Bryan Bagnas's page

Thanks for listing all the faults that folks think are problematic. It reminds of time 9 years ago when Wizards was fixing 3.5 and making 4.0. It seems the same list of problems keeps coming up. I guess it's all about personal views. For me D&D 4.0 fixed nothing I thought was wrong and kept things I thought needed work, thereby making it D&D worse. Pathfinder addressed the issues I had with the d20 mechanic. The same situation seems to be brewing now again. Different people have issues with different aspects of the rules. And like everything in life, not everyone will be happy.

BTW, I've taught many kids how to play Pathfinder and they don't seem to have issues with learning. That's the beauty of the d20 mechanic. It's easy to understand. Start with the basics. As they are understood, layer in more and more nuances until you reach full rules. Hmm, where is my Trailblazer book.

I still don't understand what they are trying to fix with a second edition. For me, they fixed a lot of the problems with 3.5 and introduced a lot of great classes that fill both story and party roles. I don't particularly like archetypes and hope they get rid of it in 2E. The system is much more streamlined already. I've played a d20 system since 2000, all the rough edges are gone in my point of view. The d20 mechanic is great and Pathfinder's implementation has been very good. Again, what needs fixing?

My main problem with psionics is that it uses and entirely different set of mechanics than the magic system that already exists. Different mechanical systems are harder to balance than like mechanical systems. This was a big part of the balanced/over-powered arguments inherent to psionics in 3.xe. IMO, if the pathfinder magic system (both arcane and divine) are going to use a Vancian system, then Pathfinder psionics should use a Vancian system as well. This will maximize the ease of integrating psionics into with the core system and minimize the "psionics are over-powered!" arguments that will ensue within 3.2 seconds of the rules' release.

Vancian psionics should satisfy the need for a thematically different system (the flavor is different) while remaining mechanically similar to the current magic system.

-Skeld

This is an excellent idea, something they should have done before. Make all three magical systems use the same rules. Brilliant.

And there are people out there that feel psionics are a form of magic. You may disagree but it is out there.

I believe Elements of Magic by ENPub converted the magic system to something akin to psionics in XPH (or like ars magica). Anyway, that is a nice system too. Perhaps there can be a variety of options to suit the campaign's needs.

at the end of the day though it is a pretty mediocre ability. All it is good for is a minor distraction and getting in the way of your own party..

I think it is based on style of play. I have a conjuration wizard that uses summon monster 75% of the time. And they have saved our butts time and time again.

For instance, attacked under water. Summon dolphins to help out.
Flying creatures with bows, summon eagles/owls to distract them.
Need to hit something with magic weapons, summon something with magic DR since their natural attacks count.

At higher levels, animal growth buffs summon animals quite a bit making them mini-tanks, damage sponges, cover or attackers. Adding more versatile creatures to the summoning table would make it better. Not stronger creatures, creatures with more environmental features or special abilities.

And for those cases where the bad guy has high AC, either aid fighter's attack, aid fighter's AC, flank with rogue or engage in a grapple.

Creativity is the name of the game. As is controlling the battlefield with critters. Summoning done right is not a mediocre ability.

Not everyone plays D&D the same way. And not everyone sees weakness in all the "other" options.

I downloaded the new Beta and didn't see references to either of these items (Psionics and Prestige Classes). Are they coming out in another book or addressed in later editions?

Of course, that also begs the question of PFRPG Modern.

Will there be more/other class alternative features?
* Such as Rangers combat abilities other than TWF and Archery, for instance other combat trees for monk-like styles (brawler, spear specialist/tribesman, etc.)
* Other uses of cleric turning (a la Kalamar's alternate abilities for turning/divine powers accessible via a special feat)
* spontaneous divine caster class

Comments so far:
I started a new campaign using 3.P and found that first level is much less dangerous but still heroic. The changes that affected this seem to be
* class HD matching BAB.
* favored class bonus (nice flavor btw)
* racial hardiness (nice flavor too)

That's it for now.

Perhaps you make the Turn/Rebuke undead one of the options a first level cleric picks. "Do you want channel positive healing blast or turn undead young acolyte?"

Or make the channel energy a feat taken by folks with turn/rebuke. You can convert the turn into a deity-specific ability (a la Kalamar), channel energy, or cone shaped undead damaging energy, etc.

In 3.5, my turning cleric has ended many a final fight just in the nick of time. Great heroics. Likewise, in non-undead fights, he was relegated to the healing battery. That's the job description -- it's a team effort.

In other games with undead and no turning, that's been a nightmare. Preparedness and balanced parties are always better than charging the next room. Many things in 3.5 aren't broken, just missing a few spots here and there.

We need to keep the core of the system intact and add a layer of coolness as options on top. Turning are not underpowered nor game breaking (except after levels 15 perhaps).

That's my two cents.

Wizards are bookish and knowledgeable, they should have 4 skill points per level just like their knowledgeable druid friends. That's the thing that really bothered me about 3.x wizards.

The other was speak language is a cross class skill. Fixed in the alpha. yeah.

I don’t like critical threats. Part of the excitement of playing 2nd edition was rolling a 20.

I disagree here. I love the crit threat idea and it's one of my favorite aspects of 3.x system. A straight roll of 20 is too common for a crit. Back in 1E, there were lots of crits on both sides of the screen with the characters usually dying.

When I heard that 4.0 was doing away with crit threats, that really made me sad. This is a great mechanic for handling crits and keeping them rather rare. And thank goodness no crit tables -- those were a nightmare. Crit multiplier is way simpler to handle in game.

Keep it is my vote.

It would be really cool if wizards got 4+int bonus of skills instead of 2+int bonus. Wizards are scholarly and know all kinds of things. At present in the alpha book, druids, barbarians and rangers know more things. That doesn't make sense. Granted, they won't be good at physical skills but book learning ... oh yeah.

And thanks for putting Linguistics as their class skill. That was my other pet peeve. They know all sorts of languages if they study magic.

Most home games I know give wizards that, so let's fix it with PathRPG. Just my two cents.

My PCs had a difficult time with the Hextorites, but only at the end. They spotted the tieflings in the cathedral and killed them quickly before they could warn the others. They blasted the zombies in the surprise round. They killed the other tieflings who were surprised rather quickly too. Then they wiped out the fanatics and the beast (who crit'd the fighter to negs).

Of course, this sapped their resources when they hit the next guard station. That's when the poopstorm started -- the rest of the temple showed up in waves. It was close 2 of 4 PCs unconscious (fighter and cleric). It became rogue & sorcerer vs Theldrick. Lots of fun as I tried every dirty trick I could. An epic battle.

My players are used to tough fights because we're all LG players and nasty encounters above EL are par for the course. In hind sight, the mods are tough for 3-4 characters and easy for 6. That seems to be their target party size.

My suggestion for parties of 3, hire a min/maxed NPC to fill out the party. For parties of 4, be generous with magic resources like potions, scrolls, wands of CLW, alchemist fire, guard dogs, etc. They need the umph early on. If you play it right, they'll run through the stuff fast.

BTW, for PCs using silence against grimlocks, grimlocks can't "see" into silence so they can't ambush anything. when they fight in a silence field, they have a blind mischance. (blindsense) They "see" through hearing since they don't have eyes...and they can only "see" 40 or so feet. I played a grimlock devoted defender before and these things came up quite often.

I had a situation where a monster got a crit and then

got a 20 to confirm.
20 was not enough to hit the PCs armor class.
There is no ruling in the core books.

The nat 20 is an auto hit and a crit-threat. On the second roll (to confirm the crit), a 20 isn't an auto hit since it's to confirm a crit. If they roll a 20 and add their attack bonus and it still doesn't hit the necessary AC, then it is just a hit. No crit.

I thought it would be cool to share the experiences of my group in the form of our campaign journal. I would be interested in reading other group's blogs.

Our blog: http://cyberaow.blogspot.com/

Our site isn't really an automated blog, but it is our campaign website and session log. Getting wormy in Greyhawk at http://www.bagnas.com/worms

We're just starting TFOE so it's still short on activity.

My daughter is 7 (second grade) and she excels at adding several numbers together and reading. I thought, that's all you really need to know to play. We've run small games where she can swap characters out to try new abilies, even mid-dungeon. I've run her and my nephews through a dungeon over Christmas allowing the cleric to have unlimited healing -- so the flow and excitement is maintained. I didn't want them bogged down with resource management.

Once I taught them about flanking and AoOs, they started to excel at combat. The D&D Box set is perfect. It has maps, figs, pretty character sheets and simple adventure. They had a blast and we spent too much time having fun.

Even with adult new players, we run an open advice table offering suggestions and advice. the monsters don't play to full capacity and only use very basic rules. Once everyone (kids or adults) get the hang of the mechanics, then you can explore tripping, aid another, bull rush, etc.

Earlier this year, my daughter wanted to DM me through a dungeon and did a great job until she got tired. She understood the consequences of my bungled pick locks, placed monsters and decided their reaction to my actions. It was great to see.

To introduce younger kids, I play with my regular group and allow my younger kids to play with minis on their own mat (on the floor). They play like normal kids but see adults doing the same. It reenforces their abilities to pretend and how to behave in social settings. (Heck, i've brought all my kids to full conventions without worry.)

D&D is great for team building, planning, tactics, reading, math and storytelling. I highly recommend it for kids of any age. It's a family game without dumbing down.