Gary Teter wrote:
Which is why I didn't put it in the playtest forum to begin with.
Because either you are trying to create something unique and the GM is expected to arbitrate it because the rules don't really address it or you are trying to create something that exists and no one cares. If the unique magic item creation system was expanded to a complex point-based design system about how and what magic items could be made, I imagine there would be a lot more threads on it.
Finding overlooked, potentially gamebreaking rules is what a playtest is for, beyond other details. In appropriate threads, that is.
Finding and fixing them. You missed part two.
Especially when you explicitly design for the opposite result.
A good game is about telling a great story and having fun.
Which you can do without any rules at all so let's stop playing the true role-player card in an argument about mechanics.
I like Pathfinder because it embraces the sprit of the world's oldest RPG.
Once again, if you want a game that doesn't embrace that spirit and has balance in the forefront, please look to 4th edition. You are not going to find that here.
"If you want a game where the rules are second to the story, please go play White Wolf, you won't find that here."
In fact, I have recently grown more excited about a 0e retro-clone Swords & Wizardry.
The irony is palpable.
I must agree and disagree with you in turn. A race creation guide is the most beneficial for GMs in homebrew worlds (and perhaps theoretically for adventure path writers to make new creatures but that may be marginal due to constraints). But this does not erect a wall between players and race creation. Either we can pretend that players won't want to create their own races because "it is for GMs" or we can accept that will happen and not accept problems that the GM is going to have to fix himself that should have been fixed in the first place.
The only concrete rules are in the core book. The rest are options that may or may not be balanced when used all together. I believe that to be true under TSR's AD&D 2nd Edition in late 90's, WOTC 3.5e in the mid-2000's, and finally currently under Paizo.
Clearly because TSR and WotC wrote stuff completely stand-alone from each other and uncollaboratively and otherwise poorly designed, Paizo should continue that traidition.
You want a good game; you got have a good DM with good players. No rulebook is going to make it so. This is the game from 0e to 3.75e.
Great, not we get into the existential sophistry.
Options whether for the GM or player are still only options at the GM's discretion. Options bring flexibility and power but in the wrong hands can bring abuse. I don't want to be "protected" by the ruleset just to bring perceived balance.
You didn't answer the question.
Look at anyone trying to break it. You manipulate it in one way or other and the whole thing easily turns into a parody of race creation. That should not be doable. There should be inherent limits here and there to stop that or at least dampen it. If they try to attack it from the end result instead of the root cause, like the Eidolon, they will hurt it for everyone.
And as far as bad abilities go - look at Change Shape and Spell-Like Ability when picking 0 level spells.
Their playtests rarely change much from test to print. They usually through in some bad balancing and call it a day.My problem is that this premise is looking a lot like the Eidolon. And that didn't go well at all. The release was not only just as broken as the playtest, it managed to confuse the hell out of everyone with all the unique rules and arbitrary constraints they made up to try and balance it which did nothing to actually address the problems.
The first clue of what is wrong with this is they are CLEARLY balancing it based on existing races and using that as a rule of thumb to reverse engineer the race creation system out of them. The problem is, races aren't balanced for spit. Unless they COMPLETELY overhaul this - which they won't - the whole thing is going to be another Eidolon.
You want some fix suggestions?
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
No, it doesn't.Roll a d20. A 10 or greater hits. A 9 or lower misses. Please explain what of that needs to be arbitrated. Needs.
100% balanced is impossible. An attempt at balance and a rationale approach to the issues is what is sought after.Do we really need another Eidolon debacle?
Not wanting to troll, Cartigan, but it looks like every thread you start is a rant about a random topic that could be ended with "GMs decide what will be in their game" but doesn't
Because no one understands that is not a valid rebuttal to "something is inherently wrong with the game design."
Alright, apparently I hadn't said what I meant to say clear enough to separate the RP from the mechanical.
God forbid I or anyone else want a product that doesn't have to be arbitrated.No, that is quite possibly the HIGHEST offense to commit around here. What one must do, clearly, is suck it up, not critique any design, and toss out anything they don't like after the fact.
Being fixed 100% and perfect is wholly different from "Let's let the GM arbitrate it instead of trying to make it make sense."Did ANY part of the Eidolon nerfing balance it? You know, like the wholly arbitrary limiting of natural attacks? No, because that was never the REAL problem, the problem was giving them 8 arms and using attacks with manufactured weapons. The problem was that they could even GET 8 arms, not that they could attack with all of them. The symptom was addressed half-assedly, not the disease. That is what I am feeling will happen here.
Umbral Reaver wrote:
I think his point is that GMs have been making custom races for their worlds since long before the ARG. They don't need 'permission' from the book to make custom races.
No, my point is saying "It's GM only!" isn't a good selling point. Nor does saying "GMs can ban race creation!" fix the problem with race creation.GMs can ban all classes that can cast spells, but that doesn't do anything to the fact that spellcasting classes are widely more powerful than non-casting classes.
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
But they aren't balanced. Did you read anything I wrote? If you look at the forest instead of the trees, you see that the ability for players to create uber powerful races is a symptom, not the disease. They can do that because it isn't balanced.
I was thinking of armor as DR, my bad. I'm not completely familiar with words of power, but I do know it is still an alternate system.
I don't think it will have a "harmful impact" any more than the Words of Power system or the piecemeal armor system will have a harmful impact; it'll remain a rarely-used optional system, I suspect.
Except those are alternate systems. This is an option, but not an alternate so it is more likely to be allowed into a game since you don't have to overhaul the entire game to accommodate it. The whole thing is going to be a huge mess.
That isn't remotely what I mean by advancing and you know it.If you are going to play a game where you level up incredibly slowly, why level up at all? The point of leveling up is to gain new abilities. There is literally no other reason to do it. If you almost never level up, why not just never level up? I would refuse to play any game where I never gained any new abilities or gained new abilities so slowly that I might as well have never gained any. You are just doing the same exact thing in the exact same way forever. It's boring and pointless and I am pretty sure there are better game systems designed for that than d20.
Scanning the playtest release and several posts about the "Make your own race" stuff, I'm getting one of those classic "bad feeling" feelings. The first clue was the very idea of "Make your own race!" after the Eidolon fiasco (that maelstrom is still going on*). The next was some of the completely absurd values of certain things (look at SLA cost for 0 level spells and Change Shape). Then a few of the people with good eyes have made the inevitable completely imbalanced, yet perfectly legal races that Paizo is going to try to "balance" around. Which I asked General Achbar about and you know what his response was (after the Eidolon fiasco).
I am getting the feeling that this is going to be an entirely new "Eidolon evolution" problem, but even worse since it isn't just one class but custom races playable by any class. Paizo just isn't good at getting balancing right, I'm sure there are a couple reasons for this but that's the short version. A book section dedicated to creating custom races is going to be a can of worms that can't be fixed and while not impinging on PFS is going to have a harmful impact on the game outside it.
I think the "Create your own race, for fun and profit!" needs to be tossed right the hell out right the hell now and they should just throw a some extra races in there to fill the space.
*Bet you didn't think I could work maelstrom into a sentence.
What.Saying "I wish I could bend metal" has NOTHING to do with knowing one COULD bend metal. I could say "I wish I could turn AOL CDs into gobstoppers" doesn't mean I could do it.
Sokka angered the all powerful knowledge spirit.
They ALL angered the knowledge spirit. Their entire party. Oh, and THE WORLD.
The only reason the Library will come back is if the Knowledge spirit sees that Sokka is a changed person and coughing up a huge amount of Knowledge on the fire nation will go a long way toward that.
Only Toph is currently seen as capable of sand bending so if any part of the library exists in the real world she will be able to access it.
Or you know, the Avatar. Even Toph couldn't bend a palace out of thousands of tons of sand.
I would assume E6 and taking a year to gain a single level are entirely different. There is a difference between never gaining a level and never advancing.
Lo, ye can of worms shall be opened and out of it shall spilleth a great many horrors unimaginable.
1) Your DM was both right and wrong
2) This can of worms has been opened before and shall be opened again. Apparently many DMs, in their infinite forest blindness, have decided that summoned creatures can and will do nothing but fight and you can only use them to fight because otherwise they don't want to die so will refuse to doe anything that kills them - other than fighting. Oh, and they can't do any utilitous things that DON'T kill them because that would mean the Wizard is being clever and we can't have that.
So, you are saying that if you change the environmental effects rules, it's worse to wear heavy armor? Yeah, having a dick GM DOES make it worse to wear heavy armor.
Fighters should get a bonus to the penalty anyway due to having armor training. Of course, casters should have Endure Elements prepared for long treks in the jungle.
Riku Riekkinen wrote:
Which is actually a weird thing to say because Fighter (the class) actually gets BETTER at using heavy armor and it makes no sense to not use it. Now, that might hurt Paladins and Cavaliers.
That is actually NOT the question and were it the question, no one is answering it anyway. Though that is a good question because I have NO IDEA what role the monk is supposed to fill.
The question is about which classes can still function best with restricted magic items.
Full casters -> 3/4 casters -> Paladins -> Rogues -> Fighters -> Rangers -> Barbarians/Cavaliers -> Monks
If you look at my answer, I listed monks as first out of the non-casting classes,
And I listed it last out of all classes.
so all the arguing about casters and how effective they are is not really relevant.
Then why do you keep bringing it up and with nonsense arguments to boot.
However, they will be impacted by lack of scrolls, wands etc. that they often utilise.
No, they really won't. The only expendable item I have ever seen casters use consistently is a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.
Let me put it this way: of the non-casting classes, the monk has the most magic-like abilities.
No, not really. Even if we discount the half-assed casting, Paladins exceed them. And get way better stuff for it:
They get a lot of class features, but they are criminally underpowered and most are finite due to being based on Ki.
Hence, he is able to do the best in low magic for the same reason that the caster is good in low magic, in that he does not depend on magic items to get magic effects. He will still be impacted by lack of rings, amulets, bracers, belts and headbands, but no more so than any other class.
The Monk is bad in low magic for the same exact reason he is bad in high magic - it's a bad class. It gets a ton of features but the class is highly MAD with nothing to show for it but the ability to not actually do anything very well but max out AC, which is useless. It's features are extremely gimped. The Monk was bad in 3.5 and Paizo did nothing to fix it.
The other fighting classes are impacted by lack of magic in their weapons and armour.
The other fighting classes can use real armor and have class abilities that increase their damage.
The monk isn't - or at least not as much.
The Fighter's, Paladin's, Barbarian's, and Ranger's damage output was only MARGINALLY based on magic item bonuses.
I am not arguing that the monk is better at fulfilling any of the roles of these other classes in any way, I am just pointing out that the monk doing what the monk does is less impacted by lack of magic items than, for example, the fighter doing what the fighter does or the wizard doing what the wizard does.
Yes, the Monk is equally good at being a Monk in either high or low magic, that is to say the class is just as bad with magic items as it is with no magic items. I agree with you.
Wow. No. Just no.You like Monks, we get it, but that is a laughably bad assessment.
A caster's power is in.. BEING ABLE TO INHERENTLY USE MAGIC. Scrolls, wands, and staves are bonuses but they are not NEEDED for the classes to fight anything at the correct CR. Scrolls, wands, and staves are basically "ring of the ram" or "apparatus of the crab." They have their uses but are ultimately not as good as their inherent abilities.
Combat classes need magic items, yes, but their flat magic bonuses are lower than the benefits from Strength or the benefits granted by their classes. A Monk is never going to have the equivalent of full plate and a heavy shield without magic items, and if he DOES manage that, he won't be able to HURT anything. Moreover, he has to use an expendable resource to gain those things with his bare hands. Combat characters can just pick up a new weapon with the property. Or can rely on casters to enhance them. Due to someone at Paizo hating Monks, they can't benefit from those enhancements. Paladins can enchant their own weapons and are partial casters. Rangers are partial casters and get bonuses against certain enemies. Fighters increase their own weapon damage and to-hit. Rogues get sneak attack.
Sure, if you want to spend your day avoiding getting beat up, play a Monk and run away. If you want to actually contribute without magic weapons, play something else.
Which was wholly different from Stolen Earth/Journey's End where almost everyone still alive related to Doctor Who was involved and it still made sense.
Riku Riekkinen wrote:
Then I guess you won't be changing weapons. You are better off staying with your primary weapon than trying to use a +1 Sai.
Which means in thousands of years not even the Avatar knew how to metal bend.
4. The Point Being That the presence of Sokka with large volumes of Lore 'might' encourage a return of the Owl with the Library to retrieve them. If there is any part of it in the real world then having an Earth Bender like Toph capable of Sand Bending on a Powerful scale might be useful in digging it out.
Riku Riekkinen wrote:
Then your GM is a git.GM: "Hey, I know this is a homebrew world and that you specialize in longsword, but here, the only magical weapon in the country is a sai. Have fun!"
Tangible Delusions wrote:
Fezzes are cool?
Crimson Jester wrote:
Yes but that's what I said; he realized the marks on his arms were associated with the Silents. With Morris' interpretation, he wouldn't even have been able to remember that.
Can you even take an AoO while unarmed? Attacking while unarmed without UAS (including while gauntleted) provokes an AoO, if I recall.
And the word you are not bothering to include is very important - "automatically." There is no rule for "automatic" actions other than the English definition of "they happen." It doesn't say you can pick up the weapon as an immediate action - a defined game action inside a defined game time space. Automatically throws the whole "pick up a weapon" out of whack because there is no defined game time space. The logical conclusion is you gain control of the disarmed weapon without any consequence.
Matthew Morris wrote:
Like how everyone else is running away after taking off their eye patches?There is clearly an invading force trying to physically break down the door. You don't need a computer eye patch to figure out to shoot whatever comes through it.
You can't remember the Silents when you look away or what you were doing at the time of looking at them. What you are saying is they can't remember ANYTHING about ANYTHING. There is CLEARLY a force trying to break down the door. His men clearly died after clearly shooting at things and oh yeah, there are dead people around them. They wipe out any memories created when looking at them, not any memories created relating to them ever - the Doctor still realized what he and Churchill were fighting.
That's an excellent way to get dead in D&D.
Matthew Morris wrote:
Badass yes, but utterly stupid and nonsensical. Everyone else had already removed their eye patches yet were still running away but he isn't removing his because he will forget what he is supposed to be fighting? Whatever comes through the damn door like a tempest.Then he is completely incapable of doing anything and is disabled the second they break in and Amy has to save him, again.
The only good part was when they were walking away from the room down the hall and were like "We should go get dinner" "Yeah" "Then get married" "Yes."
David Fryer wrote:
I am hoping that in Series 7 we can see Mickey and Martha Smith again, even if it is just in a one shot.
I'm surprised they weren't involved in the finale. It looks like the 11th is ONLY dealing with Rory, Amy, and River.
Because, as she literally says, she jumped there directly after escaping the Byzantium. They are periodically checking back and forth with each other. Though it's not even remotely clear why she waits until then to go back and reveal what the Doctor said at Lake Silencio.
Also, what's unclear, ultimately, is WHY the Doctor asked River to marry him. Clearly it was to give someone (it's not exactly clear whether it was the Doctor or River) access to the tesselator's control banks as a family member, but it doesn't show us why that's important.
That is a rather inane selection of feats. What level is this little circus even at?
Yeah, it's basically "insert media here." Especially those events skimmed across in the season premier episode.I can't think of any stretch that long in the Doctor's life between things happening.
Riku Riekkinen wrote:
But that is NOT what we are discussing. We are not discussing a blind booster tournament, we are discussing a world in which it is hard to find magic items, not a longsword
One, it doesn't make sense.She is pregnant with Tenzin - her third child - in your book? When the hell does this take place?
And the Owl Spirit uses metal bending? When the hell did it learn metal bending? Toph made that right the hell up.
Moreover, how do they EVEN GET BACK THERE? It's buried in the desert - if not removed to the spirit world. I mean, maybe if the Avatar breaks out his Avatar powers and raises it but even the Avatar is usually less powerful than the great spirits and ancients of the world.
Ko was probably killed or banished by the Waterbending Avatar after he found out what Ko did. Which is why it's in the spirit realm.