Green Dragon

Duncan Clyborne's page

Organized Play Member. 48 posts (517 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character. 1 alias.


The Exchange

Quandary wrote:

Truly, I'd like to see multiple ways to get around action economy/ standard attack limitations,

as well, the introduction of 'free' 5' steps and the like scream out for greater cleave to work off of these as well...

Please explain where this talk of free 5' steps is.

The Exchange

Here, here to Pathfinders!

(Secretly pours off drink in case those damn Cheliax Factioners poisoned it.)

The Exchange

Think of the marketing campaign! The anti-4.0 crowd would love it.

Step up from 4.0! Play the real D&D! All Orcs are not meant to be the same! Mystra still lives!

KaeYoss can think of something dirty for us.

The Exchange

Bill Dunn wrote:
One of the few really predictable things, I thought, was the acidity on the boards. Saw it in the run up to 3E. Even without the internet, saw plenty of it in the run-up to 2e (though of course in smaller scale).
Russ Taylor wrote:
Sort of. Really, the online buzz about 3rd edition was very positive. With the game nearly dead, people were pretty excited about something new.

I also remember it being positive. It got me back in the game.

The Exchange

Duncan & Dragons wrote:
What was unpredictable was the acidic nature of the boards.
Bill Dunn wrote:
You're new to the internet, aren't you? ;)

LOL Yes, I am. I started going to ENWorld when 3.0 came out and did not knwow they had boards. Then I started coming to Paizo to look at their products and discovered the boards. I lurked until 4.0 and I guess I have recently seen the worst of our sub-cultures behavior.

'As someone once said, civilized men are coarser than barbarians because they know they can be rude without having their heads split open, as a general thing.' The internet society has devolved civilized men from being 'coarser' to being down right rude.

I acknowledge that this quote is someone's signature line. Maybe this is what they meant.

The Exchange

Let me preface by saying I don't think PRPG would 'cherrypick'. But I am assuming they are looking for areas that they may want to re-design to have a similar effect.

AZRogue wrote:
Seems to me that using parts of 4E kind of defeats the whole purpose. Pathfinder is supposed to support those who enjoy 3E and don't want to change.

I think this is only part of the objective. I think they want reverse compatibility but some improvements. So some change must occur.

I am probably taking you to literally.

Duncan & Dragons wrote:
I wish we could make combat more fluid. Not with people teleporting promiscuously but something that keeps people interested in other peoples actions. Maybe give up one of your iterative attacks for an exta 5' step between blows. Or attacks that cause people to retreat, shift position, etc. Or a successful attack helping an adjacent ally or intefering with an adjacent enemy. I don't like the 'charge' than stand still with full attack actions I always see in my games.

Shamelessly plugging my own idea again. I would not expect PRPG to do things identical to 4.0 in regards to fluid combat. But just as they gave the option of eliminating the iterative attacks with feats like Vital Strike, I would like PRPG to consider giving us feats or combat actions that have the same effect as shift, slide, drag, etc from 4.0.

The Exchange

Krauser_Levyl wrote:
Krauser_Levyl wrote:

The differences, between recharge:

- Death Strike only affect orcs. Inspire Ferocity may affect any ally.
- Death Strike works when the Eye of Grummsh is knocked down. Inspire Ferocity works when any ally is knocked down.
- Death Strike works on all orc allies simultaneously. Inspire Ferocity works only in the ally who was knocked down.

Death Strike seems really better, on most situations. But remember that the Eye of Grummsh is a controler and the Chieftain is a brute. The first wields divine power granted by Grummsh himself; the second is only a big tough guy who inspires his allies with his great strenght and furious war cries.

Correction: now that I reread the ability, it seems that Death Strike works when the orc ally is knocked down, not when the Eye of Grummsh is knocked down. Err.. it's far more powerful than I initially thought!

I initially did not see the Orc vs Ally distinction. But Inspire Ferocity just seems weak for a Level 8 Elite Brute (Leader). I thought he would get more abilities similar to a Warlord since he is both Brute and Leader. The Death Strike seems more like a high level Warlord ability rather than a Controller ability.

Edit: I guess the Blood of the Enemy is his Leader ability. I was just obsessing with Inspire Ferocity for some reason.

The Exchange

Takasi wrote:
In many campaigns there is no 'starting point' of a specific 'adventure'. The DM creates a world with locations and independent events and the PCs explore them freely.
Herbo wrote:
Then there is clearly no reason for you to subscribe to Pathfinder if you detest 'adventures' so much.

I think you both missed one of the points of the Adventure Path. By using a shared setting, Paizo is creating a detailed gazetteer. By the end of the second path, I think we have about as detailed a setting as you could want. If you don't like the story line, just use the sub-elements you like and the campaign setting. And who knows, your players might just actually follow the path most travelled.

I also don't understand why people are dropping subscriptions based on what version of D&D Pathfinder uses. Whether you eventually settle on 3.5, 3.Paizo or 4.0, Golarion gives you a rich, flavor-filled, and detailed setting. If you like the Paizo's work, I believe you should stay with Paizo while you see what these various versions have to offer. When this edition roller coaster is over, we still have a great campaign setting in Golarion. Maybe a year from now you will be looking for something that supports your edition, but now we only have 3.5 (no offense to Grognards).

Paizo offers you great value no matter what your decision on which edition to play or what style of play you prefer. This has been an unpaid endorsement.

The Exchange

Takasi wrote:
In many campaigns there is no 'starting point' of a specific 'adventure'. The DM creates a world with locations and independent events and the PCs explore them freely.
Herbo wrote:
Then there is clearly no reason for you to subscribe to Pathfinder if you detest 'adventures' so much.

I think you are both missing something here. I wonder why people do not see that the Pathfinder Adventures are creating a detailed gazeteer over time. By the end of the 2nd adventure path we basically have as flavored-filled a campaign setting as you will ever find. I thought that was the point of Paizo using a shared world for their Adventure Paths. It is also why I don't understand people who declare they are ending their subscriptions based on whether Pathfinder is 3.5, 3.Paizo or 4.0. Paizo is giving us a rich adventure landscape no matter what version of D&D you playor or what style of adventure you like. If you like Paizo in the past, you should stay with them through this roller coaster. No matter what version you settle on a year from now, Glorion is dynamic, flavor-filled and original. IFf you don't like the connecting story line, ignore it and just use the sub-elements of the adventure.

The Exchange

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
David Jackson 60 wrote:

Somebody please explain this saving + duration thing for me with spells. This sounds like a dealbreaker to me in my hopes for 4th.

Your telling me that if a 20th level wizard casts charm person on a 2nd level fighter, he's got a 50% chance base to beat it???

Your telling me that the majority of spells will now probably not last more than a round or two before a save? Really even if the level comparison above doesn't fit and it's just some kind of misunderstanding, casting a spell now implies that it will be broken whenever cast within a round or two.

I suspect that a powerful mage will have ways of making low level NPCs just be dominated. In the end this should only come up as part of a plot point - during normal play, 20th level mages don't fight 2nd level fighters, they fight enemies that are of comparable power. So the real question here is "can the system handle a plot point where the evil archmage takes over the goblin tribe or were my archmage dominates commoners?".

The reality is if you have a 20th level mage in 3.5 you almost never actually play out an encounter with 10 normal Goblins as its a waste of time. So the combat mechanics don't have to address really heavily mismatched powers but their does have to be some kind of system that allows archmages, Ilithids and Aboleths to dominate lesser folk for extended periods of time.

My initial reaction is also that the 55% chance to end the effect is to lenient. But to build on Jeremy's 'the reality is' idea;

The full statement says "you'll usually get to make a saving throw to remove the effect at the end of your turn." So maybe higher level spells do not let the spell effect to end so easily. Also I believe the goal is for encounters to last a few rounds. So a low level spell/prayer might reasonably only last for 2 or 3 rounds since it is most of the combat. Otherwise, if the goal is to have an encounter last 3 rounds of so, you might as well say 'effect ends at end of encounter.' I think they are trying to get rid of the 'your character is now out of play' effects.

Anyways, if it is out of balance or you want a grittier game, a simple house rule to increase the level of the 'saving throw' or some DDI errata can fix it.

The Exchange

Marc Radle 81 wrote:
I've recently gotten into getting the pre painted plastic minis from WOTC. I'm not necessarily into spending big bucks just to get a Rare (the ol' Pokemon approach to minis ...) but I do like having cool plastic figures to use in my games.

I suggest you use ebay to buy WotC D&D Miniature sets. If you wait a few months after the release of a new set, you can buy the common and uncommon sets cheap. Commons (usually 12 per set)are practically the price of shipping. Uncommons (usually 24 per set) are relatively cheap, maybe $10-$20 for 24. Usually this will get you what you need for every type of encounter. OK, you will never get a Beholder or Dragon, but you can substitute some other large figure.

Also if you just want to substitute some wierd looking figures, buy old lots of WizKids Games MageKnight. I buy some just bacause they have some interesting 'monsters'.

The Exchange

TabulaRasa wrote:
This is not entirely surprising because, as the game grows older, WotC has to publish more and more overpowered feats/spells/Magic items to keep players interested…and buying.
Joseph Yerger wrote:
To be honest, the last few games I've played in, I've restricted myself to PHB + DMG only for class/feats/etc. Kind of as a way to prove that there is still a lot of life in just that bit of game, and there is.

I am one of those idiots with $1,000 in books and more stuff than I can use in a lifetime. I am a fence-sitter but I really want the Digital Initiative. I also fear the repeat of power creep but I hope for more balanced feat/powers and magic. I hope they improve combat (quick but with choices) and improve on Vancian Magic.

If I can control myself, I think a solution is to wait for the second printing and just buy the PHBI, MMI and DMGI. Then don't buy anything for a year, except Pathfinder and the DI! If you can fake Illusions and Summoning from previous additons, don't even buy PHBII. Convert monsters, since it is 'so easy', and don't buy anymore MM's. Pathfinder probably will have what you need for monsters. And keep your own fluff/cosmology. How hard can it be to modify Halfings to make them Gnomes and ignore the Tieflings tail?

Don't a lot of us buy new game systems just to see the rules? The problem is not the new edition, it is my obsessive complusive need to have everthing and the chaos it causes. If I can control my spending, it might be fun to see the game evolve. (Except they killed my magazines.)

And if the 4.0 rules are not play tested well and create new problems, I have a bookshelf full of years of fun with 3.5. Just add the House Rules you like from 4.0.

The Exchange

I fear of retalatory flame strike, let it be known that I am going to try and stay with Edition 3.5 since it has what I need and I want to save money. But I think this a good way are trying to improve the game...

Timothy Mallory wrote:

I think what is being overlooked in all this ranting about power is that the only items that are expected to provide persistant enhancements are the core three slots: armor, weapon, neck.

Added to this are the new rules for multi-classing and level advancement. I think the synergy of these elements will help prevent abusive Min-Maxing. The 3.5 rules are SO FREE that you can create strange combinations that no one could have imagined in game design. Even if your players are 'conservative', magic items that stack from different magic types (armor, defense, natural, profane, etc.) make extreme characters a possibility.

I think most of us are experienced gamers and we are assuming we don't need help in maintaining a balanced game. When I was playing at 10 years old in the 70's, this would have been good way of handing magic. Now I know not to give away too much magic and not to make magic totally accessible, but I still screw up occasionally. And it is not just me. It is still a frequent thread topic about 'low magic' campaigns or rules sets such as Iron Heroes.

I feel this is a good example of a small step in the right direction to help improve the game. I also feel it is an example of a change they could have made to Edition 3.75 instead of revamping the whole system. For me, I am going to use this stuff as food for thougth for House Rules and how to maintain magic. And if I ever use 4th Edition, I can always allow Rings of Feather Fall useable at all levels. I mean does anyone not have House Rules?

And finally reference Low/Medium/High magic. In 4th Edition, if you only allow use of some slots you can now create a medium or even low level magic campaign. For example, in 4th Edition you only allow use of the three permanent item slots (Weapon, Armor and Neck) you have just made a Medium Level magic campaign.

The Exchange

Are not the Dragonborn the new 'strong' and therefore better at fighting race? If so, I suspect alot of the fighters role will be Dragonborn. Not necessarily out of desire, just out of practicality. But I also don't understand the advantages to being a Dwarf, so maybe Dwarves will fill the fighter role.

The Exchange

Stereofm wrote:
Duncan Clyborne wrote:

I like that the DDI will allow a seamless upgrade to the edition as improvements are identified. We will not need a Edition 4.5 or 5.0 since Edition 4.0 will smoothly evolve.

Never seen problems in software updates so far ? New to computers ?

Duncan Clyborne wrote:

And even the nay-sayers will be able to join down the line (with an extra helping of Sebastian's Humble Pie), because all future products will be easy to get electronically.

Assuming we want them to begin with.

Hey, I was being sincere. If they launch this thing a little out of balance, they can fix it mid-stream without hassle. This I see as the greatest strength of 4.0. Re-read the thread and I think is one of 4.0 greatest strong points. This is why I want DDI. I don't want to keep figuring out which set of Polymorp rules I should use in 3.5. And my computer does not help me in 3.5. So ;p.

The Exchange

I think it is also worth noting that magic weapons 'suffer'. The 'Flame' effect only adds to your damage if you critical. It is like 'Flaming' is gone and you can only go directly to 'Flaming Burst'. I presume this works with fewer magic items and added levels/abilities. You should still be doing more damage as you go up in level, but apparently it comes from different power sources. I would guess it also helps prevent 'Min-Maxing'. Probably a good overall idea, but will people find ways to circumvent the intent?

Basically 3.5 multi-classing, Magic Weapons and Crticals can be abused. But hopefully 4.0 level abilities, fewer 'multi-classing' options, modified magic weapons and modified critcials will prevent 4.0 game abuse. Time will tell.

But this is an intriguing point. I keep thinking of all these rule changes idividually. I like some of the changes, I am indifferent to some, and I dislike some. I worry they will combine in bad ways. But if it is done right, the overall effect may be good. Again, time will tell.

This topic might deserve a thread: What will the synergy of all these rule changes be? Do some build together to enrich the entire experience? Or will it be a train wreak?

The Exchange

DaveMage wrote:
It brings to mind a potential hybrid method: if you roll a 20 (or critical threat) then you do max damage if the roll us unconfirmed, or double (regular) damage if the threat is confirmed (with the caveat that you do at least regular max damage).

I like this hybrid idea allot. This is what I like best about 4th Edition; stealing from it. Stealing the good, combine with 3.5 and make a hybrid. Whether I eventually switch to 4.0 is irrelevant. I benefit either way.

The Exchange

I am a negative person (I call myself a Realist) but I will try because I want the DDI so badly.

Although individually most of these changes might be good, I think they are trying to make too many changes at once with not enough playtesting. The synergy effect of these 'individually' good changes might be broken but...

I like that the DDI will allow a seamless upgrade to the edition as improvements are identified. We will not need a Edition 4.5 or 5.0 since Edition 4.0 will smoothly evolve.

And we will be able to customize software to permanently kill Gnomes if a DM wants to.

And even the nay-sayers will be able to join down the line (with an extra helping of Sebastian's Humble Pie), because all future products will be easy to get electronically.

There I tried.

The Exchange

I could not think of a 'fun' name and did not not see a reason I would want to create a new identity. (Some of you guys might know each other in 'real life' if you used your real names.)

Now if I could change my Forum Name, I would become 'Duncan & Dragons' (hence my Avatar). Either that or 'Fantasy Freaker' since that was my families nickname for me when I played too much D&D as a kid.

[I think James Keegan's comment about 'no one in their right mind would want to stalk me' is humorous. These boards are full of people not in their right mind. Or maybe he knew that and wants to be stalked.)

The Exchange

TheDMFromPlanetX wrote:

Ok im going to take a big risk now, a few says from now a severed orc head will be hanging on my front door, curtesy of the TLF (third edition liberation front).

I actually like that they have the guts to change things, ...

Ok take your best shot, ill take cover behind my more or less useless DMG.

I agree with TheDMFromPlanetX. There are several changes that are being hinted at in 4e that I do not like, but this is not one of them. I don't like the rule changes that are making this edition 4.0 instead of 3.75. I like the Digital Initiative and some other things. The racial changes are an examples of a change that makes sense from one old timers perspective.

Elves are based on Tolkien and Tolkien's Elves had obvious 'celestial' connections. Old D&D trying to make 'Wood Elves' more Fey only worked for half the players. The creation of numerous sub-races are peoples ways of satisfying everyone. This solution elimates sub-races and gives a solution that should satify most. (maybe)

Along this line, WotC has identified that the Warlock class is very popular and should be a core class. It makes sense to give each core class an iconic race and Tieflings make sense as the iconic Warlock.

Still along this line, is that Gnomes are just a type of Halfling, as are Hobbits, Kender, and all the other sub-races. I have a house rule that a 'Sword of Halfing Bane' hurts all these creatures equally since they are basically the same thing.

I don't mind these type of changes. They could have incorporated it into a backwards compatible edition. It is the 'other' changes that bother me.

The Exchange

I’ve Got Reach wrote:

Here goes my unpopular opinion on Power Attack and D&D math complexities in general:

2) D&D math IS overly complex. If you don’t believe me, you haven’t played in our power-gaming munchkinizing gaming group. Take my 12th level paladin for example:
Power Attack
Combat Expertise
Bulls Strength
Bears Endurance
Divine Favor
Magic Weapon
Smite Evil

These are just a few of the characters combat options/abilities; there are others I’m sure I’m forgetting. Add these up in your head during the course of a battle. Now get poisoned, level-drained, ability drained, penalties, and outside bonuses and figure out your abilities. At 2:00 a.m.

Playing this character without the benefit of Excel is not impossible, just impractical, and not fun at all.

I think the word TEDIOUS is better than COMPLEX for describing the 3.5 system. I would have respected the article better if they said, 'Toggling Power Attack (and similar feats/spell effects) 'ON-OFF' will speed play and allow us to supplement table-top gaming and computer added gaming effects better.'

I think this article is an example of why 4.0 was not necessary. This is a small improvement for edition 3.75 that could have been backwords compatible with 3.5. Instead I am getting a non-compatible edition.

I respect (and want) improvement and digitalization. Instead, I am getting a 'better' Power Attack at the cost of my prior investment. I wish I could agree with Sebastian, but I do not like the way WotC is doing this.

The Exchange

Readling between the line, you could set up something like 4th Edition might be. They seem to be making Savings Throws into Armor class. So as an example, you take your Reflex save bonus and add it to 10 to get a Reflex Armor Class. Then the spell caster rolls d20 and adds his ability modifier (maybe some other stuff also) and must achieve the Reflex Save Armor Class to hit when he casts a Reflex based spell. '20' does double damage. So the wizard does an attack roll to hit each round.

Also I am guessing Shadow Mage from Tome of Magic will model spell casting. Basically, you start with memorized spells. But when you reach 7th level, 1-3rd level spells you do 3 times per day but you still memorize higher level spells. When you reach, 13th level, 1-3rd level spells are 'at will' and 4-6th level spells are 3 times per day but you still memorize higher level spells. Eventually, I think even 4-6th level spells become 'at will'. Maybe you should make this more generic and say he can cast spells 3 levels before his highest 3 times per day. Spells 6 levels lower than his max spell level he can cast 'at will'.

Shadow Mage spells I think were a little more restricted into lists and you get more than Sorcerers but less than Wizards. But I like the flavor of spell lists.

(I want to throw in a little Arcana Unearthed also. Basically, spell casters can increase or decreas the power of spell by one level. But I don't know how to work it in.)

Anyways, you basically can have the wizard making attack rolls each round. He also would have to memorize his more powerfull spells (whatever high is for his level) but he can blast at will his low level spells.

This is all from memory and may have gross errors. It is also based on no 4th Edition threads I have read. And no play testing either. Heck, even reading this post might be dangerous.

The Exchange

Talion09 wrote:

I'll be quick, as I'm at work. Otherwise I'd give this the more indepth response it deserves.

I'll continue my GameMastery and Pathfinder subs (and continue buying supplemental material like Flip-Mats, Map Packs, Item Card, etc) as long as Paizo keeps on putting out consistent high quality products like you have over the last 3+ years.

If you go to 4th, I'll follow. If you stay 3.5, I'll keep on buying too.

And if you make a 3.75 version, I'd buy it too, as I would expect it to be high quality.

*And this deserves more of its own thread, but what would you "fix" in 3.5 if you made a new edition? Perhaps make gnome ninjas a core class? ;-)

Ditto minus the Gnome Ninja idea. I am curious to know what edition 3.75 would be. The reason behind sticking with Paizo is that I am using the industry 'turbulance' as an excuse to cut my expenses. I have enough 3.5 resources to last a lifetime. All I want is my monthly fix of 'entertainment'. That will be Paizo.

The Exchange

This Flip Mat looks fantastic and may be more versitile than you imagined. Looking at your preview it looks like I can use my MapPack; Village-Market Place to overlay the central portion of the map and create different market layouts. (Preferably with the PC's chasing a thief through the market that is now different then they remember.) Was this intentional? (If it was not, somebody should take credit anyways.) You might want to think about making another Map pack with smaller size shops than your Map Pack: City that can fit on the Flip Mat:City Market. Then the whole thing can be customizable. (I might buy a second flip mat and a scissors and do it myself) Nice synergy between your products also.

The Exchange

Maybe you should reconsider your criteria. Bring only books for the players. Assume you will be re-kindling their spirit in gaming or they have never gamed. So bring the Complete series and Compendiums. Don't even bring your Core Rules.

Assume you and the players will use the SRD. I would assume you would use digital and you will need books to support your players. Although it is not perfect, I use DM Genie and then import the books into DM Genie. You need the original book to get the password, which I think you have. It is not perfect because you have to have to wait for others to input the data into DM Genie. But for the $30 it costs for DMGenie (or some similar product) you get access to most of your library.

And subscribe to Pathfinder so you get digital adventures. Your weight restrictions apply on the way home also! Send your Pathfinder hardcopy to your home of record. (I am old Army. I spent 18 months in Korea.)

The Exchange

Last post of the day. I must go to eBay now and complete my set...

The Exchange

I still don't know how to classify the "Heroes of .." books. (I am into sets.) And those Draconomicon, Liber Mortis, & Lords of Madness Rules Builder books. I can not believe I forgot all the monster manuals! Just too much on my shelf to take in all at once. I stopped at MM4. Or I said I would stop. Now that I know MM5 is last, I will get it. But wait, then I will need the Fiendish Codex's also. Must have everything....

Actually there is selfish little part of me that like 3.5 going away. It means I can, theoretically, complete my set someday.
Maybe I found my Avatar Name, 'Duncan Ketchum'. I wanted Duncan & Dragons, but the stupid server won't let me switch.

The Exchange

Check out eBay. People sell old figures all the time. It is not that hard to post an item for sale. I think you would get a better price. Good Luck!

The Exchange

Despite the sarcasm, it ain't a bad idea.

The Exchange

Duncan Clyborne wrote:
What else do we really need to play forever? Not your personal preferences to make something just like your home-brewed campaign. Or 'I want more psionics.' Or 'I want another campaign like Eberron.' But what else is really missing? Is there any real gap?

I updated my Topic. I was not specific enough in my Post Topic. I should asked; 'What additional products should WotC have given us?

The Exchange

First, I don’t know if I will like 4th Edition but, either way, I probably won’t switch for awhile.

I was talking over 3.5 vs. 4.0 with a long distance friend. As usual the topic of ‘I have more 3.5 books and adventures than I can use before I die’ came up. Then the often heard, 'WotC has been putting out poor product, twice a month, for the past 18 months.’ I responded with something like, ‘WotC was probably distracted by 4.0 and wanted to finish everything up. At least they finished everything, although possibly at the expense of quality’ (P.S. I think we knock WotC overly much about quality).

We are all caught in the emotions of losing what we love and some of us are excited about what 4.0 might be. What more did we really want more from WotC? They have extended themselves to saturated the market and give us as much as possible for 3.5. They have created enough to keep us happy forever.

We have more than I would have imagined: Core Books, Optional Rules (PHB2, DMG2, Unearthed Arcana, Tome of Battle, & Tome of Magic), Compendiums, Splat Books (Complete Arcane, etc.), Race Series (Races of Destiny, etc.), Expeditions Series, Environment Series (Sandstorm, Dungeonscape, etc.), Game Aids- (Dungeon Tiles, Fantastic Locations & Miniatures), Several Campaigns (including a new one in Eberron), Modules and Dungeon to give us our monthly fix (Although they took the Dungeon name back, they indirectly created Pathfinder that can support us indefinitely), Allot of third party companies (indirectly created again), and last, and least, Software Support (I suspect they tried to re-group and then decided to do the D&D Insider thing.)

What else do we really need to play forever? Not your personal preferences to make something just like your home-brewed campaign. Or 'I want more psionics.' Or 'I want another campaign like Eberron.' But what else is really missing? Is there any real gap?

P.S. Let’s not make this a whine about quality. Experimentation sometimes breeds good and bad.

The Exchange

Xellan wrote:
Death and resurrection imposes a negative level that's removed when the character achieves their next level.

I kind of like this. I am the DM and I just had a character die for the third time in three game nights. I am thinking 'people would learn something from dying.' I also feel sorry for the guy.

Maybe you gain experience at double rate until your next level. Or maybe a special death related feat. +1 to Reflex Savings Throw against Fire spells if you die from a Fireball. -1 to attack and +1 Defensive bonus to AC if your Wizard dies in melee combat. Maybe select an Unearthed Arcana character trait that could be related to your death. (Character traits have both good and bad affects.)

The Exchange

Duncan Clyborne wrote:
I am perturbed by multiple attacks.
Hammith wrote:

What exactly are your problems with multiple attacks? The way that you're building it up would cause larger amounts of damage, although it would only be on one die roll (thus causing more risk of missing for the whole round). ...
One easy way to reduce rolls (which may or may not be your problem with the system), is to have players roll multiple dice at once. Each of a different color and corresponding to a certain attack, of course.

I should have explained my grudge. I find it slows play and distracts from the fun. We use multiple different color dice already.

When I played as a kid it was fun to watch someone else roll and see the results. We have lost the feeling of; "Yea! I rolled well." Now the play is; "I hit, I missed, I hit, I missed, what was the AC again, I hit, I missed, I missed, oh, I forgot about the Bless Spell,(pause), I still hit three times, and now for damage...." The feeling now is; "Hurry up and pre-roll and tell us the result."

The increased 'massive hit-total miss' problem can be overcome with the right math. And it can be viewed as exciting if done right. Maybe something like saving throws where it is half damage. (I don't like that idea. I am just thinking out loud.)

I did not think I was alone on this. I thought it was ID'd as a weakness for SW and 4th Edition. I asked for someone else's solution since I know mine was weak.

The Exchange

Enough on spells already.

I am perturbed by multiple attacks. It appears to me that high level and multi-weapon attacks could be done with one roll. Maybe something like 2H wpns do good damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1.5 x 1/2 BAB (Min 1)), Regular weapons do normal damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1/2 BAB (Min 1) and Multiple Weapons get -2 to hit and good damage (Base Weapon Damage x 1.5 x 1/2 BAB (Min 1)). You would also have to multiple incremental weapon damage (Flaming, Shock, etc) by 1/2 BAB (Min 1).

I have not thought this out statistically, but has some one figured a better way to do it? Someone out there must do statistics for fun.

The Exchange

grrtigger wrote:
If you watch this interview with Andy Collins (might be in part two) he pretty clearly states that 4.0 is a "clean break" in the system, and (in my words) that providing a conversion guide would be too complicated and the small booklet format (like the 3.0 to 3.5 guide) wouldn't be adequate to truly provide a full guide for converting everything. He recommends starting from scratch and giving the new system a good look to see how much it's improved.
Kruelaid wrote:


Now that announcement makes me happy.

It's better to build a new one than patch up an old broken one. This is the most well-known RPG on the market and it should have the most well-thought out rules. Right now, 3.5 embarrasses me.

God help them if they disappoint.

Although I agree that we might be ready to rebuild form scratch, it will force Die Hard 3.5 players away. It will also will hurt Paizo since they probably can not support two 'completely different' systems. I would rather have moved 3.5 to Digital. Then later offer 4.0. If this is as different as it sounds, 3.5 will form an island of players and Paizo will have to decide which is most profitable to sell too. I think eventually Paizo will have to switch.

The Exchange

I saw somewhere from a Paizo source that the Paizo goal would be to continue giving their customers what they want.*
Some other Paizo source said that they tend to support the main stream edition.** (Obviously my summaries)
That means someday they will support 4.0.

My theory is that Paizo will stay 3.5 for awhile. Then after the DI takes off a bit, they will continue publishing the Pathfinder hardcopy product in 3.5, but sell a 4.0 digital product through WotC.

This should make everyone happy.
1- 3.5 Die Hards will just ignore the whole 4.0 thing and buy Pathfinder.
2- 4.0 Newbies will just see good Paizo digital products coming through WotC.
3- Hybreds, like me, will have their hardcopy Pathfinder on the gaming table but ignore the stat blocks. We will just use the 4.0 DI to allow faster prep and game play. [This is what I do now. I take Dungeon and put the stat blocks into my computer.]
4- Paizo will be using WotC to increase market share. They just need 4.0 fans to reach the critical mass that will support Pathfinder convertion to 4.0.
5- WotC gets their slice of the pie.

Actually, I don't know if I want 3.5 Digitallized or 4.0 Digitalized. I want to choose. Hopefully, RPGXplorer or DM Genie or somebody will also convert Pathfinder to 3.5. I just want my computer to help me!

P.S. Paizo will do it allot cleverer than I described, but they will make Die Hards and Newbies both happy. Paizo resources are the only constaint. But if the 4.0 DI is so good, it should be easy for Paizo to make 4.0 modules.

* I am too lazy to research. I don't think it is that controversial.
** Still to lazy to research.

The Exchange

Fox_Reeveheart wrote:
We are buying new PHB's at 4 years intervals! what the hell?!

And don't forget splat books and errata. I just fear I will be tempted to have electronic books, with errata, being pushed to me every month in a standardized format. For $10/mos the SRD and software, for $15/mos I also get the newest prestige classes, and for $20/mos I also get adventures. Sure the format will suck, because I like books, but I can then use my computer to help me. It might be worth it, rather than getting a new book every other month. And WotC gets steady income which is probably their greatest dream (and what the employees desire by the way so no one gets fired unnecessarily). I just wish they did this four years ago! That is what everybody should be mad about. They are 4 years too late with this.

PS I made up the rates. This is not some scoop.

The Exchange

BluePigeon wrote:

Don't count on it. I'm prepared for the worst.

I received my free Pathfinder download a few days ago and I'm looking forward to switching to Paizo/Pathfinder/Game Mastery exclusively. If Wizards put D&D into a playable card game, I hope it sinks the company and they give the entire line to someone else who deserves to treat it for what its worth.

Let's start rumors: Where did Monte Cook go six months ago?

I think I will like a change although I might not like 4th Edition.
1- Since they announced "Rules Compendium" I have been looking foward to stop buying WotC simply because I have all I need. (Except Miniatures of course)
2- I would like to see whether DI (from WotC or someone else) can help me for game prep. Already RPGXplorer seems to be competing.
3- Maybe they have some good ideas for improving the game. Maybe spells like Arcana Evolved or eliminating high-level/multi-weapon dice rolling. Who knows. I can steal what I want now and in a few years, when I am looking for a RPG 'change', I will buy.

The Exchange

I vouch for Derek also. He also has a blog at I actually gave him my extra cards just because I hoped he could find them homes. Sort of an island of misfit cards.

There are also some pdf cards on the pdf sites (RPGNow, Your Games Now, DriveThruRPG). One I just noticed today is "Gamescapes Story Cards". They are simple and might hold you over until Paizo gives us everything. They don't have 'equipment'; just all the weapons and some armors. Mentioning it on Paizo's Boards maybe rude but I don't think it will hurt Paizo. We will all still buy the Paizo stuff (usually in duplicate).

And on the pdf subject: one of these days I need to pick up TOGC's pdf of Complete Item Cards. That gives the statisitics for SRD gear and a lot of magic and they have blank cards for stuff you make up. They also fit in my card sleeve with my Item Cards. I have to protect my Paizo stuff!

The Exchange

Wyvern wrote:
Hopefully not. Those resources should be used for a better printed product.
Vic Wertz wrote:
To be clear, "those resources" would have to come from the third party. As in, we provide them with files used to create the print publications, and they do the rest. As you point out, we have a lot on our plates as it is.

Vic has it right, but so does Wyvern. I DM with my Dungeon magazines and a computer. And my tabletop game has almost every Paizo product on it.

Wyvern, look at all the work you do. Yes, it is fun. But it is also time. To risk a leap of logic, there is a growing segment that uses digital content and will pay for it. I guess I am part of it already but you are not. Every adventure a consumer has to digitalize from Pathfinder, is a temptation the consumer will pay WotC for a cannned program when they run out of time on game night.

But as Vic, said "those resources" would come from third party. Paizo needs to give them the jump. Maybe JPG files, monster stats, spells, and new magic items two weeks prior to publication. Maybe the whole PDF. So when the consumer has Pathfinder come to their mailbox, they have a hardcopy, a pdf and a place to go get the RPG Program files. The question is; is Paizo open minded and/or soliciting support?

Finally, I wish I could find support for my Mac. And I am now going to look at RPTools.

The Exchange

Taliesin Hoyle wrote:

I think it premature to dislike the electronic version of the magazine. Just because Paizo is no longer producing it does not mean that it must necessarily be bad. There are some people at wizards that are creative, intelligent, adept writers and creators. They took their love of gaming and made a career of it.

I am also upset but I think WotC is doing a smart thing. They are being disrespectful by forcing me to go online but there is a great value in content that can be used with a computer program. (Think DM Genie or DM Familiar.) Sure they will have an eZine and I will hate it. But I think they are going to give me my monsters, spell, magic items and stuff that I can speed up my preparation time and game play.

I love my hardcopy rulebooks, magazines and modules. I will buy them as long as I can. But I will pay extra to get it digitally so I can use it in a RPG Computer Program. There is an active, and I presume growing, group of people who use the SRD Websites and RPG Programs. Digital will add great value to these users. Just look at all the excel character sheets out there. And if Paizo does not have a strategy to partner with user groups or SW writers, WotC will start winning market share.

The Exchange

Does Paizo have a plan to get Pathfinder/GameMastery Modules into a RPG Computer Program format (like DM Genie or DM Familiar)?

Having adventures available in a RPG Computer Program is definitely a value-adder. Currently no major player has a strong SW initiative and WotC is obviously pursuing it. I believe WotC are going to make/buy a program and use it to support the core rules, rule additions and adventures as they launch Dragon/Dungeon Online. I am afraid overtime, this value may move a lot of us away from Pathfinder. Even if we love the Pathfinder books, we will move over to whoever gives us SW support.

The Exchange

I laminated mine (and a bunch WotC and Skeleton Key Terrain Tiles). They seem good and they lie flat. My only caution to you is that some of the dark tiles are hard to read. My Haunted House is really hard to read. Paizo did seem to want them to be durable with a glossy/laminated finish. It almost makes it like laminating it twice. But, I want to keep my stuff forever, so it was worth it for me. I also taped the associated tiles together and drew 1" grid lines on the backs so I can use them to make pre-drawn adventure sites.

The Exchange

I don't like this but am confident the Paizo team will take care of us as long as it is viable. I will continue to make Paizo my preferred choice for gaming stuff. I like the Print/Online nature of Pathfinder. I need my Critical Hit Cards soon.

I have not read all the posts, but I wonder if WotC really thought about the damage to future editions? I returned to playing D&D after a 15 year sabbatical because of Dragon's third edition preview articles. I respected the move to 3.5 because of Dragon's 3.5 preview articles. Without this print product, I wonder if the next edition (or some other change or product) will not be given a chance. WotC may get a boost to their online content but will it damage D&D in the long run?

Now I am going to fondle my copy of The Dragon Issue #1. A Pink and Green cover, what were they thinking?

The Exchange

Or maybe this is not new. Here is the idea. WotC spends so much energy on art work, have you ever thought of combining your Item Cards with their art work? I love looking at your art work and creating new magic items but they already have the done the stat work. Your relationship with WotC might make it possible (or impossible, I don't know much about this). You probably have card ideas for a few year but if not, I would cetainly buy. (Actually, I buy most of your stuff anyways.)

The Exchange

Doyle Tavener wrote:

Hey all, I am looking for the following from Hero's Horde:

3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 19, 31, 40, 50, 103


Doyle, I have a 3 Chainmail for your 37 Spiked Chain. I did not seee anything else but write is a one card swap is worth it to you. Thx.

The Exchange

Mosaic and I are mid -trade. Anyone else please write: I still want/have the following:
Want (one of each)
07 Platemail
11 Buckler
12 Steel Shield
15 Wooden Shield
19 Bolts
38 Spiked Chain
55 Potion
69 Scroll
78 Staff
84 Wand
105 Gemstone
106 Gloves

Chrome For Trade (no special value to me)
15 Wooden Shield
17 Battle Axe
102 Crown

For Trade (Item Number/Name/Qty Available)
02 Breastplate 1
03 Chainmail 2
20 Crossbow 2
24 Halberd 1
26 Longbow 1
29 Longsword 1
33 Shortbow 2
41 Potion 1
42 Potion 1
43 Potion 1
44 Potion 2
45 Potion 1
48 Potion 1
49 Potion 2
51 Potion 2
52 Potion 1
53 Potion 1
56 Potion 1
60 Ring 1
61 Ring 1
62 Ring 1
63 Scroll 2
64 Scroll 1
65 Scroll 1
67 Scroll 1
68 Scroll 1
72 Scroll 1
73 Rod 1
74 Rod 1
76 Staff 1
79 Wand 1
80 Wand 2
85 Wand 1
90 Amulet 1
93 Book 1
95 Boots 1
96 Bottle 1
99 Circlet 1
100 Cloak 1
104 Gauntlets 1
107 Headband 1
108 Necklace 1
109 Periapt 1
110 Robe 1

The Exchange

Mosiac, As I read the exchange I have 8 cards you should want and I think you still have 8 I want. I would send first. I will post my complete list later, but for now I have:

For Trade
02 Breastplate, 05 Hide Armor, 08 Scale Mail, 09 Splint Mail, 17 Battle Axe, 36 Sling, 43 Potion, 56 Potion, & 93 Book

Want List
01 Banded, 06 Leather Suit, 23 Flail, 30 Longsword, 31 mace, 37 Spear, 50 Potion, & 106 Gloves

I will write also. My address is Any other traders can write me also!