I think it would be a very cool but essentially impotent change to remove the clause about the druid still dying when his time is up. Dying when your time is up is a pretty useless ability, really, since it can almost never come up. It just means that if you want to play a high-level druid who's been around for thousands and thousands of years, you can do that. (These suggestions also apply to the Monk's Timeless Body).
This might just be a prejudice of mine, but it seems to me that the divine casters should, as a rule, be worse at casting than arcane casters. So, how about if we split their casting between Wis and Charisma? They need at least 10 + spell level Wis to cast those spells and get bonus spells based off their Wis, but Cha determines their save DC? This way, it's a lot harder to play a cleric who's good at everything, and he'll generally be worse off that the arcane guys. (We could also do something similar with the druid, though Charisma wouldn't work as well, nor Int, and the physicals are certainly out, so he might need a different fix).
So, the fighter's shtick is that he can be pretty much any type of combat character, right? And fixing him through new class features is difficult because every fighter prestige class assumes he just has a bunch of feats, right? So, why not fix the fighter by rigging the feats so that there are a bunch of really cool, really nasty feats which require fighter level 5+ or 7+? It's generally been my complaint for fighters that you run out of all the feats you at all actually want around 12th level, if not before, and then have to start picking up stuff like Improved Disarm, which you probably won't ever use since your character doesn't really roll like that. Wouldn't it be cool if a 15th level fighter could pick up a save-or-die feat of some sort? Or maybe high-level fighters can can automatically block attacks sometimes? I dunno, but frankly, I'd be ok with letting fighters stumble upon some borderline-overpowered feats once they get out of dip territory, and perhaps some even better ones once they hit PrC range.
One suggestion that has consistently come up every time I've ever seen rangers discussed is a spell-less variant. Some people just really hate the idea of their ranger casting spells. Now, fixing this is tricky, since spells add a lot of versatility and you'd have to give them some pretty potent abilities to compensate for that. Here's what I've got so far (it's very, very rudimentary, really just a list of ideas):
Rangers are masters of something. Point is, they get new uses for their iconic skills, mostly in Favored Environments, but I don't want to put too much of a stress on that. Heal (No one ever takes this, because magical healing is always so much better, but Aragorn used it to great effect, and since he's pretty much the ranger, I'd like to make it worthwhile for the Ranger)
Search
Survival
Stealth
Perception
Swim
I like that the Pathfinder ranger has Favored Terrain built-in, but I've never been a fan of Favored Enemy. Not that I think it should be removed, just that I want to be able to build a ranger without it. So, what would people feel about giving the ranger the option to take something instead of Favored Enemy or Terrain? Possibly he only chooses one of each each time he would get either, and then the class is rebalanced to take this into account?
Now that casters cast 0-level spells as many times per day as they life, might it be a good idea to let the Gnome do the same with his racial spell-likes?
Something that's been bothering but I've had little hope of effecting, how do we feel about that second +2 to an ability that the races get? I mean, the reason given is that it balances the core races against noncore races, right? Well... which races, specifically, are so much more powerful than the core races?
Is there any reason why this can't just be replaced with Die Hard? He's still underpowered, and making racial ability worth a feat would go a goodly ways towards fixing that.
Tin and fiddles! The board ate another post! Grrrrrrr..... Ok, so, I think physical attractiveness should be struck from the description of Charisma. Here's why: 1. Charisma is a casting stat, yet it makes no sense for physical attractiveness to hypothetically effect casting. Life, if two sorcerers who were otherwise identical except for their *ahem* feminine assets (let's say they were on just on the opposite sides of the border between Char 19 and 20) were to cast a fireball, the sorcerer with the greater *ahem* endowments would hypothetically net at least a few more degrees of heat (which leads to funny jokes about "wow, you're so hot!" but when the laughs die down it just leaves you wondering why) and can cast another spell per day or so (which leads to the uncomfortable question of where exactly they store those spell slots). Additionally, if you were to specifically make yourself ugly (you wore a bad cut of clothes, put on makeup, maybe styled your hair like something from the 80s) your Charisma wouldn't go down. Makeup might give you a penalty to certain social rolls, but that would be at the DM's discretion. You certainly wouldn't have fewer spells to cast, and your save DCs wouldn't drop. 2. Physical beauty is subjective from person to person. While you can sometimes push this into the epistemological ether of the die roll, there will still be cases where a given character simply doesn't find another attractive (not "you're ugly," just "You're blond, and I prefer brunettes"), and yet they still face the same bonus. 3. Physical beauty is subjective from species to species. Humans will not find ilithids attractive who won't find beholders attractive who won't find orcs particularly attractive who won't find dwarves attractive, and so on. While there could be some cross-species attraction, it will generally be rare, especially when crossing the barrier between types, like between humanoid and aberration. 4. Some species are clearly [i]not attractive[i], and yet they have high Charismas. Like the ilithid. If he were the only instances, it might not be that big a deal, but when monsters seem to have high Charisma scores without any regard for how attractive they are, it strains credibility. 5. Charisma goes up as you adventure (ie, if you put the level increases into it). Are we to assume that a life of eating hard tack, sleeping on uneven stone floors, getting into fights all the time, taking scars and getting beat on, and generally running yourself ragged... makes you more physically attractive? 6. Charisma goes up as you age. Now, I don't want to get into an argument about whether or not age makes people more attractive, but the general consensus of modern western culture (the culture most cultures in D&D, whether consciously or not, are based on) seems to not that it does not. In general, though, it seems odd that a seventy year old would have an easier time seducing someone than a twenty year old. All in all, I think it makes far more sense to leave how attractive a given character is up to the player. If they want to stress it, maybe they could take an "Attractive" feat or something, but building it in to Charisma just doesn't make sense.
Personally, I'd prefer this to be built-in to the class feature, but barring that, here's a feat to give the monk's Slow Fall some extra coolsauce.
Parry (Combat)
Improved Parry (Combat)
What do you think? I'm a little concerned that this could result in frighteningly-high AC, but then again, you are losing attacks, and at this level, attack bonuses usually far exceed AC anyway, so maybe it's not such a bad thing.
This has been a perennial problem for every DM I've gamed under as well as for every game I've DMed: what are the mechanics for convincing someone that you're telling the truth when you are telling the truth? It has something to do with Sense Motive and Bluff, but the problem is if you run it like a normal Bluff check, a person who sucks at reading people is more likely to get the picture than someone who's great at it, and if you run it in reverse, having a high Bluff check is bad. Anyone have any ideas on how to adjudicate this? Preferably, there'd end up being a sidebar in the eventual book on this, since it's a pretty common occurrence, I've found, and tricky to work around.
Hello, all. I stumbled upon Pathfinder yesterday, and I have to say, I’m very impressed and excited! I was tremendously disappointed by 4e but also rather annoyed with the number of house rules I felt I had to drag around to make 3.5 as good as can be, so it’s really nice to see it all integrated together like this. That said, much as I like the changes, there are some I have suggestions/criticisms regarding. I decided to do it page-by-page, and it ended up coming out to this. I know it’s rather a lot, but for every change I took issue with here, there are at least two or three that I really like. Anyway, let’s begin: Pg 7: Charisma should not be physical attractiveness. Leave that up to the player. Perhaps there could be an “Attractive” feat for players that want to stress it, but it doesn’t really make sense in a slew of cases for the stat itself to equal hotness. Also, Charisma should have a built-in bonus other than adding to skills (but I already have a thread on this: ). Pg 8-9: Dwarves. They need to be streamlined a bit. They just have too, too many abilities, and it seems inelegant. Specifically, I’d ditch “Hatred” and “Defensive Training.” The same for gnomes, too. Pg 10: Half-orc: Orc Ferocity: I’d take away the “once per day” thing, as if they get knocked before 0 twice in one day, they probably deserve the extra round (perhaps once per encounter?). Also, I’m not convinced the half-orc is balanced yet. The reason they were so much less spectacular than the other races in 3.5 was because +2 to strength was deemed just too good. However, +2 to Int is probably better for a Wizard than +2 to Str is for a melee character, and more to the point, Humans and Half-elves could put their +2 into Str if they wanted. Upshot: half-orcs need a little more love. Pg 12: Barbarian Rage. Love the change, but it might be worthwhile to state that barbarians above 1st level get (2 + Con mod)*Barb level + 2 rage points. Also, it might be nice for there to be a way for a barbarian to psyche himself up and regain some of these rage points, possibly with a feat. Pg 14-15: Rage abilities: Clear Mind should be Ex, I don’t think Elemental Rage makes much sense, Low-Light Vision is probably only worth 1 point, Renewed Vigor seems like it should have a use cap and doesn’t need to be supernatural (while HP does partially represent physical damage, 1d8+Con mod at 6th level isn’t enough to require the points healed to equal physical damage), and Terrifying Howl definitely shouldn’t be supernatural. Finally, Mighty Rage should probably only cost 3 rage points per turn, though honestly, I don’t see a problem with both rage improvements being free. Also, there should be a feat that gives the Barbarian extra rage points. Pg 16: I love the Bard picture. As for the mechanics, I liked Bardic Knowledge as it was, what was wrong with it? Pg 20: Uhhhh, Deadly Performance is way, way too good. Performance checks can get really, really high, and I just don’t see how anyone except maybe a Cleric or Druid will have a high enough Will save to have a decent chance to not keel over. I mean, it’s going to be *at least* 1d20 + 26 (read: 36.5 average), and most people probably won’t have a much higher Will save than +15, if that. Pg 24: Not a critique so much as a suggestion: perhaps druids could also choose to form a Nature Bond with a specific location instead? More useful for NPCs, but it would be cool if , for example, the party came up against a druid in her glade and wished they had lured her out of it first. Pg 27: I dunno, but it just seems to me that the Fighter needs just a little bit more, especially now that feats are more common. Maybe more fighter-specific feats would do it. Pg 30: It isn’t totally clear that he can’t spend, say, 2 ki points to get 2 extra attacks, or 15 ki points to get 15 attacks. I think it’s pretty obvious what the intention is, but an extra sentence to nail it down could avoid confusion. Also, ½ monk level rounded down or rounded up? Finally, I don’t think Slow Fall is so powerful that it should have the additional requirement of being within arm’s reach of a wall. It would be pretty cool, actually, if he never takes damage if he’s within arms reach, and can fall the listed distance in freefall before he risks taking damage. Pg 31: Abundant Step is cool, but I’d rather it could only move the monk Close Range away at caster level = monk level. Paladin: I was kinda disappointed that it didn’t follow the trend of giving classes X points to spend and keeping the Smite Evil uses separate from Lay On Hands. I guess it kinda makes sense, but still (Also, in the final release, my hope is that the Paladin description will be careful to oust the “detect *THUMP*” paladin as a fraud and charlatan.) Pg 32: Divine Bond: It’s a tad unclear what “bonus” means, as well as whether or not, say, Flaming and Holy cost the same number of points. I can infer that that’s what the section’s trying to say, but it isn’t totally self-evident. Also, there isn’t actually a duration listed (1 minute per Paladin level is technically only the amount of time the weapon glows, since it says nothing about the abilities), and it also doesn’t say anything about whether or not two uses of the ability can stack with one another, in which case a 20th level Paladin could potentially have a +24 weapon for 20 minutes if he blew all 4 uses. Finally, how this interacts with the base weapon’s enhancements is a little unclear: it says “doesn’t stack,” but implies that only enhancement bonuses don’t stack, that you couldn’t turn a +5 weapon into a +10 weapon, but you could turn a normally +5 flaming freezing electric holy weapon into a +5 flaming freezing electric holy brilliant energy speed weapon. This is fine, but it needs to be clearer that that’s what it’s trying to say. Pg 33: Why not let the Paladin call the mount more than once per day? He can enhance his weapon more than once per day, and frankly, the mount strikes me as less dangerous in general. I don’t even see a problem with letting him call it as often as he wants. Aura of Resolve: should function on the Paladin even if unconscious. Pg 34: Aura of Righteousness: should function on the Paladin even if unconscious. Holy Champion: the Paladin should be able to choose whether or not to banish the outsider. Pg 36: It would be nice to be able to play a spell-less ranger. Pg 37: Hunter’s Bond: neither bond functions for a solo ranger, which is unfortunate since if any class lends itself to the antisocial personality type, it’s the ranger. Maybe the hunter could choose to be really good with poison? Or trapping? Or even better at hiding? I dunno, something. Pg 38: It’s a little unclear exactly who sneak attack affects and who it doesn’t. I take it zombies still don’t have to worry about it, but it looks like it requires a DM call. Also, it would be really nice if there were an option for a sneak-attack-less rogue. Pg 39-41: Certain Rogue talents should be able to be taken multiple times. Combat Trick should certainly be ok, and the same goes for Minor Magic, Major Magic, (either 2 extra times per day, or another spell) and Resiliency (use it more times per day). The same goes for Improved Talents: Defensive Roll (more times per day), Opportunist (more times per round), and Feat. Also, Skill Mastery should give her 3 + int bonus number of skills, so if her Int goes up or down after taking this, it changes the number of skills she can take 10 on. Pg 42: Ah, the Sorcerer, my old friend. How long and hard I’ve argued to make you better. Let me give you a little history: over on the WotC boards a few years ago, the chic thing to do was post a Sorcerer fix. It seemed more people wanted to do that than everything else combined. Anyway, when the smoke cleared, it seemed to me that there were four main problems with the Sorcerer: 1. Staggered spellcasting. You know, how all the real casters get the new spell level at caster level (2*spell level -1), but sorcerers have to wait that extra level. It’s arbitrary and unnecessary, so remove it. 2. Too few spells known. One more spell known per spell level gives them enough chutzpah to get along. The bonus spells from bloodlines help, but first, they shouldn’t be even further staggered, and really, I think the bloodline abilities are enough by themselves to get it across that sorcerers get their power from their genes. Also, 6 spells per day is much more than they need, so it’s ok to drop it to 5/day, or even 4. 3. Metamagic time increase. Also arbitrary, also unnecessary. Let the sorcerer be good at metamagic out of the box, it won’t break anything. At the very least, let them finally use Quicken spell. 4. Material components and scroll use. They really just don’t make sense for the sorcerer. They should have to be trained in Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft at least before they can use Scrolls. Since Pathfinger doesn’t have XP costs, I don’t see how we can remove pricey material components, but it would be cool if there were some way. I dunno. Also, we found that giving sorcerers a slightly altered Thematic Spell (from Magic of Faerun) was a great way of making each one distinctive. For those of you without an obscure 3.0 Faerun book, Thematic Spell basically means all the sorcerer’s spells have a similar *ahem* theme (like darkness or tiny flying skulls), or something happens to the sorcerer’s appearance when he casts (ie electricity crackling, floats off the ground an inch, clothes float, eyes glow, etc etc). He also added +1 caster level to ½ Sor level spells. Anyway, those are my suggestions towards fixing the Sorcerer. Pg 43: Abyssal level 1: pretty much useless. When is it ever a good idea for a Sorcerer to go into melee combat? Same with 9th level. Pg 45: Celestial Wings: there’s no listed action to activate this. It’s Su, so I suppose it’s a Standard Action, but it should probably be stated here too. Ascension: if the Sorcerer has tongues, he should be allowed to swap it out for free. Within Reach: As a bigger change, I’d suggest making all save-or-die effects merely drop you to -9 hit points and falling. With that change made, though, Within Reach would need to be made a little better. Destiny Realized: just make all critical threats against the sorcerer automatically fail (it’s simpler, not much more powerful, and doesn’t actually grant immunity). Pg 46: Claws: Also useless. Breath Weapon: this would be cooler if it was ½ caster level and instead useable once per hour / once per minute / once every 1d4 rounds. Pg 48: Incorporeal form: also doesn’t have a use listed, and probably should. One of Us: it gives you leeway re: appearance, but I don’t see any harm in tossing out a few more suggestions on how it might manifest. Pg 49: So… a bonded object is basically +1 spell slot? But any spell the wizard has in his spell book, right? Or does “any spell the wizard knows” refer to spell mastery-ed spells? Also, specialist wizards should take a -1 caster level to all non-specialist-school spells (with Universal being tuned down a bit, consequently). Finally, Sorcerers and Wizards were fine with a d4 hit die. Standardization of hit dice is nice, but not super important, particularly since Barbarians break it anyway. Pg 52: I’m torn on whether or not to add Climb and Swim together. On the one hand, they clearly represent very different things. On the other hand, they aren’t really powerful enough to justify keeping apart. My inclination is to bite the bullet and add them. Other than that, I like the changes. Pg 62: Perception (Scent) looks too easy to me. Maybe it’s just that I have a terrible sense of smell, but I’d think it should be +1 per foot rather than per ten feet. Pg 68: Arcane Strike: Would be nice to be able to burn spell slots to add to attack and damage. Pg 70: Cleave: I never had a problem with it before. It was just a fun feat for the fighter. (Same comment with Great Cleave later). Pg 76: Channel Energy: Should probably only heal half the amount of damage it deals. Pg 77-8: Grapple: looks good, but also has a lot of “if-then” statements, which are tricky to run. Pg 81-2: Abjuration: I like Protective Ward, but would like it a whole lot more if it were what the specialist ability were based on. Like, it starts giving more and more bonuses as the wizard goes up in level. Maybe it gives a bonus to saves as well and energy resistance and spell resistance/immunity or something. Also, with respect to all of these Specializations, the spells definitely shouldn’t be spell-likes. If it has a pricey material component, they should have to pay it just like normal. I’m not going to comment on the Cleric domains, largely because clerics don’t interest me, and that’s a lot of information to go through. On a skim, though, it mostly looks ok. Pg 100: Breath of Life: The healing shouldn’t be able to bring someone above 0 HP, and it should be able to fix death effects (setting the person at 0 HP). Also, good clerics should be able to spontaneously lose a 5th level slot to use this. Pg 101: Darkness and Deeper Darkness: Aww, I really liked that darkness spells shut down darkvision. It was one of the funnest parts about them! At least let deeper darkness do it… Pg 104: Find the Path: Why not just make it easy to counter this spell? I mean, the only problem with it is that it makes the concept of “lost city” absurd, right? Maybe the spell works through a sympathetic connection to maps, so if there isn’t a map to the place, it can’t get you there (uncommon/rare maps might require a check or something, and you only get a vague direction or something). Pg 117-8: Slay Living: Um… it just deals damage, so the title is a total misnomer. Pg 118-9: Wish: Inherent bonuses shouldn’t take away from one ability score, nor should you need to cast them in immediate succession. Pg 142: Just to check, is magical item creation the same, except no XP cost? Allright, that’s it. I’m sure there are other problems, but I tried to limit myself to aspects of the game I feel I have a good hold on. Thank you!
Now, there are classes that specialize in each of the abilities, but each of them also has built-in reasons for wanting them to be high. While not everyone needs every ability, they are universally punished for dumping any given ability... except for Charisma. Here, let me show you: Strength: Encumbrance, melee attack/damage, CMB, skills useful to everyone. Dex: AC, Ref save, ranged attack (including some spells), skills useful to everyone. Constitution: HP, Fort save, buffer from death vs. con damage/drain (vs mere KO in the case of the other ability scores) Intelligence: skill ranks Wisdom: Will save, skills useful to everyone. And: Charisma: ... Nothing not role-centric. Only characters with Cha-centric abilities and the face character have any reason to have Charisma above 1, and that's not a fair comparison since all the abilities have class abilities based off them. A fighter with a Charisma of 1, for example, isn't any worse at what he does than a fighter with a 10 or an 18 in it, but he can't get away with a score of 1 in anything else without paying for it (Dex means his AC and Ref save are suffering, Wis and his already-poor Will save is even worse, Int 1 and Int 8 aren't any different, true, but Int 8 and Int 10 are, and obviously he can't dump Str or Con). The same goes for the Wizard, Barbarian, Rogue, Druids (Wild Empathy excepted), Clerics (Channeling excepted), Monks, and Rangers (Wild Empathy excepted), and if a Sorcerer could get away with switching to Int, he would be a fool not to. In other words, I'd like to give Charisma a few more built-in benefits, at least one that everyone would like. Thoughts? |