Because I love the piercer, and because of this, I will take these and adapt them a little. First, they are aberrations (or maybe magical beasts?), and a little intelligent, like 4 or 5 and 6 or 7 for the elder ones. And something like 10-12 for the king, the "stone wizards", and the control piercers.
Hi, I just searched this thread but I didn't find it, though I'm quite sure I read something about it...
EDIT: Facepalm <_<°
I never used the menu... but now I know what it is for.
Oh, and Kyle: Great program. I use it all the time! Thank you so very much!
Hmmmm . . . . this is sounding more like an "Intro Set" than a "Basic Set." By that I mean everything needed to play in one box, but not necessarily a lighter or more basic version of the rules. Still, I hope that they make it less intimidating w/ limited classes, class options and feats, and maybe leaving out the combat maneuver stuff. We need to keep younger gamers coming into the hobby.
Well, a lot of feats and options etc. would be unnecessary for level reasons alone (look at the core feats - this alone will be quite a cut). The four base classes only could work, though. But Combat maneuver could be handled easy enough,imo.
I'm looking forward for this. Even though I'm probably have to wait for the german translation... damn you, nephew. Learn english already. ;)
Should LPJ Design buy the rights for the Razor Coast setting from Sinister Adventure and release it?
Turin the Mad wrote:
Thank you, I'll dm some CoC in the not-to-near future and now I have my adventure. Well, it won't be 4e, but an asylum in Timbuktu... ^_^
As a member of the Most Honorous Guild of Doormakers, Windowcarpenters and Gatecrafters I have to stress that use of this item in the boundaries of the city is punishable by guild-law with at least 12 lashes and/or a fine of up to 2000 GM.
Nice one! I will use this to annoy my players soon... ^_^
While Knowledge skills are nice flavor choices, most of them lack any real mechanical benefit. Meaning, the +2 doesn't really help all that much for most of them.
Hmmm, the mechanical benefit is not the only aspect. Knowledge skills help (and lack of them hinders) the PCs in a variety of ways, that can be (and probably should be) more effective than the +2 against getting lost in saving important resources (Sage's fees, or choosing the correct path in a dungeon, for example). In my campaign there is not one evening at the gaming table without a use of knowledge skills... because knowledge is power! ;P Of course, this is not very easy to express in numbers, as it depends on gaming style, but IMHO knowledge skills should be treated as powerful as disable device or at least handle animal... ;)
Well, the way Kaisoku has written it, the list would not take more place than a single feat. I say this would be an acceptable loss of space for the convienience of easier conversion. Better than calling for DM abjucation in a standard feat; this would come up probably every second time someone chooses this feat... and that would suck. ;)
Well, I would absolutely like to see my PCs being flung around by an enraged hill giant (*makes mental note with an evil DM grin*), but, yeah, this is a balance issue.
To your question, are you serious? I mean, seriously? Getting someone out of the way fast in a spectacular manner is not only useful but fun as heck. I mean, come on. Darth Vader throwing the Emperor into the open core of the reactor. Throwing someone over the bar into the bottle rack. A guards getting thrown down a flight of stairs into the reinforcements. Heck, Yeah! That's what I want to do when I play/I want to see when I DM. Seriously!
What I really would like to see and am much too lazy to make myself:
Change the bardic performance to something like this
Class abilities / Level*
* without minimum rank or maybe half
and for ranks in different perform skills additional abilities…
Perform abilities (Act) Rank
Perform abilities (Comedy) Rank
*(I don’t have the slightest Idea)
This would be a giant load of work, of course, as 28 new abilities would be needed (36 (4 per 9 perform skills) – 8 that could be reused for specific perform skills (countersong for 1 rank in Perform (Sing), for example, or distraction as above)). But that are also a tremendous load of options for bard players to explore. Well. You are free to post your suggestions for abillities that are tied to specific perform skills, but, as I have said, I don't see that happen... ;)
Keep the 3.5 bard abilities open for all perform skills (countersong with dance? Why not, you perform an arythmic dance against the mesmerizing song of a harpy or something...) and just add some stylisch and usefull songs/abilities for different perform skills. As the player can only use one perform ability at the time, this would mean options, but should not be too overpowering. *shrugs*
I really would like to see a system like the rogue talents for the abillities of the monk. Instead of Slow fall, Purity of Body (etc.), and Ki Abillities just make it something to choose from. So every level you could choose a new, well, let's call it just "talent" as well. They need to be taken in order (so slow fall 20 before slow fall 30 etc or purity of body before diamond body) and some may need a minimum level as well, but this way every monk would be a little more unique. And it would be relatively easy to give the monk some new options, without hurting backwards compatibility too much (as long as it would be possible to build an exact 3.5 monk + x abilities).
How about make it a Ki mechanic? Like, spending one Ki-point to get a +2 or even +4 bonus to cmb? And/or make one additional maneuver per round? This would make the monk more "maneuverable" and wouldn't take too much place in the monk description.
A very good compilation. Would you mind if I would use your findings on my Wiki Page?
No problem, use it.The abbilities list is not complete, whatsoever, as there were some abilities like dimension hop that were
a) allready discussed to be potentially too powerful or even broken
b) just too unique to be made into a general guideline
This is a rough draft of a template to port domains outside the SRD over to PFRPG (beta, as is). As an example, I tried my hand at the void domain, wich can be found here.
1st Level Power: Use a supernatural ability at will as a standard action. These are all examples based on the domains in the Pathfinder beta rules:
2nd Level Power:
4th Level Power: Choose a thematically appropriate second level spell of higher power, even off a spell list other than the cleric’s. The character can use this as a spell like ability once per day.
8th Level Power: Use a supernatural ability at will as a standard action. These are all examples based on the domains in the Pathfinder beta rules:
12th Level Power:
16th Level Power:
20th Level Power:
*These spells are normally restricted to a certain type of creatures, energy, or concept
Created as an example:
1st Level Power: Shaking Touch (Su): As a melee touch attack, you can cause a creature to become shaken by fear of the great nothingness between the stars, causing them to take a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. This effect is a mind influencing fear effect and persists for three rounds. Once a creature has been affected by the touch, it is immune to its effects for 1 day.
The concept of the new domains is sound. What I really would like to see would be a template to port over old domains. This would make it a tiny little bit easier to do this. And, yes, it is the worst new thing regarding the backwards compatibility... but still, this is not such a big thing. Just strap the domain spells and abilities from NPCs and add the new domains. Are there really so many written sources where cleric NPCs are not working at all without their old domain spells and abilities? I doubt it.
I like that. The short blurb could just stand in the header of the chart under the saving throw... in extra fine print, even, as it is obvious for experienced players by the progression itself.
I always thought it would be cool to have monsters like hags more customizable, so instead of having green and night hag and the other one *blushes* (Oh, sea hag, right?), give the hag entry a list of powers to choose from, and get differnet hags this way (Like the ghost template). On second thought, this wouldn't be backwards compatible at all, so... hm...
I think no-one ever said that about 4e...4e feels more like: "Balance, Balance über alles"... ;)
Pax Veritas wrote:
Teehee. That made me giggle like a little girl.
As a reader of Monte's Journal, I see slim chances of him doing something more substantial to support pathfinder than giving good advice to Jason. He's moved on from game designer to other pursuits (writing fiction and non-fiction books). But maybe... sometime in the future... well, hope dies last.
I see later on that racial bonuses are added to the list of bonuses that usually stack, but I'm at a loss as to why. Do we foresee lots of PCs with multiple races? Or is there a plan that templates will be granting racial bonuses now?
Well, they do already, look at the vampire template under skills, for example.
IMO, there's a flaw in this comparison. Of course, dwarves get the better fighting boni, but the skill focus and the free choice of the favored class is better for a more skill oriented character like a rogue or bard. And immunity to sleep and +2 vs. enchantment is something that's not too bad, too.
b j wrote:
Well, warrior isn't really the best choice for a kobold to begin with... And if you look at a 1st level fighter with 20 STR - I don't think a 3rd level kobold warrior would be able to stand up against him one on one.
The swashbuckler needs some more love! Really, he is just like an ordinary (3.5) fighter with ... with almost no interesting class features but the one were you get the int bonus to hit. Almost everything else could be emulated with fighter feats and sometimes you could even do better that way... that's a really underpowered class, all in all. IMHO.
edit: or was it int bonus to damage? Even worse that way...
Dragonchess Player wrote:
Fighter 2/Evoker 5/Eldritch Knight 7 would make more sense, IMO (BAB +11, CL 11). Weapon Specialization isn't worth losing 6th level spells! Evoker 6/Eldritch Knight 6 will have slightly better saves, but that's just a mechanical artifact of the 3.x level progression (i.e., rules instead of flavor).
Um, +9 +3 +6 (F2E5EK7) or +7 +4 +7 (E6EK6)? There is one set of saving throws better? Different, ok, but better?