Dennis da Ogre formerly 0gre's page

79 posts. Alias of Dennis Baker (Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16).


1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Coridan wrote:
Staying in one class till 20 is always going to be dull no matter what incentives there are to it, because then your character seems like "just another [insert class]".

What is seriously broken with D&D is that WotC found out the way to maximize profits was by upping the number of books they sold. Quality no longer mattered just volume. People's insatiable desire to 'stand out from the crowd' made it easy for them to crank out books and books filled with junky slasses, PrCs, domains, feats, magic items, spells, and races and most of it total garbage.

To be honest if having the coolest funkiest character with the newest features and bling is important to you then I suggest you try out 4e, WotC are the masters at cranking out new stuff on a regular basis. Who knows maybe this time they got it right and they will be able to get the quality part down too.

I'll let you in on a little secret. Cool colorful characters are not a bunch of stupid stats on a page they what you inject into them. Regardless of whether it's a Human Fighter 20 or a Wizard 3/ Master Specialist 7/ Abjurant Champion 3/ Archmage 5. If you need a crutch to make your characters interesting then maybe you should try playing the base classes and focus on role playing instead of being so obsessed with class features.

Some of the coolest characters I've played were generic base classes.

Blackdragon wrote:
Last week I was at the local B&N in the game section with their huge pile of 4E book on an endcap. next to it is a selection of other RPG stuff as well as The Complete Idiots Guide to Dungeons and Dragons, and The Complete Idiots Guide to Being A Dungeon Master. The punchline. THe guides were all 3.5. Imagin some newbee buying a full core set and then picking up the guides. Pricless!

What I saw at B&N was piles of 4th edition books scattered over 3 areas, I'm not sure if that means they are selling like hotcakes or if they weren't moving at all. I'm leaning towards the latter.

Ok, I'm going to throw this out here. If I put together a Wiki or a Blog would anyone be interesting in plonking around with this and maybe playtesting it?

Rogue with 1 rank of Knowledge other than Local == +1 through +3
Wizard with 1 rank any knowledge skill == +7 through +9

Class skill bonus is generally relevant throughout the career because at higher levels skill checks are generally higher. Granted that difference isn't near as significant as it is under 3.5 where the XC skill would be 1/2 the class skill

Duncan & Dragons wrote:

Are you guys serious? Paizo has too much stuff on their plate. The truth is 4e is an intro to D&D. If you want to move up to Pathfinder, play a PfRPG fighter. Admittedly, that does not help a brand new DM much. If PFRPG has time to spend, making PfRPG forward compatible from 4e should be the objective.

EDIT: OK, maybe a 5 level intro book that the fans create.

I agree, Paizo has their hands full if you figure PfRPG hardback in August '09, maybe Monster Manual in '10... I love the idea but wouldn't drop it in their lap. This would be a great project though.

Vic Wertz wrote:
[the d20] license will be terminated as we release the new game system license.

Umm... wow, that's harsh. Where did he say that? I'm just curious what the forum was, I have no doubt it was said.

I guess it's a good thing most of your product is OGL and not d20.

Hey thanks everyone! I think I'll just wait until #12 ships then subscribe in the mean time I'll drool over the player previews. I'm not sure I'm going to buy the campaign setting book yet or not.

I would love to see something like this, the problem is you would break compatibility with 3.5... which means you would have to provide another complete set of adventures, supplements would work, etc.

@ Fake -- Microlight is IMO way too stripped down and it would probably be easier to strip existing stuff down than vice versa.

For the basic version I think I would go with:
Fighter <-- No iterative attacks, maybe an increasing damage bonus
Rogue <-- Simplify the skills system even more
Sorcerer <-- Close to the Battle-caster variant
Cleric <-- Converted to spontaneous casting

I think spontaneous casting would be better because in my group memorizing spells is generally the most confusing part for beginning players. I suspect one just flat out cheats not because she's malicious but because she's lazy.

Actually maybe a better idea would be some 'basic' classes that could drop into PfRPG. They would be slightly lower power than their core equivalents but engineered for easier play and would be playable in existing modules.

Ok, we're in the middle of Red Hand of Doom right now and enjoying it quite a bit but I would like to get started with an adventure path next. We probably won't be starting anything for at least 3 months. I'm just trying to figure out...

Where do I start? Should I just wait for the next series to start and subscribe then? When does the next series start? Is there a way I can just buy an entire adventure path at the subscription rate now?


MarkusTay wrote:
Why would anyone in their right mind give up all of their company's legal rights and get NOTHING in return (except the silly logo)?

The GSL grants you permission to use certain amounts of WotC IP that are denoted in the SRD, and it allows you to use certain branding on your product. To say you get 'nothing' in return is far from true. If you are releasing a product for 4th edition your product will be more successful under the GSL than if you published it unlicensed.

To be honest the GSL is much better than the situation was back in the day. It's just a matter of 2 steps forward, one step back. Some of us just refuse to take that step back.

Dread wrote:
I did find the rule on Favored Classes though...It looks interesting. Thanks, now all i need is a page number for multi-classing *chuckle*

There is non right now. Therefore it's unchanged for now.

Page 11 wrote:

Favored Class

Each race has a favored class, representing its natural affinity for a specific set of skills and abilities. Whenever you take a level in your race’s favored class, you receive +1 hit point. Humans and half-elves frequently get this bonus, unless they multiclass. You do not gain this bonus for taking levels in a prestige class, regardless of its focus or theme.

MarkusTay wrote:

I don't think it can be legally enforced, though - To say that a party can't use an "Open Source" that is public domain, AFTER you are no longer under contractual obligation to them?

WotC might try to enforce that, but I'd like to see it stand up in court.

Well you are misrepresenting the situation. OGL content is OGL and always will be. You can always use that.

If you have a product line that you release with GSL licensed content you agree to give up the right to use OGL content for that product line. The contract is limited in scope and as such would likely be enforceable.

We just finished Hollows Last Hope with a solo + NPC/ DMPC and it worked fine. Out characters leveled up to 2nd level before the monastery which made it a lot easier. We didn't have a cleric but we used the PfRPG alpha rules so the character had a lot more hit points at first level plus the heal skill allowed them to do some overnight healing beyond the typical 1HP/ level.

Our character was a ranger and he rolled well with his animal empathy when he encountered the fox so the fox followed them and helped them also. Personally, solo or small groups make animal companions or pets like this shine.. not so great when you have 7 people in a group though.

The encounter with the 2 wolves and the worg was pretty challenging, you might consider just one wolf.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

In this thread James and Lisa both sound like they have no intention of publishing 4e products. Granted James is mostly talking about Pathfinder Products, the fact that they haven't even bothered to pick up and learn the 4e rules makes me think they aren't planning on publishing any 4e stuff.

In general their strength and their core customers are in D&D 3.5 products. I don't see them investing time and effort into building a 1 off 4e product. Of course I'm a notoriously bad guesser.

Devil of Roses wrote:
Hmmm, perhaps something like Acrobatics covering balance and tumble and the like and Athletics covering Swim, Jump and Climb? Or would that be too 4e? Just a thought, makes sense logically.

I kind of like this, the thing is no one really ever puts ranks in swim. When some of the classes have a whopping 2 skill ranks per level and half your group is wearing armor it sort of seems pointless.

Of course my PC group has to attack a group in some half submerged buildings this week. I'll bet they're missing their swim ranks now :)

I definitely like the idea of merging climb and jump into one skill, I'm not entirely sure about swim though but considering that is the only way ranks would get put into it it might be a good idea.

I lost a daughter 3 years ago this week... sometimes it feels like it was yesterday. Cherish your memories but try not to let them burden you too much.

My condolences and even though we've never met my thoughts are with you Today.

Well looking at it today there is only one 'cancel' order. It's like going into a casino and only seeing the losers. They should post up new subscription requests too :) (j/k)

I think having the Customer Service board first is a subtle message about the companies priorities. While I agree seeing "Cancel XXX" in big letters at the top of the screen is a bit of a turn off on the other hand I love the fact that they put customer service first.

When you hit reply to it does show (and quote) the post you are replying to. Are you hitting Add New Post instead? It would be nice to see the last few posts instead of just the previous one though.

LazarX wrote:
Ogre, if you really have a list of 100 issues regarding domains, you might want to start a thread on it.

Don't look at me, I wasn't the one who promised it.

James Risner wrote:
Takes time. Here is 7 books. I will post more as I read more books:

James, I think it's safe to say that all cleric NPCs using domains will need to be either converted or used as is. How much of an issue this is is debatable, many people feel it is not a big deal, obviously you do and if you haven't been convinced by what's already been said then I don't think anyone else is going to change your mind.

In general your list still boils down to a few issues that are repeated over and over. I do see a couple more issues with converting domains and that is that domains provide access to some PrCs or Feats.

One thing I notice is that many cases you list are cases where a prereq is intended to limit a PrC or feat to a specific class and the domain is used as a backdoor method of getting into a class that wasn't designed for a cleric. I don't see that as a compatibility issue... I don't see it as an issue at all.

snobi wrote:
Goodbye INT. My thief is dumb and loving it.


I love it. I tend agree with the consolidation. Rogues shouldn't have to be geniuses to be good at their core class stuff.

Over the next 3-6 months? Absolutely not, 4e doesn't have the install base and they can make more money on their existing subscriptions.

Medium term 1-2 years? If 4e takes off it's quite possible they would make more money on 4e sales. In fact it's likely.

Longer term? With the GSL Wizards holds all the cards for 4e. It would be hard for me as a business to tie my fortunes to the whims of another corporate entity so thoroughly. If PfRPG takes off then Paizo will control their own destiny and whether they fail or succeed is truly based on their own efforts. What happened with Dragon and Dungeon magazines could happen with any single aspect of D&D gaming. Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice shame on me. Paizo doesn't want to get burned twice.

Keep in mind Paizo doesn't have to be competitive with D&D for the company to be successful. They just need to keep a platform that is active and compelling enough to keep their existing user base then grow that.

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'd be all in favor of slower advancement as well.

But given that many people enjoy a fast rate as well - why not split the difference, and write the Pathfinder APs after the switch as following the Medium chart? Then a sidebar (like the old Dungeon "scaling the adventure" ones) could give tips on using fast or slow advancement instead.

While I like the idea of and it would work quite well would this really work though? It seems to me the players would just always be behind the 8 ball, always a level or 2 behind where they should be but they would still progress through the game just as fast. Thus "Fast" progression becomes Easy, and Slow progression becomes Challenging but the pace of the game remains the same.

I think what the OP had in mind was that instead of having 10 encounters for a given CR you have 20. The only way I could see achieving this would be by adding optional encounters to the AP with the caveat that they should be skipped if the player is following a slower XP progression.

Personally I love the idea of spreading out the gameplay and making leveling up a bit more of a reward.

Krome wrote:
And absolutely nobody here who does want a nicer looking website has even once mentioned they want it to resemble Gleemax or WOTC, so why on earth do you still use those as examples? That is as irrelevant as saying we want the website to look like Cookie Monster.

First, I can understand your concerns about navigability raised in your previous post. Making the web site more user friendly is always good and there are a few jagged edges around here.

You mention the d20SRD site and that is an awesome site. The perfect example of why websites don't need bling to rock hard. The only use of graphics on that site are the parchment background. You talk about "Web 2.0" but d20 is all straight html and hrefs with a touch of CSS. Other than the nav bar that slows down page scrolling I think d20SRD is a perfect example of why Paizo shouldn't change.

Worth1000 is a totally different concept for a site.

Renderocity... I'm just not sold on what makes discussion any richer on that site than here. The white on black text is tough to read. The signal (amount of stuff you want to read) to noise (blingy stuff, adverts, and non-message stuff) ratio is quite poor. On my rather large screen I loaded a page and less than 25% of the real estate on initial page load was actual messages. On a similar Paizo page more than 60% of the page is actual message. The other WoW based site was ok but I fail to see how it was any better than Paizo. Discussion is discussion, having a tan textured background does not make it any more relevant or interesting.

Compare: Renderocity versus Paizo

If bling is so important why is the worlds most successful websites one of the least blingy?

Here is a very popular mountain biking forum (generally 300+ users online at any given time) I use:
Other than the necessary adverts it is a very simple site, very readable and usable. People are drawn to content... not bling.

Also, considering Paizo is first and foremost a web retailer Paizo's home page bears a striking resemblance to the most successful web retailer out there.

If you want to talk about hunting down the post monster that eats posts at random... I'm with you there. Some incremental upgrades supporting a few more BB codes and maybe image or attachment support in posts, I'm cool with that also but overall it meets the task of enabling discussion quite well. If it ain't broken why fix it?

Selgard wrote:
BAH. freakin thing ate my post. *grumble!*

Frustrating. I've gotten into the habit of hitting CTRL-A CTRL-C before hitting the post button.

You have not answered the question of why the Wizard 10/ Cleric 1 advances in clerical power faster than a normal Cleric 1 either (after 10 levels a Wizard 10/ Cleric 10 has CL 15/15).

Arknath wrote:
The things you are pointing out are, in fact, deemed by WotC to be the equivalent of a new level of spell access plus more spells per level. Look at a 5th level wizard and a fifth level rogue. A fifth level rogue ONLY receives a +1d6 sneak attack damage and a wizard gets access to 1 new spell level and no more spells per day (not counting the one new for 3rd level). So, to counter the fact that they do not receive an increase to spells they receive a feat.

Sneak attack==Class specific power

Spells == Class specific power

Class specific powers do not increase when you multiclass unless you use a PrC that specifically allows it to. That is what Wizards "Deemed". If you want to have one class specific power scale with level then you should have parity.

Arknath wrote:
In fact, if you look at the rogue's progression (SRD) there are only two levels where the rogue actually receives another bonus ability other than trapfinding/trap sense increase. So, by reverse engineering, we can surmise that a +1d6 to damage when flanking is pretty beefy and equivalent to a spellcaster level.

???? What ???? There is no 1 to 1 equivalence here. By reverse engineering give me a break.

Arknath wrote:
rage = bardic music = turning = wild shape = smite = sneak attack = stunning fist = full spellcaster level.

There is no equivalence because the powers all work completely differently.

You want equivalence? There is no more rage/ day mechanism, rage points determine how many rounds a barbarian can rage. Under your idea a the multi classed barbarian's rage duration is fixed forever while the duration of Bulls strength for the wizard would increase every level. Similarly the number of rounds per day a cleric can use Divine Power increases under your system and again the Barbarian's rage duration is fixed.

Similarly the bonuses from Greater Magic Weapon increase with level but the bonuses from Inspire Courage do not. Not # of times per day but the bonuses derived from those class abilities.

Keep in mind that the changes to this system are less than 6 months old and are in flux. The Paizo management has already said that fixing high level play is one of their #1 priorities (IMO they are very very close to having fixed low level play). The Beta is in the can but likely will not resolve the issues you bring up.

The system as it is right now, and even when the beta is released is an incomplete product. I can't make any promises about what's going to happen with high level play but based on Lisa and James' comments I have a feeling it will be significantly different than it is now in 16 months when the final product is released. So whatever you decide to do now, I strongly recommend you check into the finished product when it's released in August of '09 to see if it's resolved your issues.

-- Dennis

RogerWilco wrote:
I think caster/martial multiclassing should work in such a way that you get that a Cleric10/Sorcerer10 is about as powerful as a Fighter10/Barbarian10. There should be no need for classes like the Mystic Theurge and Eldrich Knight and all the other PrCs that specifically exist only to make caster/caster or caster/martial combinations viable.

Your solution somehow makes your second class advance faster than it normally would. An example: Take 10 levels of Wiz, put on the robes and become a cleric, You advance 10 levels somehow your caster level is now 15... Somehow a cleric that has wizard levels advances faster, this makes sense?

Why should caster level increase when the power of Bardic Song does not?

If caster level increases due to continued use shouldn't a rogues sneak attack continue to increase as well? And before you break out the pointy stick argument assume for a minute that he's multi classing with Wizard.

hogarth wrote: could do exactly that in AD&D, assuming you were a dual-classed human!

Indeed but noone did because it was horrible. You couldn't use your old class until you were higher level in the new class, your THAC0 didn't increase until the new classes THAC0 was higher than the new one. I seem to remember that you could never add levels to your previous class either. I don't know anyone who actually did this option. There might have been a few NPCs with this setup though.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
In RAW, you do not gain retroactive skill points (or languages) for Int increases. At 8th level, that wizard gains 6 skill points (2 + 4), not 13 (2 + 3 + 8). Likewise, at 16th level, the wizard only gains 7 skill points (2 + 5), not 22 (2 + 4 + 16). DMs will sometimes do so when building NPCs to simplify the task, but it shouldn't apply to PCs.

In 3.5 this is true in PRPG it is no longer the case. As Shusumo pointed out, in PfRPG skill ranks are always equal to X+INT Bonus. If you INT goes up your skill ranks do. This is also supported by the description of ability drain on the second to last paragraph of page 148. Unfortunately I don't know that it's said expressly in the alpha that when you increase your INT every 4 levels skill ranks go up. Certainly if long term magic item use increases skill ranks permanent ability increases will as well.

Regardless, even with 5 skill ranks per level wizards ARE by far the knowledge skill kings. Rogues have a ton of skill ranks so they can invest them in... skills, things like stealth, climb, acrobatics, etc, Rogues don't generally have skill ranks to invest in knowledge skills. Rangers, same thing. Bards? Maybe bards are the #1 competitor to the knowledge skill king but shouldn't that be the case? Even so, most bards invest ranks in several non-knowledge skills plus their generally moderate INT keeps their ability modifier lower than the wizards.

To be honest wizards are a huge benefactor of the Paizo skill rule changes, perhaps even more so than the rogue.

Neithan wrote:

That was before someone figured out how much more money you can make with selling books to players too. :D

Currently, official WotC Books hold over 700 PrCs.

Regardless of how many are out there unless they revised the rule somewhere it's still relevant. Obviously the ban stick should be used very sparingly but I think it's completely appropriate where someone is obviously gaming the system.

Timespike wrote:
I'd really hate to see multiclassing totally hamstrung like some people here want to do. Whatever happened to GM approval and adjudication?

I agree, no new rules on PrCs. DMs just need to grow some backbone if their players try to pull a fast one.

After the sorcerer nearly gets eaten when he's ambushed by a giant frog the party rests for the night. Without any healing magic we rest for a day and a half and bust out the new heal rules (no cleric in the party). The sorcerer who was injured is at -4 HP and the ranger made his first heal check for 8 hours of rest. The first 8 hours of rest for that night heals up 6 HP of damage bringing the sorcerer up to 2 HP.

The characters stay at the campsite for another 24 hours for a day of 'complete rest'. Another successful heal check and the character heals a whopping 12 (4HP/ level for full days rest + DC 15 heal check) more damage. One full days rest and a DC 15 heal check and he's back up to full HP.

So, while I think it's cool that characters have decent healing outside of casters I am surprised at how much healing the party can get in a short period of time for such a low DC heal check. At 4HP/ level/ day any character can be fully healed in 3 days. Maybe if the DC was higher or on a sliding scale (For example a roll of 15 heals 2HP/ day, a roll of 20 heals 3HP/level/day and 30 or higher heals 4HP/level/day.

Anyhow... since we have no healers we're taking full advantage for now.

Long-Term Care wrote:

Providing long-term care means treating a wounded person for a day or more. If your Heal check is successful, the patient recovers hit points or ability score points (lost to ability damage) at twice the normal rate: 2 hit points per level for a full 8 hours of

rest in a day, or 4 hit points per level for each full day of complete rest; 2 ability score points for a full 8 hours of rest in a day, or 4 ability score points for each full day of complete rest.

You can tend as many as six patients at a time. You need a few items and supplies (bandages, salves, and so on) that are easy to come by in settled lands. Giving long-term care counts as light activity for the healer. You cannot give long-term care to yourself.

Well the reason I mention waiting for the Beta is because Jason has said on a couple threads that combat feats reworked. Other stuff I haven't heard about.

Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
What I want to do here is stop bickering about these things and seek as to why he changed things and that is it. I am not here to argue with anyone.

As I said above... you are talking about stuff that is no longer relevant. Wait for the beta then comment.

First, nice table, I've been thinking about doing something like this. I'll have to bookmark this thread.

Archade wrote:
* Beast shape spells should specifically say swarms are disallowed …

First, the wording in the spell:

Beast Shape wrote:

When you cast this spell you can assume the form of

any Small or Medium creature of the animal type.

Note the word creature is singular. I suppose you can say that a 'swarm' is a singular thing but it is not a single creature. Read the wording of the swarm template "Swarms are dense masses of Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny [/b]creatures[/b]...". I know in D&D sometimes the word creature is used to describe whatever you happen to be poking with your sword but in this case it's pretty clear.

Archade wrote:

* At no point does beast shape I-IV grant any animal the ability to rage (dire badger, badger), attach (dire weasel), blood drain (dire weasel), hold breath (crocodile, porpoise), ink cloud (octopus, squid), keen scent (shark), spring (cheetah) – oversight?

* If someone turns into an aquatic animal, shouldn’t they be able to breathe underwater? The spell doesn’t specifically say

Much of this is answered in the Polymorph section which is confusingly before the Domains and Arcane Schools on page 80.

"If the form grants a swim or burrow speed, you maintain the ability to breathe if you are swimming or burrowing." So the while it doesn't expressly say that you gain hold breath I think it's pretty clear that you can breath as the creature of that type can. You could actually interpret this rule to imply that you gain the breath water ability while in any form that has a swim ability.

The text on page 80 does not much of the rest of the things you brought up, nor does it touch on racial skill bonuses. The implication is that they are not granted.

Repairman Jack wrote:
After all, fair is fair. Or do just casters benefit from multiclassing?

Every multi classing combination has a different amount of synergy. The idea put forward by Arkanth is a fix for one specific poor class combination synergy. Specifically any combination that involves a class whose powers are focused in their spell crafting. Classes that derive much of their power from non-casting abilities -- Druid, Bard, Barbarian, Rogue, Monks... these classes are left in the dark.

To date the theory behind why these classes are left in the dark is "They poke things with sticks so it doesn't matter how you mix and match those classes they all get better."

SagaWeaver wrote:
Arcane Bloodline

Hey, who's to say I don't want to extend prestidigitation? ;) I agree it's a bit clunky and the choice of having a power you can't use for 2 levels or a feat and a power you can't use for 1 level kind of sucks.

As for why not give him a second level spell at 3rd level? Because then there would only be one sorcerer bloodline ever played.

Well considering it's the 'Arcane' bloodline how about simply allowing him to use one of his daily spell slots to prepare a spell as a wizard does rather than for spontaneous casting? The ability would advance once every 5 levels to a maximum of 4 spells per day at 18th level. Limit the spell memorized to 1/3 of the casters level so a 9th level caster could memorize 2 spells of 3rd level or lower.

Maybe fewer prepared spells per day? I thought 4 at 18th level would be good.

Seeing as the wizard's arcane bond steps on the sorcerers toes a bit it seems that turn about should be fair play :)

Dragonchess Player wrote:

Alignment: Any non-lawful.

Skills: Decipher Script 7 ranks, Disable Device 7 ranks, Escape Artist 7 ranks, Knowledge (Arcana) 4 ranks
Spells: Ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 3rd level or higher
Special: Sneak Attack +2d6 (emphasis mine)

Seems like arcane trickster is ok, but all of the PrCs prereqs will have to be given the once over to see if they need to be reworked based on the new skill system and faster feat progression.

Jason has already said that the feats are being overhauled in the Beta. The changes he's done were based on feedback from the boards and playtesting. They are being fairly tight lipped about what specifically has changed in the Beta so... Don't you think it's a good idea to wait for the beta then comment on what the current rules are?

Considering Jason has already expressed that the feats are going to be significantly overhauled in the Beta (based in part on discussions on this board) don't you think it's a good idea to wait a bit and see what the changed feats will look like in the beta?

Wolvorine wrote:
I'll grant you all that, and it makes sense. But you have to admit, just looking at...

Well the new skill system effectively helps characters that want to spread skillpoints around a lot because every new class skill you take gives you 3 class skill bonus points. By 2nd level the 16 INT wizard will have 7 ranks in most Knowledge skills. Every time his INT goes up by 2 he gets a new pool of skill points go up significantly.

If the 16 INT wizard drops his bonus attribute into INT each time at 8th level he will be INT 18 and get his normal 5 skill ranks plus 8 additional skill ranks because his INT went up, then at 9th level he gets 6 ranks. Same thing will happen at 16th level, 6 skill ranks plus 16 for the INT increase.

Steven Hume wrote:
I been thinking about this and how many DM have to now deal with PCs with 20 stats? I mean +5 att and dmg 1st lvl, even wizards with DC of 15+ how many people that are using the system have seen an increase of 20s in starting stats? ahhh am starting to miss the 2e max stat charts heh

Well honest rolls with 4d6x6, or the 15 point buy in tend to seriously limit the number of 20s you see on character sheets. Granted when rolling up characters you do see those 18s but not nearly on every character.

Overall though, mental stats are getting a major boost from the new racial limits.

While you are thinking on improving sub-optimal multi class choices please make sure to fix the bard/ monk and the the barbarian/ bard, these combinations get seriously punished under the current system.

I want my Gonagle.

Kirth Gersen wrote:
So I propose that a "soft" rule is better, one along the lines of "each DM will decide which prestige classes are appropriate for each campaign, and what the restrictions are on following them. Therefore, the official rule is that no character may take levels in a prestige class except by prior DM approval, no matter what specific guidelines your DM prefers."

I might suggest the wording for that rule "Prestige Classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available for your campaign. The best prestige classes for your campaign are the ones you tailor for yourself."

Whew... what a mouthful, I know it sounds pretty severe but that more or less matches what you suggest. Incidentally it's plagiarized from the 3rd Paragraph on the Prestige Class heading on page 176 of the DMG.

The entire reason PrCs were put in the DMG instead of the PHB originally is because PrCs were never intended to be handed out wholesale to any player who wanted to use them to break the system.

It was later when Wizards realized what a cash cow PrCs were that the trouble started but if some whiney player tells you he should be able to take 1 level of XXX because it's allowed in the rules point him to paragraph 3.

Wolvorine wrote:

Well no, but I would expect Albert to have some wicked ranks in Knowledge skills, and if he were a wizard, some equally wicked ranks in Spellcraft.

And, maybe I didn't read carefully enough, why are we assuming that with Pathfinder a 1st level Wizard will typically have an Int of 18-20? That's in the Pretty Darned High range.

Keep in mind that a human, half elf, or elf wizard will have a +2 INT racial bonus so getting an 18 in an ability is a lot easier and less expensive using point buy. Even so, I don't think that's an unreasonable point of view, I'm not sure about "Pretty Darned High" but several players in my group don't have 18s in their primary attributes. Would you consider it's reasonable to assume the wizard has a 16 INT? That means he has to roll a single 14 (unless of course you are running a race without an INT bonus which is also possible).

So the 16 INT is gives the wizard +3 INT bonus... We're no longer talking about Albert Einstein, now we're talking about the math professor at UCD. He's a sharp dude but Einstein he ain't.

So he gets 5 skill ranks at first level, more skills than anyone except the ranger and the rogue. He will put a rank into Spellcraft and the rest into knowledge skills. So 4 knowledge skills with 1 rank, +3 for class skill bonus and +3 for INT... +7 in 4 knowledge skills. That's a pretty good knowledge of 3 disciplines outside his primary study.

Keep in mind Wizards are primarily focused on learning about magic, it's their bread and butter. Einstein was a genius in physics and mathematics but was he a zoologist? A botanist? Architecture? An expert on comparative religions?

Knowledge (Arcana) is probably the closest thing in the D&D world to a PHD in Physics. I expect a wizard should be good at that, and have a smattering of knowledge elsewhere... that's pretty much what you've got.

Viktor_Von_Doom wrote:
Too many people shucked their elf and gnome and halfling for catfolk, goliath, whispergnomes, and tiefling.

Not one of those races exist in my campaign world. Heck dwarves and elves are pretty rare and children follow them around when they are in towns.

I have a lot of trouble with the concept of a world that developed 15 primary races let alone the hundreds or thousands in splat books. I've also seriously consolidated the monsters so there are far fewer red-shirt races. Overall the game just runs smoother if I can see how the races interact with each other in the world scale. Hey... I'm not suggesting you guys play that way.

I've found that generally the people who decide they want to play some uber race are either munchkins or total newbs. The munchkins are doing it to break the game and will be enough trouble without their special race. The newb is probably picking a race that is sub-par and would have enough trouble pulling their weight with a normal race.

Again... I'm not suggesting my way of DMing is for every group... *shrug*

-- Dennis

Well considering Wizards primary attribute is intelligence there is a certain synergy here. With Pathfinder this is amplified even more A 1st level wizard will typically have an INT of 18-20 or 6-7 skill points per level, higher than anyone other than a rogue or a ranger with a high INT score. By 8th level his INT is likely 20-22 for 7-8 skill points per level... at 16th level the Wizard is likely have many more skill points than even the rogue.

Even if this were not the case, I would still suggest that the rogue should get more skill points. The wizard spends his time/ energy learning to cast spells. Rogues spend their time/ energy breaking into things and sneaking around.

Would you expect Albert Einstein to be an expert infiltrator, better than a trained operative?

Taliesin Hoyle wrote:
I think it should be level divided by four. Every time a player gets a stat bump, they get to use an extra buff. First to third level characters can only have one buff...

Why hurt low level characters when the problem is for high level characters?

Overall I'm just glad that Lisa and James recognize this is a high priority issue with the game.

Sledge wrote:
I have to second this. I have players that prefer their online anonymity. Having to personalize a free product has prevented them from downloading the alpha test.

The registration and personalization take almost no personal information to do. It's less personal information than most internet forums require. Heck, it doesn't even confirm your email account before letting you DL it.

If they are that paranoid about privacy then maybe you should just preorder a couple dead tree versions of it and pass them around your group in August. Of course then they won't be able to participate in the playtest feedback in any case because registering for the forum requires all the personal information to download.

Todd Johnson wrote:
Funky, WoW-style loppy donkey-ears are an abomination that should be eradicated like a cancer.

Like So?

I'm all for that. Anything that is taller then the top of the elf's head or sticks out more than an inch or two sideways is irritating though.

I do find it quite amusing that this thread is so ancient and the point long since decided by Paizo yet this thread lives on.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>