It has been a long time since posting on these forums, but since the success of Pathfinder Unchanged (still around the corner for most), I felt this was the perfect time to simply share a few changes of our own that has vastly improved the feel and quality of our games.
Now first I want to start out by saying these are just two rules changes we introduced, but I feel have had the best/easiest impact on play. When making these changes, we always had golden rules that any changes we made must be easy to explain to players (a few sentences or less), must not break the game, must not break logic/common sense, and must only "fix" what we felt has truly been broken. With that said:
A light, heavy, tower shields gain an additional +1 shield bonus. So Bucklers still grant +1, light shields grant +2, heavy grants +3, and tower grants +5. In addition (like how mounted combat feat works), as long as you have a shield equipped, and are still receiving its bonus to AC (didn't shield bash, etc), once per round you can attempt to block an incoming attack. The blocker makes a melee attack roll, if that check is equal to or higher than the attack roll made by your opponent, then the shield takes the damage instead. If the attack roll is a critical, then you can attempt to block the confirmation roll. If successful, the critical hit is a normal hit instead and the shield eats the damage too.
Example: Monster attack 5th level fighter with a 16 STR and a shield. Monster gets a 23 on his attack roll. Fighter attempts to block (hasn't tried this round), and rolls a 25. Success. The monster still rolls damage. Monster does 17 damage. The shield take 17 damage (minus hardness). If the shield breaks, that's it. Get a new shield or kill that monster already.
I have always loved the idea of counterspelling, just hated the rules for it. All of the normal rules for counterspelling still apply, except:
As an attack of opportunity, a spellcaster can attempt to counterspell. The spell must still be a valid spell for counterspelling, and must be within range of the spell he is casting. Regardless of success, you cannot cast a spell on your turn (rule for only being able to cast 1 spell a round minus quicken still applies).
Example: Mage A is attempting to cast a 2nd level spell. Mage B attempts to counterspell. He has does not have the Improved Coutnerspell Feat, so he decides to counterspell with Dispel Magic. He must be within medium range to do so (the range of the spell 100 ft. +10 ft./lv). Regardless of success or not, Mage B cannot cast a spell on his turn, except for a quickened spell. He can still use items (wands, staffs, scrolls, potions, etc) and class features or that crossbow you've had sense level 1. This rule allows counterspelling to be more "reactive" than "proactive", which to me is always how its felt in literature.
Well, if these go over well I will post our fixes for metamagic feats (making them worth a while and not outdone by rods), evocation spell damage as well as spell damage dice in general (making high level spells actually feel like higher level spells), and a few specific spell tweaks like Magic Weapon being a worthwhile spell.
I ran a very brief (so far 1 shot) playtest that involved a level 5 swashbuckler. He had 3 NPCs out the NPC Codex. A level 5 bard, cleric, and rogue. During this playtest, it was almost exclusively a dungeon crawl. During which he encountered a few groups of enemies, traps, locked/jammed doors, a few skill checks, and one "boss" encounter at the end.
Swashbuckler is a "slow and steady" class. He almost always fought defensively, getting his AC to a 26, and relied on attacks of opportunity (combat reflexes) to get the job done. Damage output was still effective.
Swashbuckler works well with others. During the encounter, he was a great asset to the rouge and bard as he provided flanking, and "DPS" (absorbed a lot of attention from enemies). The bards inspire courage was enough to offset the accuracy penalty for fighting defensively.
Swashbuckler is very MAD. As the class clearly relies on at least 3 ability scores to be effective. The class needs a good STR as any melee class should. He needs a good CHA for his panache ability, and a good DEX to offset the AC and weapon finesse. The player put this class solidly next to the Monk in terms of requiring good ability scores and anything less than a 20pt buy is just not worth playing.
Swashbuckler is a very narrow class...almost too narrow. There will be almost no distinction between one swashbuckler and the next (much like the gunslinger). That being said, it is very good at what it does.
The skills the Swashbuckler posses make it still effective during a crawl and out of combat utility. However, the class posses almost no class features that are useful out-of-combat other than skills.
The player enjoyed himself while playing and enjoyed the class. I asked him to rate the class on a 1 to 5 scale. He said "a 4/5. The only reason for the loss of a point is because he feels the class is too narrow and lacks any flexibility to be a base class. This might be better suited as a alternate class."
[WARNING LONG] - So I have been running sandbox games for several years now. Out of my gaming group, my games tend to be the ones of any success. By success I mean running for a while, everyone having fun while doing it, and the game coming to a fun ending. (not to say my friends games are not any fun)... I've made some mistakes, tried new things, and made improvements on my game. Recently, one of my friends attempted to run a sandbox game. He asked me for help, and he listened to the "WHAT", but not "HOW" or "WHY". Recently, his game came to abrupt end when 4 players dropped (out of 5). Not including the 2 or 3 that dropped before I came into the scene. In light of that, I want to help you guys avoid "Game Killers" of running a sandbox game.
1 - Do not tailor the game to the players or their characters. Players should be encouraged to play whatever they want. If they come to an obstacle they cannot overcome, let them fail or come back to it later. This will influence players to be more well rounded in their character creation, or at least as a group.
2 - DO NOT ASSUME ANYTHING, EVER! I cannot stress this enough. DO NOT require a skill check [OR ANY TYPE OF ROLL] to move the story/plot/mission/quest further. If the players need to find a clue to move on, they simply find it. If not, then call for a skill check. Lets use the locked door as an example. The 3 obvious choices are lockpick (if able), bash (if able), find keys (if able). If there is a possibility they could fail all 3, it should not be required to get through that door. Instead, the door should have something else behind it that helps the players if they do succeed. Such as a shortcut, treasure, or possible just an empty room (whatever the situation calls for).
3 - The 3 clue rule. When planing a mission/quest/adventure, always try to leave at least THREE (3) possible conclusions to said mission/quest/adventure or 3 clues to solve it. If the players feel/look like they are getting stuck, or are bored, or lost, give them clues. For example, I had a player get stuck trying to move through the sewer under a ruined city. Climbing up and moving through the city was always an option (a dangerous option, but an option). Never assume the players have a particular skill or a particular skill high enough (or roll high enough) to accomplish anything (see above).
4 - Be FAIR. This doesn't mean what you think it means. It means, in a TRUE sandbox game, if a character gets killed by a goblin, the character gets killed. If they fail a save, they fail. If they succeed, THEY SUCCEED. Plain and simple, whatever the outcome maybe, move on.
5 - Do NOT become attached to anything! When fleshing out your world, do not become attached to it. I know this can be difficult, especially for your NPCs you worked so hard to be cool. But here's the truth. They ARE NOT COOL. No NPC can, will be, or should be cool EVER. I use a rule of thumb that if you think the players will like an NPC, the players will try and kill them. And you need to be fine with that, and allow it to happen (because it will). This includes NPCs, locations, items, and even plot-lines. That's right, quests. Your players will hate your quest you spent 5 hours on, and love the one you spent 5 minutes on. This leads me to my next point...
6 - 10 Minute Rule. When planing a mission/quest/adventure/anything (except the world), do not spend more than 5 to 10 minutes on it. Jot down a few bullet points, important names, 3 clues, reward...and DONE. That it. Trust me, your players wont even realize.
7 - The WORLD. This is the ONLY exception to the above rule. Spend days, weeks, or even months planing the world. Create towns, cities, economy, factions, companies, governments, gangs/criminals, guilds, schools, religions, magic, and the meta-physics of your world/universe. The one thing that makes any sandbox game work is a world for your players to explore, become immersed in, and do stuff in. So, after you have a world (or a small piece of it) fleshed out, plan plenty of things for your players to do in it; and expect for about 1/3 of it to NEVER get used. See rule 6 above. I recommend creating about 10 to 20 missions for your players to pick and choose what they want to do. If the players come up with their own thing...roll/role with it.
In the end, NEVER say no. Says yes, asked for a roll/role, and decide the outcome. Sometimes players may want to do things or ask for things they cannot do or have yet...that's fine; just tell them "not yet".
A few more pieces of advice. Keep DC's low, use NPC classes ALOT, do not overuse Core classes, keep treasure rewards low but frequent, give players plenty of options, and above all BE CLEAR WITH YOUR PLAYERS, BOTH AHEAD OF TIME AND DURING THE GAME!
I'm interested in any feedback you guys have, or pieces of advice you have from times you've run sandbox/open ended games.
Our concept of leveling seems to be heavily influenced by modern (or old school) video games. But Pathfinder is not a video game. Its a simulation of something more. So, once a character (or party) has earned enough Xp to level up, when does that moment of accession occur?
At the end of the fight or encounter
After a solid rest (8 hours)
After a short rest/meditation/prayer/study
Do you have to train to earn your new class features
...or is level more subtle than that? I know I personally tally up xp in-between sessions. If the characters have earned enough, they do it before game and it really doesn't have a "moment" in my games. They are just suddenly capable of new things. In solo games I have run, I have had a player gain his class features and skill points slowly (and not all at once).
What about you? How do handle leveling "in game", or how has leveling been handled in games have you been in?
So, a few friends and I have been discussing the possibility of adding a defense variant in our games. I have always like the idea of a defense bonus, but never liked their delivery. Until now...
The idea here is, the bonus does not stack with Armor of any kind. The bonus on applies to AC (not flat-footed or touch). It does stack with shields and any other type of bonus. While the bonus does not stack with armor, armor still has the benefit of apply to flat-footed. The concept around this is promote a play style where players do not feel the need to wear their armor at ALL times.
"Oh, your wearing your spiked full plate to the bar...really..."
- or - "You are all going on a sea fearing vessel, why are you donning heavy armor." - or - "your tracking through 108 degree dessert in half-plate..."
The bonus is not large, but it does allow characters to feel like they are "defenseless" when their armor gets sundered, or they get arrested and have to break out, or they go to a court ball and need to wear nice clothes.
We call the bonus: Parry bonus to AC.
Not Proficient in armor - +1 Parry bonus to AC
Light Armor Proficiency - +2 Parry bonus to AC
Medium Armor Proficiency - +3 Parry bonus to AC
Heavy Armor Proficiency - +4 Parry bonus to AC
At 4th level, and every 4 levels thereafter, all characters receive a +1 Parry bonus to AC (or +5 at 20th level).
If you take the armor proficiency feats or later take levels in a class that grants armor proficiency, your base Parry bonus increases to match. For example, a level 3 wizard then takes 1 level of fighter. His base Parry bonus increases from +1 to +4, and he gains an additional +1 bonus to Parry for reaching 4th level granting him a total of +5 Parry bonus to Defense. If he then chooses to equip a chain shirt, his AC does not increase, but his flat-footed AC does increase by +4.
NPC classes nor monsters get this bonus. NPC's with Heroic levels do. (The difference between a Warrior and a Fighter).
As the title says, does mage armor or shield for that matter count against touch attacks. It is a force effect and does stop incorpreal attacks. As a GM I feel it should, but it is specifically an Armor bonus, so I'm still not sure.
as the title suggests, do we have a timeline as to when the UE might make it onto the PRD website. I use that website every game I run and play in. It makes it so easy to look up spells, monsters, NPC's, and updates rules, etc. I would be lovely to have a comprehensive book such as the Ultimate Equipment on there too. I would use it all the time.
Several blog posts ago, there was mention of a mythic playtest coming end of September. Well, its almost mid October and...no word as of yet. I've been checking the blog post regularly and haven't seen any mythic posts for over a month and was wondering what happened. Did it get delayed? Canceled? or is it just tanking longer to write the playtest then anticipated?
Any relevant news would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
As the title says (and I'm not sure if this is the place to post this), but the PRD site seems to be missing the ARG spells in the Spell List index and Spell index. I'm not sure if that's just an oversight or if they just haven't gotten that far yet. I'm making a cleric character who specializes in a earth/metal theme and I noticed a few awesome spells were missing from the lists. I use those to easy preparation notes instead of having to flip through books. But hey, if I only have to flip through one extra book, I'm cool with that. I just wanted to bring this to your attention (if you weren't already aware of it).
Keep up the good work guys, and thanx for all the hard work.
So, as the title suggests, I am looking for a generator that randomly produces mundane items. I like to keep my games low and make items and silver pieces more of a big deal. Regardless, I've been looking for a generator that can randomly produce a mundane item for when the players are looking through chests, searching rooms, or even looting a person. I don't like to always just dish out money and magic items.
If anyone knows of one that would be awesome. If not, is there anyone who a enough understanding of programing that they wouldn't mind taking a stab at it. I wouldn't mind helping catalog items and such I just don't know a thing about programing. My idea is to eventually add any non-magical item from weapons/armor/and gear from Core, Advanced Players, and Ultimate Combat.
...or if the Dev's out there would like to add that to the PRD website. Anyway, just a suggestion. Is there anyone else out there that would be interested in such a tool?
So, while trying to figure out the pricing formula around the spellbooks in the Ultimate Magic so that I could create my own, I realized that some of the prices listed in the book (update) are not correct.
So on the PRD website which has the latest errata, or in the pdf download, the price is listed for the very first book The Defensive Primer as 185 gp (in the book or older pdf's its 160 gp).
Neither of these is correct.
The first book calculates the price like this
0 lv - @ 5 gp each - x20 (core spells only)
1st lv - @ 10 gp each - x7
plus the cost of a spellbook - +15 gp
TOTAL = 185 gp
BUT...the book also has a 40 gp lock (average) on it and is calculating 2 cantrips that are not suppose to be in there to begin with. The rules even say that all spellbooks contain all cantrips except those in the opposed schools.
So the correct price of this book should be
0 (5 gp) x18
1st (10 gp) x7
+15 gp spellbook
+40 gp average lock
TOTAL = 215 gp
I don't have time to recalculate all of the prices, but I did notice this and was hoping someone else might notice this and correct it for future errata. Also, double check to make sure my math is correct.
Hey, I first off want to say I LOVE the new PRD, and have a hotlink to it that I use at every game I run now. The spell list and spell class list is invaluable during a game. Instead of flipping through books wonder what where that particular spell is or what book its in to begin with, I just click it...and done.
Anyways, I wanted to make a thread about request for the site and or other feedback, such as small errors. Mainly request though. I had a few of my own.
1 - The ability to sort out the spell list by school. Just like you have level on there, I want to be able to see all but Illusion, or only Evocation spells. Just thought it would be extremely helpful.
2 - A monster list. I know I've read somewhere that there are plans for this one already, I just wanted to list so that way people saw that there is a demand for it. And if you are going to make a monster list here a few request for it.
- The ability to search by CR
- The ability to search by monster type
- The ability to search by terrain
- A summon monster section that already has the summoned monster with template added. Then hot link the summons monster table to said creature.
Just had a few ideas to make the website better. I know something like that is no small task and requires hours of tedious coding and eye bleeding work...but the payoff would be so sweet.
So, I'm making a few new magic items for my next game when I noticed a big price discrepancy in a few magic items. I don't remember all of them, but the one that stuck out the most is Ring of Freedom of Movement. Now, I know a few magic items its cool to tip a few gold here and there to make an item a nice round number, but this is a few thousand gold.
So the equation on p 550 says
CL x Spell lv x 2,000
plus, sense the spell is 10/min a level duration the whole thing x1.5
Sense the item is a 7th level caster level (min needed for wizards to cast 4th level spells), that means the item should be priced like so:
7 (CL) x 4 (spell lv) x 2000 = 56,000 (already over)
then, the whole thing x1.5 = 84,000 gp.
The item is listed as 40,000. By doing some reverse math its easy to see this was originally calculated as a 5th level caster without multiplying x1.5 even. Its not a big deal, its just something I noticed. I figured I throw that out there so maybe the next errata will catch it and fix it.
I searched all over these forums for an answer to this and couldn't find one. Sorry if this has already been covered somewhere, but why are the prices listed in Ultimate Combat for specific vehicles not the same as listed in the Core Rulebook.
Example, a Galley in the Core Rulebook is 30,000 gp, while in the Ultimate Combat its only 10,000 gp. This is a fairly large discrepancy. I have players in my game who were thinking of getting a ship to carry all of there stuff and we argued about whether it should cost them only 10,000 gp or 30,000 gp as it always has been.
Is there a reason for this, such as the prices listed in UC are an updated more accurate representation of vehicle pricing. If this is the case, then why were they not updated in the Core book errata. Or is this simply an oversight. Which I'm guessing it is.
PS: I do not mean to come across as condescending or mean, just curious. I think I'm probably going to rule its a typo in the UC and should follow the Core Rulebook prices.
First i just want to say that I LOVE this book. However, as the subject line suggest, this spell just doesn't seem balanced. I'm not "trolling". I'm asking a serious question. This spell seems identical to Cone of Cold except:
Cone of Cold - 5th level spell, Wis/Sorc
Cold Ice Strike - 6ht level spell, Clr/Wis/Sorc, swift action
How is that balanced? That is equivalent to a Quicken Spell Metamagic (Feat mind you) for only one spell level higher that would normally take a 9th level spell slot to do (and spend a feat/have a rod).
I do want to know why this spell was made and what the thought process behind this is. Is there something I am not seeing here? I simply cannot allow this spell in my games until I see a reason for it being balanced.
Do you ever watch a movie, read a fantasy novel, or play rpg video game and think, man...wands in Pathfinder don't really feel like this at all. I have come up with what I feel fixes this, but I'm not sure if this is at all balanced. So please feel free comment.
Now, understand that I don't think there is anything currently wrong balance wise with the wands mechanic, I just don't like how they feel. I find too often wands in the hands of a rogue or bard, not in the hands of wizard or sorcerer (where they SHOULD be). I want to change that.
First a brief summary of the current wand rules:
Contain 1 spell up to 4th level
Contain any number of charges up to 50
Casting of each spell consumes 1 charge
Cost of creation is 375 gp x spell level x caster level
Once charges are spent, the wand is a pretty stick (useless)
Here's what I propose: PART 1
They work more like "mini" staves
Contain 1 spell up to 4th level (as normal)
Contains only 5 charges that can be recharged like a staff
Casting of the spell consumes 1 charge (as normal)
Cost is the same
Once charges are spent, the user may pay a spell caster to recharge it for a small fee (I'm thinking 10 gp x spell level x number of charges being recharged)
I'm also proposing something else a friend of mine has come up with. We have been playing around with the mechanic for a several months now and I think we've got it down to a science.
Here's what I propose: PART 2
Wands and Staff's can be enhanced (sort of like a weapon)
Except the enhancement bonus applies to the casters Spell Save DC's for all spells cast through the wand/staff
- For example, a +2 wand (cost +8,000 gp) adds +2 to the save DC's for all of the mages spells.
This means that by high levels, a mage COULD have up to +5 to all of his spell DC's...which I am fine with personally. I've always felt spell DC's were a little low by high levels anyways.
By the numbers using actual examples
20th level wizard's spell vs a CR 20 Balor
A Balor's saves are Fort +29, Ref +17, Will +25
A wizard (assuming an Int of 22) casting a 9th level spell with a +5 staff would have a DC of 10 + 9 for spell lv + 6 for abilty score + 5 enhancement bonus.
Total DC of 30
This means that the Balor could make his saves on:
Fort save could make it on a roll of 2
Reflex needs a roll of 13
Will needs only a roll of 5
Is that SO bad? I don't think so, but what do you guys think of these two changes?
As much as I love the APG, and do believe it is possibly the best RPG book ever written...there is one aspect of the game I feel is lacking...Unarmed combat. It is nearly impossible, or should I say improbable to play and unarmed character without levels in Monk. Yes, you can get maneuver feats and such, but you still end up with 1d3 damage (1d2 if small)... And the Monk, well he starts at level 1 with 1d6. Why is it so unreasonable to want a character who is capable of being effective at killing monsters with his fist.
So, I've been thinking of introducing a few new feats into my games to fill in the missing gap. They are called combat strike feats. Please tell me what you think... Overpowered? Underpowered? Not effective? Too much? Too little?
Combat Strike (Combat)
You are effective with your unarmed strikes.
Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6
Benefit: Your unarmed damage increases to 1d6 plus strength if your medium, or 1d4 damage if your small. This has no effect if you have levels in Monk.
Normal: Your unarmed attacks deal 1d3 damage if your medium, or 1d2 if your small.
Improved Combat Strike (Combat)
You're unarmed strikes are highly lethal.
Prerequisites: Combat Strike, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +11
Benefit: Your unarmed damage increases to 1d8 plus strength if your medium, or 1d6 damage if your small. This has no effect if you have levels in Monk.
Greater Combat Strike (Combat)
You are a deadly force with your unarmed attacks.
Prerequisites: Improved Combat Strike, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +16
Benefit: Your unarmed damage increases to 1d10 plus strength if your medium, or 1d8 damage if your small. This has no effect if you have levels in Monk.
I have a 6th level cleric in a game I'm running...at some point soon he will be 8th level and was thinking about taking Holy Vindicator. The thing is, 8th level cleric is also when he gets his 8th level earth and community domain powers.
question is: at 2nd level Holy Vin (when he gains a level in spellcasting), would he gain his 8th level domain powers or no? If not, should I just wait until 9th level to take my first level so I do get the powers?
Builds would look like either: cleric 7/holy vin 2
or: cleric 8/holy vin 1
So, one random night after a late game, a couple of friends and I were talking about some rules at a Waffle House (I know) and discovered an interesting issue. We first noticed the issue after a battle mage in our group did obscene amounts of damage in a single round. He had used a touch spell, and scored a critical hit with it.
Now, I know its in the rules that touch spells can score a critical hit with a natural 20. BUT WHY? I personally don't think it should and here's a few reasons why:
1 - spells deal multiple dice worth of damage (typically more than or equal to a full-round from a fighter)
2 - sneak attack deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by a critical.
3 - burst effects (such as shocking burst) deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by the critical.
4 - All precision based damage is not multiplied by a critical.
5 - spells that add dice to base damage are not multiplied by a critical.
Things that do critical
- base weapon damage
- solid bonus from ability scores
- solid bonus from enhancements
- solid bonus from buffs (such as bardic music)
So again I come back around and ask...WHY are touch spells allowed to critical? I always figured that the benefit behind a touch spell was that there was no save usually (like scorching ray) with the exception of a hand-full of powerful saves (like disintegrate).
Tell me, not from a stand point of RAW, but from your own personal opinion, do you think its fair if I can get a critical hit with a ray of disintegration) and deal (by 20th level) 80d6 damage that destroys force effects and cannot be resisted with energy resistance?
What do you guys think? In my groups we've already houseruled this out.
PS: This is not a gripe/complaint, but merely a realization and a curiosity if anyone else noticed this or feels this way. Nor is this a "why didn't Pathfinder do this...or why didn't they do that", but a just wondering why this was even a rule in the first place?
While I do realize it's a little too early to start talking about a book barely announced yet, but I (and I'm sure others too) have some THING that they REALLY want to see.
Personally, I want something that I remember being in the 2nd ed Tome of Magic book (of course I could be miss-remembering) was a table, organized by level, with every spell from every class. Written much like the cleric spell list or wizard/sorcerer spell list in the back of the core rule book, but a list that simply has EVERY spell organized by level.
I'm just curious what other things you guys might want to see, or hope to see, or think you might see. Just food for thought.
While running/charging, I know you get a -2 AC bonus, but wouldn't you also get a -2 penalty to CMD as well? The logic behind it would seem that it should be easier to trip/knockdown someone running than not.
For those of you who where following the other thread (or not), I figured a new thread would be the best place to get into the hard crunch of some final fantasy Eidolons.
For those of you who weren't following the other thread, I plan to run a FF style Pathfinder game, and while I have almost everything I need already I do need some stat's for some final fantasy eidolons. I plan to do them at 3 leveled intervals. Low (6th level), mid (11th), and major (16th). I will be using the rules for the APG (playtest) Summoner's Eidolon stats. I have changed the levels for the eidolons to 6th, 11th, and 16th to meet the requirements needed to gain some evolutions (such as large requires 6th level).
While I do already have a list of Eidolons I want to use in my game, It is not limited to said list, and I would greatly appreciate any help anyone has. The stats I present here are not finalized, and can be revised if we agree that a different set of stats better suits the "concept" of the eidolon.
Well, I'm not quite sure this is the best place to put this, but here goes. As the title suggests, when I got my print copy of the Bonus Bestiary in about a week ago I noticed something. Axe Beaks are pretty much the perfect stats for a Chocobo. One of my friends then made the comment "dude, you should run a final fantasy game".
A week later...I want too. So, I want to run a game with that Final Fantasy feel with changing as little as possible. Now, because the FF series has span over such a vast array of time frames, worlds, and styles, the feel is definitely something I need to define first.
I am basing my game around the concepts and technologies of Final Fantasy 2 (USA), and Final Fantasy 3 (USA) aka FF 6 (PlayStation 1). A medieval, dark ages game with Pathfinder RPG rules to supplement. I may pull elements from other Final Fantasy games.
Most of what I'm changing are options and flavor. I've gotten some leg work done, and have rolled around with some brainstorming ideas, but I need some help to fill in the blanks.
Humans are unchanged
Elves are humans that are naturally magical in nature (like Terra from FF 6)
Gnomes are Moogles
Halflings are kids (yes kids)
Dwarves, Half-elves, and Half-orcs are simply not available.
Bards are Red Magi
Clerics/Oracles are White Magi
Sorcerers/Wizards are Black Magi
Druids are Blue Magi
Horse prices are Chocobo prices
Axe-Beaks are Chocobos
Big weapons are a must...as is spiky hair for fighter...(hehe)
Bring Acrobatics DC's down a few notches to allow for ridiculous jump checks
A way to handle Espers
A mechanically simple way to handle materia (maybe)
A way to handle creatures to fight as solo's with a bunch of hp, without all of the CR or power (boss fights)
spell points (MP) system
androgynous clothes...looking at your FF 10 - 12
so yeah... If you notice, most of what I'm doing is simply re-Flavoring anything and limiting a handful of options to capture that "feel" of a Final Fantasy like setting. Any suggestions would be appreciated so thanks in advance.
As the title suggest, i noticed something about pathfinder. Okay, pathfinder has done an excellent job of supporting "almost" every concept for a character. Aside from classes/prestige classes, we've got feats that support
Sword and Board (weapon and shield feats)
Combat Maneuver feats
...but no feats that support a polearm-style of fighting
And i don't just mean a guy on a horse with a lance, or even the two-handed feats...i specifically mean support for the beloved spears, halberds, javelin, or even the quarterstaff.
I'm not asking for much; just a single 3-feat tree. Historically speaking, spears were the weapon of choice for thousands of years. Even well after the invention of the longsword, spears still had and extra 8 to 15 feet advantage, could be thrown, and required little to no training to use.
Just a thought; anyone else notice a lack of spear fighters in their games?
Okay, i'm not sure if someone else hasn't already thought of this (and posted it), but i didn't find anything. So, here goes:
Generally speaking, i've notice two types of desires out of a "Pathfinder Psionics"
1 - Keep power points, but nova is a problem
2 - Keep with standard rules, but lake of diversity is a problem
So, i had a concept about merging the two thoughts together to eliminate both problems. For clarification, i'm defining "nova" as a psions ability to spend all of his points on his highest level powers while a sorc/wizard/druid/cleric has limited access and must rely on lower-level spells. Nova is not defined by the wilder ability of being able to spend more than normal points for a higher caster level.
Okay, so the idea is that Psionics will have both the standard per day/known system that sorcerers/bards/oracles/summoners have, but also have power points. You don't spend your power points to cast your powers, but to augment them (listed under the powers description) or to add metamagic (err metapsionic) feats.
Something sort of like this...
Psion 5 with a 18 Int
0 (talents) - at will
1st - 6 +1 bonus
2nd - 5 +1 bonus
3rd - 3 +1 bonus
0 - 6
1st - 4
2nd - 2
3rd - 1
power points - 16
4 + Int first level, +2/level thereafter.
Metamagic mastery - you can spend 2 power points to modify a power with a metamagic feat without increasing the casting time.
Far Mind - spend 1 power point to make a range touch attack using your Int modifier instead of your Dex modifier to deal 1d10 damage +1 damage per 2 caster levels.
Charm - as charm person spell but,
Augment - spend 1 power point to include animals, monstrous humanoids, plants, and vermin.
I know i didn't give it the slow progression like the sorcerer, but that was just a thought of Int based spontaneous caster.
Okay, my question doesn't necessarily have to be a +3, but i was wondering if there where any rules against enchanting a robe like armor. This way, a wizards AC doesn't such without having to boost yourself with spells.
Lv 5 Wizards gets a +1 Robe (+0 base Ac, no max dex, -0 ACP, 0% ASF)
So, he could have a AC of say 14 (+1 robe, +2 dex, +1 dodge)?
Could a player take the Ability Focus feat to improve say stunning fist DC, or assassin death attack DC? As a GM, a player in my current game is a monk assassin and wants to know if this is possible. I have ruled that it is okay for death attack as i see that qualifying as a special ability, but stunning fist? I'm not sure.
Feel free to answer either or both questions and thanks in advance.
I posted this in response to the lack of playtest results being posted on the boards, or the tremendous amounts of speculations, or arguing. I am, however, curious as to if anyone else has notice a similar problem with the oaths?
I haven't had a chance to playtest this yet, but i am a little concerned about the summoner's spell list being a little too powerful. Running into similar balance problems as with a Players Handbook 2 class the Duskblade, where it only got up to 5th level spells, but there were 8th level wizard spells on that list.
Now, yes the bard has similar "higher level spells on lower level slots" type of list, and of course by the level he achieves these spells it is on par with the full on caster.
However, this list is aimed a little more towards buffing (especially his eidolon), and these types of spells can be the most powerful. Sense these spells do not require saves, the lower-level(ness) of these spells is not a down side. An example is Haste is a 2nd level spell, greater invisibility 3rd level, and teleport circle as a 6th level spell.
just curious if anyone else notice this, or feels this way.
Okay, so i read both of these feats like 10 times each and unless i'm blind and missed something (errata?) these two feats should stack. The reason i ask is because i'm playing a ranger (archer) build and this would be interesting. Now, i know the general rule of stacking is that it isn't cumulative but always based upon the base factor.
So if my math is right, an archer doing a vital/manyshot with a longbow would deal 3d8 as a single attack + deadly aim + point blank shot (if applicable). If i've got this right...awesome.
ok...i was making a Cavalier NPC playtest. i began to stat up his mount when i realized under druid animal companions, the advanced horse section says special ability: war trained (see Pathfinder Bestiary)
i looked, i did not see anything. What exactly is this referring to in the bestiary? I get that the animal does not receive the normal penalties in combat, but what does this has to do with the bestiary? is there some other special ability i missed.
okay, I'm trying to design a trap for a modern/futuristic setting that implements a room that gradually gets colder and colder and colder. I've got a good idea of stats, but I have little idea of how to rate its CR.
here's what I've got
Freezing Room TrapCR 12 Type mechanical; Perception DC 25; Disable Device DC 30;
EFFECTS Trigger location Reset automatic reset
Effect onset delay (1 round); (1d6 cold damage, plus an extra 1d6 cold damage every additional round to a max of 10d6 cold damage by round 10); never miss; multiple targets (all targets in 30-ft. square chamber)
...and here's the break down of it's CR
Percep 25 CR+1
DisDvc 30 CR+3
Auto reset CR +1
...where i get tied is the damage. Should I just use the max damage as its calculating factor?
Dmg 10d6 (average of 35); multiple targets (35 x 2 = 70; 70/10 = 7)
total CR 12?
does that look about right? thanks in advance for any help.
ok...I don't have all of the fluff worked out yet, but right now I need some feedback on just the mechanics of a playable Faerie race...here's what i've got
Faerie Traits: +2 Dexterity, +2 Charisma, -2 Strength
Speed: 20 ft
Vision: Normal (or low-light)
Dust (Sp): 1/day levitate
Fey Magic: 1/day Speak with animals, feather fall
Spirit Form: 4 + Con mod round per day (+2 per level) can take on a diminutive Faerie form. She gains +6 Dexterity, -4 Strength, fly 90 ft (good), +4 size to AC and attacks, -4 size CMB and CMD.
Feels a little too powerful...not sure where to go from here.
Ok...I know both spells tell you they don't stack, but I still don't see what they mean by "don't stack, they over lap". Neither of them offer the same bonus, they both offer two completely different effects...
...so my question is this:
I'm playing a 7th Ranger in a future game where acid and fire based weapons are common, so this is a big deal in the game; if I have both spells Resist Energy and Protection from Energy up does it work like:
- I reduce energy damage by 10 first, then subtract remaining damage from protection (total of 48 at this level)?
- Or do I simply reduce from protection, then when that's done, I have resistance 10?
If the later is the answer, then there is no point to having both spells on at the same time. I also provided links to the descriptions of both spells above.
This is my attempt to convert the Psion into a Pathfinder base class (not core). This post will be edited as changes occur, and I want to thank anyone in advance for advice, support, or constructive criticism.
Notes: I am loosely basing the Psion off of the Sorcerer & Wizard.
Psion Alignment: Any
Hit Die: d6
Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Fly (Dex), Knowledge (all) (Int), Profession (Wis), and Spellcraft (Int).
Skill Ranks per Level: 2 + Int modifier.
Base Attack: Slow progression
Saves: Will strong
Power Points: Same
Powers Known: Same (see talents)
Max Power Level: Same
Talents Known: 4 (1st level), 5 (2nd level), 6 (4th level), 7 (6th level), 8 (8th level), 9 (10th level).
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Psions are proficient with the club, dagger, heavy heavy crossbow, light crossbow, quarterstaff, and shortspear. They are not proficient with any type of armor or shield.
Bonus FeatsAt 6th, 12th, and 18th level a Psion gains a bonus feat. At each such opportunity, he can choose a metapsionic feat, an item creation feat, or Combat Casting. The Psion must still meat all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including caster level minimums. These bonus feats are in addition to the feats that a character of any class gets from advancing levels. The psion is not limited to the categories of item creation feats, metapsionic feats, or Combat casting when choosing those feats.
Psions learn a number of talents, or 0-level powers. These are manifested like any other power, but they do not consume any slots and may be used again. Any talents that can be augmented, have their cost paid as normal, however there is no initial cost.
Powers Converted into Talents: Bolt, Burst, Catfall, Daze Psionic, Detect Psionics , Distract, Far Hand, Float, Know Direction, Minor Creation Psionic, Missive, My Light, Telempathic Projection.
Psionic Bond: At 1st level, psions form a powerful bond with an object of a psicrystal. "Use the rules for Arcane Bond for object bonding as normal, and use the rules for psicrytals as normal".
Discipline: A psion chooses a discipline of how he pulls his powers. This represents the way and path of a psionic character. These disciplines grant bonus powers, an additional class skill, and other special abilities.
At 3rd level, every 2 levels thereafter, a psion learns an additional power, derived from his discipline. These powers are in addition to the number of powers given.
The following disciplines represent only some of the possible sources of power that a psion can draw upon.
Clairsentience Class Skill: Perception (Wis)
Bonus Powers: Precognition (3rd), Clairvoyant Sense (5th), Escape Detection (7th), Remote Viewing (9th), Clairtangent Hand (11th), Precognition, Greater (13th), Fate of One (15th), Hypercognition (17th), Metafaculty (19th).
Psychokinesis Class Skill: Disable Device (Dex)
Bonus Powers: Control Object (3rd), Control Air (5th), Energy Cone (7th), Control Body (9th), Energy Current (11th), Null Psionics Field (13th), Reddopsi (15th), Telekinetic Sphere Psionic (17th), Tornado Blast (19th).
Psychoportation Class Skill: Acrobatics (Dex)
Bonus Powers: Detect Teleportation (3rd), Levitate Psionic (5th), Astral Caravan (7th), Fly Psionic (9th), Teleport Psionic (11th), Banishment Psionic (13th), Ethereal Jaunt (15th), Time Hop Mass (17th), Teleportation Circle Psionic (19th).
Telepathy Class Skill: Bluff (Cha)
Bonus Powers: Charm Psionic (3rd), Suggestion Psionic (5th), False Sensory Input (7th), Dominate Psionic (9th), Mind Probe (11th), Mind Switch (13th), Crisis of Life (15th), Mind Seed (17th), Mind Switch True (19th).
Any powers that are normally under discipline powers listed in the books, allow for any psion to take. Disciplines simply grant bonus powers now, not a selection of limited powers.
Also note that I have not yet written powers for the disciplines.
don't know if this has already been answered (couldn't find it), but there are 3 feats in the Beta version called Overhand Chop, Backswing, and then something else; these seem to be missing in the final book. Are they simply renamed, did they remove them, did they forget to add them, is it a type o or intentional?