JohnnyKage's page

Sounds good, Thanks Kathryn.

There are limits on use, and saves to reduce deadly effects - but like I said, I'd be happy to post full stats if anyone wants.

Right now fighters are too bland. I LOVED the Book of 9 Swords - but it was almost too good... I think advanced feats that only fighters can get is the right way to go - and gives incentives to play solo fighters.

Yes please post them!!!

Read my post above this in regards to 9 swords. I'm curious about what you opinion is.

I have a solution for the 9 blades. Actually it’s an add-on system. Have any of you guys ever taken a look at Arcana Evolved? Anyho...both books have a kinda similar system.

I always thought of feats as something extraordinary that you can do or ability you have. Weapon Focus, Iron mind, Improved Trip are all good examples.

With Pathfinder, they introduced "COMBAT" Feats. This isn't a terrible idea but how may people are going to use Dodge at higher levels? It almost becomes a wasted Feat. Not to mention, feats are limited and you only gain so many of them. I’m just not a fan of using feats for combat.

My system gets rid of the combat feats. Instead we are developing a system that is partially based on Arcana's combat rituals, and the 9 swords disciplines called Combat Maneuvers or CM for short. It's actually a very easy system (just have to work out a few multi-class and prestige class issues).

CM's have descriptions, action types, prerequisites and benefits similar to feats. Unlike feats, only one can be used a round, you have only so many known and readied to use.

When I have a finalized testing version maybe ill post it. Thus far my players are stoked. It turns the current combat system into a lot of fun.

This is how one looks like for crap and giggles:

Riposte [Counter]
Prerequisite: Lvl 3, Dex 15 (all CM’s are level based 1-4)
Action: Immediate
Benefit: One successful strike by an opponent is blocked and you gain an instant attack of opportunity against him.
Special: You do not get any extra AoA then already granted.

Here are a couple more feats. To be honest, I have a ton of them (for all kinds of classesm race, feats, est.

Here are a few more to make a pro-typical fighter feared (for a change), espcially at higher levels.

Some other fighter only feats:

Combat Discipline [Fighter, General] (Original Design for 3.5)
You are skilled at maneuvering out of harms away against specialized martial attacks.
Prerequisite: Int 15, fighter of 6th level.
Benefit: You gain a +4 competence bonus (to your opposed roll) when resisting or avoiding against the following special attacks: Bull-Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Sunder, and Trip attempts.
Special: This feat replaces Pathfinder’s “Defensive Combat Training” feat. This feat can also be applied as a bonus to opposed rolls to avoid new feats such as “Combat Insight” or “Low Blow.”
A condition that makes the character lose his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes him lose this ability.

Weapon Insight [Fighter] (Original Design for 3.5)
You are highly skilled with all proficient weapons known to you.
Prerequisite: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, fighter of 6th level.
Benefit: He has a unique insight on the handling of weapons. You can extend the bonuses granted from weapon focus and specialization to all the weapons he is proficient in.
Special: This ability extends its benefit to Exotic Weapons feat if he has it or takes it. However, this feat does not apply to the Chosen Weapon Specialization Feat, the fighter ability Weapon Grand Mastery gained at 20th level, est.

Misc Feats that have worked out very well:

Riposte [Combat] (Original Design for 3.5)
You are adept at turning attacks against an opponent.
Prerequisite: Base Attack Bonus +2, Int 15.
Benefit: As a swift action, you can add you intelligence to your armor class (minimum +2 bonus and a additional +2 if you already have an ability that allows intelligence to be added), against the next opponent who attempts to strike you. If he misses, you get a free attack of opportunity against him.
Special: This feat does not allow you any more attacks of opportunity then normally granted to the character.

Single Weapon Style Specialization [Fighter, General] (Original Design for 3.5)
You are adept at fighting one-handed, leaving your other hand free.
Prerequisite: Base Attack Bonus +2, proficiency with the weapon you are using.
Benefit: You specialize at angling your body to avoid harm and to make fast and furious melee attacks. When using a weapon one-handed you gain a +1 bonus to initiative checks and a +1 dodge bonus.
Special: A condition that makes the character lose his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes him lose this dodge bonus. The character must be aware of the attack to gain this bonus. Also, dodge bonuses stack with each other, unlike most other types of bonuses.

Two-Hand Weapon Style Specialization [Fighter, General] (Original Design for 3.5)
You’re an expert at wielding a weapon with two hands.
Prerequisite: Base Attack Bonus +4, proficiency with the weapon you are using.
Benefit: When using a weapon two-handed, you gain a +2 competence bonus to damage rolls made, when using your weapon two-handed.

Two-Weapon Fighting, Massive [Fighter, General] (Modified from Arcana Unearthed)
You can use heavier than normal weapons in each hand.
Prerequisite: Base Attack Bonus +6, Two-Weapon Fighting, Str 17.
Benefit: The character can use any one-handed weapon with his off-hand and treat it as a light weapon. Example: You can wield two long swords with one being treated as a Light weapon for Two-Weapon penalties if any.

Weapon Tandem [Fighter, General] (Original Design for 3.5)
When using the two-weapon style, choose a light off-hand weapon that compliments your primary weapon.
Prerequisite: Two-Weapon fighting, Proficiency with the weapons you are using, Dex 13.
Benefit: Your light off-hand weapon receives all of your primary weapons bonuses for feats (such as Weapon Focus) when used together for two-weapon fighting.

Laurefindel wrote:

100% in agreement for grouping weapons for the purpose of getting the weapon proficiency, weapon focus and weapons specialization feats (including their improved and greater versions).

However, weapon focus (basic )should still be the only feat available to non-fighters.

JohnnyKage, can you give me a write up of how you implemented those feats into your campaign? Like prereqs, stats etc? Thanks.

The following feats are based on the 2e Combat and Tactics. Greater Weapon Focus and Specialization are obsolete.

If you take this Chain of feats you only have 5 (2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th and 20th) additional fighter feats avaiable for misc. This chain starts at 1st or 2nd, then 4th level and every 4 levels there after till you automatically recieve Grand Weapon Mastery at 20th (replaces PF Weapon Mastery).

I use a different feat to allow the bonues of Weapon Focus and Specialization to be applied to all weapons. However, Chosen, Mastery, est., can only be used with "one chosen weapon" (not an unarmed attack either).

NOTE: Type [Fighter] stands for fighter only feat (or has to have a certain amount of fighter class levels to select feat). [Prestige] stands for feats not avaiable till 10th level.

This feat replaces Greater Weapon focus and Specialization:

Chosen Weapon Specialization [Fighter] (Original Design for 3.5)
Choose one type of weapon, such as long sword (cannot select unarmed strike or grapple), for which you have already selected the Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization feats. This weapon is now considered your weapon of choice.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization with selected weapon, fighter level of 8th.
Benefit: You gain the benefits of Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization and Improved Critical (+1 to hit, +2 to damage and your critical threat range is doubled), with the selected weapon of choice.
Special: You can only take Chosen Specialization once, for one specific weapon.

Weapon Mastery [Fighter, Prestige] (Original Design for 3.5)
Choose one type of weapon (such as a long sword), for which you have already selected Chosen Weapon Specialization with. You have mastered the use of your chosen weapon.
Prerequisite: Chosen Weapon Specialization, fighter of 12th level.
Benefit: The character receives an additional +2 attack bonus and +2 to damage. In addition, he cannot be disarmed while wielding a weapon of this type.
Special: You can only take Weapon Mastery once, for one specific weapon.

High Weapon Mastery [Fighter, Prestige] (Original Design for 3.5)
You have significantly improved with your mastered weapon of choice. You can react quicker and cause more damage with this weapon.
Prerequisite: Weapon Mastery, fighter of 16th level.
Benefit: With his chosen weapon the character receives a +4 competence bonus to Initiative checks and the damage dice dealt by his chosen weapon increases one step. Example: a long sword’s damage increases from 1D8 to 1D10.
Special: You can only take High Weapon Mastery once, for one specific weapon.
Improvement: The Fighter gains a 5th attack at 20th level when using the full-attack option. See the fighter ability Weapon Grand Mastery for details.

Every fighter gets this feat at 20th level. (Replaces Pathfinders Weapon Mastery). However, if you have Weapon High Mastery you get an additional Bonus attack at +1. 20th Level (20/15/10/5/1 with chosen weapon):

Grand Weapon Mastery: At 20th level, a fighter chooses one weapon, such as the longsword, greataxe, or longbow. Any attacks made with that weapon automatically confirm all critical threats and have their damage multiplier increased by 1 (a ×2 becomes a ×3, for example). Special: In addition, he gains a 5th attack with a BAB of +1 if he selected the High Weapon Mastery Feat with his chosen weapon.

I've been using these feats for some time (all are battle tested). Always felt the fighter class sucked at higher levels so I made these feats for a higher level Fighter. Good for players not having to rely on Prestige classes.

100% in agreement for grouping weapons for the purpose of getting the weapon proficiency, weapon focus and weapons specialization feats (including their improved and greater versions).

However, weapon focus (basic )should still be the only feat available to non-fighters.

Yup! fighters have to have something of their own to combat against raging barbarians and smiting paladins.

Barbarian is far from my favorite class, Johnny- my point is that I never wanted to play one before and now I find myself truly enjoying it.

I have played the Barbarian class several times and it has always been enjoyable for me. There are some feats that make his rage do some wonderful things offensively. A fighter is very hard pressed versus a raging barbarian and normally will have to play very defensively to last an encounter against him. If you really haven't played the class previously how can you honestly compare the two versions?

Out of curious, how many of you even played an epic Barbarian?

We will be finishing our campaign soon in FR. We still plan on playing in the realms but not with 4e. However, I am still intrested in the book. I'm curious as to what they will change. If we like some it we will use it, if not we wont.

I've also heard that WotC isn't planning on releasing much for FR 4e anyhjow other than the main campaign setting.

JohnnyKage wrote:

Only The Greater Weapons Focus and Specialization feats are fighter only. Specialization used to be +1 to hit, +2 to damage and has always been a "fighter only," since 2e. They changed specialization as to allow monks and rouges to at least gain a +1 to hit.

Though these feats are listed as feats, they are also extentions of the fighter class. The fighter's primary ability is to get feats, even with Pathfinder.

There is also a balance issue. If the barbarain can rage with specialization, as well as the paladin with smite, it allows these classes to over-welm the fighter class.

There is also the matter of the fighter being a trained warrior. It's only through this training (fighter of 4th level to gain specialization) that a fighter gets these feats. Thats why a fighter cant cast spells as a feat, or get uncanny dodge, or shape shift, est.

Thats why there is mutli-classing. If somethings such as specialization wasnt a class only ability, then there would be no need to have the class at all.

I agree that weapon focus should be allowed for a weapon group but only as a fighter class only privlage.

Fighter class privilages need to be far more powerful than the spec/greater spec and greater focus feats.

I posted a list of "fighter paths" that borrows from 2e material and the concept of becoming more of a particular "weapon based martial artist" like a dual wielding specialist, a 2 handed weapon specialist, a weapon and shield specialist, or a combat maneuver specialist.

This would change what class based powers you get at level up.

A flat rate of +2 to hit and + 4 to damage is not class-defining and ALL other warrior classes get better abilities as they level up. Smite can do hundreds of damage, divine might will give you more than +4 to hit and damage, assuming you have at least 18 cha (which pallys and clerics should have at a reasonable level), barbarians get greater and mighty rages, the strength bonus alone gives the equivalent of having ALL...

I agree with you 100%, espcially at higher levels. I have always found the fighter and rouge greatly lacking at higher levels.

I've used a lot of things from 2e (combat and tactics still one of my favorites). I have several fighter only feats such as (but not limited to): weapon mastery, high mastery, weapon tandem, weapon insight (can apply weapon focus to a group of sim wpns), chosen weapon specialization (combines greater weapon focus and specialization), armor specialization, est.

One of these days ill post them. I'd actually like to see what your paths look like or the link to them. I have a feeling in the end i will write my own PHB as there seems to be to many faults not just in 3.5 but pathfinder too.

JohnnyKage wrote:

Conan became a fighter (never a rouge). Just because you steal doesn't mean you have to be a rouge. Think of t in terms of why the assassin class was dumped.

And...if you guys remember, Conan was stupid. He didn't know what the hell was going on until some other barabrain jumped on him, and started eating him in the gladiator pit.

Conan didn't learn how to read and write until he became trained (aka a fighter). I see Conan more as a low level barbarian, eventually a high level fighter with a good climb/use rope skill.

Have you ever read a Conan story? The ones by Howard, the original author?

Conan was anything but stupid. In fact, he was pretty sly and witty, in his own barbaric way. And charismatic to boot. The fact that he was not used to "civilized" customs does not mean he's stupid. In one of the early stories (but one of the last in Conan's timeline), The Phoenix in the Sword, as a king he is seen promoting the arts and culture... The arts!

And I think the Pathfinder Barbarian is ideal to model Conan-like characters. How many times does Conan "panterish twists" and "cat-like leaps", dodging enemies and darting past files of enemies to confront the sorcerer, even when he's caught in the "red mist"? That's exactly what Guarded Stance does.

Having playtested the class recently, I can say that my half-orc barbarian is much more versatile, interesting and fun to play than any previous version, and is much more Conan-like if you wish to build your PC after that fashion.

And about Illiteracy, I like 1st level Barbarians Illiterate too, but this is a very minor point, if at all, and it does not bother me at all.

I own several "Howard books" and some of the first graphic novels. When I said he was stupid I was speaking in generalized terms of "not knowing the great world around him." My appoligies for not being specific.

Perhaps this will explain my point (I'll try to be specific this time):

Main Entry: bar·bar·i·an
Pronunciation: \bär-ˈber-ē-ən\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin barbarus — more at barbarous
Date: 14th century
1 : of or relating to a land, culture, or people alien and usually believed to be inferior to another land, culture, or people
2 : lacking refinement, learning, or artistic or literary culture

Just because Conan was very smart doesn't mean he woke up one day knowing how to read and write. He was taught. Because he was smart prehaps you could say he was a fast learner. However he certainly didn't run over to the great library in his village to learn how to.

1st level Barbarian knowing how to read and write: 100% ridiculousness.

Back to Rage Points:

I understand were you are coming from ZeroCharisma but here’s why I disagree with you:

A barbarian is a specialized fighter in game terms, so is the paladin for that matter. Through-out D&D/AD&D the core classes have always been the cleric, fighter, thief and magic-user. Every other class was and still is, a specialization in some area based off the 4 core classes.

There is only so much room for the diversification of a class such as the Barbarian. In game terms the Barbarian is not that different from prestige classes. The main reason why the Barbarian became a class was:
1) it made sense to start a barabrian at 1st level rather than down the road as normal specializations (aka prestige class).
2) It added a role-playing and versatility element to the game itself at 1 st level.

Incase you haven't noticed, prestige classes are a very specific and focused class, specializing in a specific are. The Barbarian is a specialized fighter, nothing more. if you want more diversification play a fighter or multi-class as a barbarian/fighter (then you will have a true Conan).

Now we can all agree to disagree in regards to who likes or doesn’t like rage points (you know I don't). However and again, some of the powers are not thought out. It’s an oxymoron to have a rage power such as defensive stance.

Rage + Defense =

Main Entry: ox·y·mo·ron
Pronunciation: \ˌäk-sē-ˈmȯr-ˌän\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ox·y·mo·rons also ox·y·mo·ra \-ˈmȯr-ə\
Etymology: Late Greek oxymōron, from neuter of oxymōros pointedly foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mōros foolish
Date: 1657
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements

Unfortunately, I'm starting to get the impression that some of you are being biased. Perhaps this class is your favorite? So far I haven't seen a credible post that answers my questions of "how some of these new rules makes sense."

Just had this discusion on another thread in regards to Conan. Conan did become a trained warrior (aka a fighter). At best he was a low level Barbarain, then a High Level Fighter.

Conan became a fighter (never a rouge). Just because you steal doesn't mean you have to be a rouge. Think of t in terms of why the assassin class was dumped.

And...if you guys remember, Conan was stupid. He didn't know what the hell was going on until some other barabrain jumped on him, and started eating him in the gladiator pit.

Conan didn't learn how to read and write until he became trained (aka a fighter). I see Conan more as a low level barbarian, eventually a high level fighter with a good climb/use rope skill.

Only The Greater Weapons Focus and Specialization feats are fighter only. Specialization used to be +1 to hit, +2 to damage and has always been a "fighter only," since 2e. They changed specialization as to allow monks and rouges to at least gain a +1 to hit.

Though these feats are listed as feats, they are also extentions of the fighter class. The fighter's primary ability is to get feats, even with Pathfinder.

There is also a balance issue. If the barbarain can rage with specialization, as well as the paladin with smite, it allows these classes to over-welm the fighter class.

There is also the matter of the fighter being a trained warrior. It's only through this training (fighter of 4th level to gain specialization) that a fighter gets these feats. Thats why a fighter cant cast spells as a feat, or get uncanny dodge, or shape shift, est.

Thats why there is mutli-classing. If somethings such as specialization wasnt a class only ability, then there would be no need to have the class at all.

I agree that weapon focus should be allowed for a weapon group but only as a fighter class only privlage.

JohnnyKage wrote:

Guarded Stance (Ex): The barbarian gains a dodge bonus to her Armor Class equal to 1/2 her barbarian level for 1 round against melee attacks. (2 rage points)

What? How? Who?

You go into "RAGE," "hacking and slashing," "not caring for bodily harm." Now it doesn't matter? You can now go into a defensive stance by spending Rage Points? How does this make "SENSE"???? Sense is the key word here my friends.

A barbarian who swims his weapon around in a rage will undoubtedly block some attacks simply because he was in the right spot at the right moment. Plus, who the hell would attack someone who's spitting at them?

Think it out, Johnny; there's no need to get so upset over these things.

Sorry you feel I'm upset. I'm not. Dissappointent? YES

Sorry to say this but your analogy is based on something that can be roll played when an opponent misses his attack. Rage and anything Defensive for this ability doesn’t make sense. Going on offense and defense is something a trained warrior does…I believe it’s called a “fighter.”

Here’s an analogy of my own: would it make sense for the Drow to see perfectly fine in daylight (without having to take a feat)? If the answer is no, then it doesn’t make sense either that Barbarians can be defensive during Rages or read and write without having to take literacy.

lmao!!!

Thats great he has a intelligence of 12. Hell, he could have an intelligence of 18 for all I care. You just dont wake up one day knowing how to read and write. You have to be taught.

Barbarians don't use reading and writing, they use crude art-work and symbols. It's not only a matter of intelligence, it's also a matter of culture!!! Most cultures Barbarains didn't know how to read and write. And for those very few who did, they were taught how to use a weapon, use a tool, hunt, est, well before they learned how to read and write.

I bet Conan the Barbarian would have been a better movie if it was...Conan the "Philosopher" or Conan the "Scholar"? Whats next...the Barbarian school of knowledge skill?

Ridiculousness!!!

As far as rage points go...again based on actual high level game play testing...there annoying, just another thing you have to keep track of. Its not so hard on the player end but its a another pain in the butt on the DM side, which eventually leads to the slowing down of the game...then eventually it leads to pain in the butt for players because, there now waiting too. And sorry to tell you, pre-sketch or not, its just more added time.

I don't mind spending time on things worth spending time on. But it's just not needed.

Some of the rage powers are retarded too. When in a rage you lose -2 to your AC. You also cant use a couple of skills. All because: thats right you guessed it, YOUR IN RAGE!!!

However, heres one genius Rage power:

Guarded Stance (Ex): The barbarian gains a dodge bonus to her Armor Class equal to 1/2 her barbarian level for 1 round against melee attacks. (2 rage points)

What? How? Who?

You go into "RAGE," "hacking and slashing," "not caring for bodily harm." Now it doesn't matter? You can now go into a defensive stance by spending Rage Points? How does this make "SENSE"???? Sense is the key word here my friends.

It's truly my belief that some of these powers created are not thought out other than to create something new.

It's the same thought process of WotC. Nothing was balanced here. Just more silly non-sense.

I have 2 major problems with the Barbarian class.

1st) Now Barbarians are literate? How does that make sense? They are uncivilized yet they can read and write? Instead of storming a local village for supplies and food, they raid them for their books? What the ****!?!

I can understand a barbarian eventually learning to read and write as he explores new lands, and has friends that teach him how to read and write. However, at 1st level I find it comical at best to suggest the barbarian knows how to read and write.

2nd) Rage points and rage powers: In no manner does this system simplify anything. In fact, it does just the opposite and creates far more work, especially for a DM. After play testing, espcially at high levels, this system sucks.

I can understand the fighter and rouge classes needing a boost above all other classes, particularly at higher levels. However, I don’t believe that’s the case for the Barbarian.

If there is any boosting that’s strongly recommended I think some high-level rage feats could be created and that’s it; you can use some rage powers and convert them to feats. The No Illiteracy and rage points/powers have to go.

I don't think armour training is bad. Sure, the max dex and armour penalties are powerful, but the fighter can use it.

I personly don't like the idea of an unconditional class bonus to a single save - especially a weak one. Unnecessarily complicated. Just give him the good save.

Weapon Mastery is called Weapon Mastery because there's no weapon mastery feat in the available rules, so they don't have to pander to that. In fact, they can't take those rules into consideration.

Im guess you mean "conditional class bonus"? The armor training is a conditional bonus, I just stated it. His armor doesnt get better just his training. A fighter caught up in a entanglement spell is not going to be able to take advantage of the bonus whether its defensive or armor training.

I know Pathfinder and PHB 3.5 do not have a bonus or feat called "weapon mastery" but other source books do that people may use. Hence the possibility of "Grand" mastery seems more fitting.

Changes made for Agile Warrior:

Heres a idea i created that was just redesign to go along with the pathfinder fighter...I'm including it because it may make for a new addition to the PFHB.

Fighter Variant Templates: (New)
The Fighter variant template allows for an alternate type off fighter. A variant template substitutes one or more starting class abilities at 1st level. Class abilities not mentioned in the template remain unchanged from the core fighter class. All variant templates must be selected at character creation and cannot be changed once selected. Once a variant template has been chosen, you cannot multi-class between the core Fighter class and any other core variant template. Fighter variants are considered “fighters” for all game purposes unless otherwise stated.

Designer Note: Variant templates are an alternative to using prestige classes for minor class changes. They are also effective especially at character creation (1st level) when a prestige class makes do not apply and not having to create a totally new character class. The variant template is based on the old AD&D 2nd edition of character class kits. I see a character like "Drittz" being an Agile Warrior more than any other type of class created thus far (icluding prestige classes).

Agile Warrior:
Unlike the conventional Fighter, the Agile Warrior relies on his dexterity, speed and wits in combat, rather then brute strength. Agile Warriors make for great archers, swashbucklers, and two-weapon fighters as examples.

Abilities: Dexterity is very important, followed by Strength and Constitution.
Class Skills (Changes): Gains Acrobatics (Dex), the rest remains the same.
Class Features: (same as fighter except were noted):

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An Agile Warrior is proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with light and medium armors and light shields. He loses proficiency in heavy armor, heavy shields and the tower shield.

Weapon Finesse: The agile warrior gains this feat as a bonus at 1st level in addition to his regular bonus fighter feat.

Uncanny Defense (Ex): The agile warrior can add his Intelligence or Wisdom bonus modifier to his armor class against a single opponent in a given round if he is wearing light or no armor at all.
A condition that makes the character lose his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes him lose this dodge bonus. The character must be aware of the attack to gain this bonus. Also, dodge bonuses stack with each other, unlike most other types of bonuses.
Base Reflex Save Bonus: Changes from poor to good (PHB, page 22).

Special Disadvantages: Unlike the core fighter, the use of heavy armor or heavy shields (including the tower shield) prevents the agile warrior from using his defensive training ability (starting at 3rd level), because of his reliance on freedom of movement and dexterity.

This is still a work in progress. any helpful ideas would be appreciated.

I can't say i would feel sorry for the mutli-classer. He would still have tons of benefits.

Regardless, the main reason the core classes are beefed up in Pathfinder is "so" you dont have to go multi-class or prestige class crazy.

It's a wonderful thing to have core classes that are now very intresting to play all the way to 20th level.

VERY interesting points.

the future of the Realms is in our hands. ...this time, literally!

Thats my thinking exactly. This whole 4e thing may be the bast thing thats happened.

I've been writing a ton of ideas for the project, and going through some old artwork to use for it too. Maybe in a week or so i'll have some more refined story lines to present.

I'm hoping i can actually get some help with this too. Seeing is believing so perhaps if a few creative minds see how serious i want to take this project i may be able to gather a good design team.

in the mean time, if anyone has some ideas...please post them. I could use all the help i can get.

Does anyone feel the same way? Yes and No.

I think that as a all around fighter he's awesome. He the most versatile warrior around. you can build him into almost anything.

Today I posted something in the "Races and Classes" alpha 3 section that you may appreciate.

Go to: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/feedback/alpha3/racesClasses/issuesWithTheFighterClass61wws

If you noticed I suggested changing some names as we already use a Weapon Mastery feat, (from 2e Combat and tactics) as an example.

Our house rules go as follows:

1) Weapon focus automatically changes to greater weapon focus for free (when reaching a BAB of +8) for dedicated class fighters in the game (mutli-classing forces you to take the actual feat).

Weapon specialization works the same way with a BAB of +12). This is a big boon for fighters as it frees up 2 feat slots at later levels and boost the classes abilities.

Eample:

2) We also have a Weapon Mastery Feat (a fighter class only feat, that can be taken at 14th level or higher) though he needs to have Great Wpn focus and Spesicalization and imptoved critical to take it.

With a name change suggested, at 20th regardless a fighter gets "Weapon Grand Mastery" as presented as Weapon Mastery per Pathfinder.

Eventually i'll post all my feat ideas/house rules but I am currently modifing some of them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as adding the extra attack and all...it would be to much I think. With pathfinder...at 20th level a fighter would have a +24 to hit, +4 with his chosen weapon, auto critical and +1 damage mutiplier.

Add in the feats (not including our Weapon master) you have +26, +8 and a -2 bonus to your critical range, auto critical and +1 damage mutiplier.
Add our Weapon Mastery (taken at 14th level) you add another +1 to hit and +2 to damage.

You could do some serios damage in a round and you dont have to smite or rage to do it with your chosen weapon.

House rule: (Weapon Mastery)

Me and my group have been play testing this class alot lately using the Aplha 3.

The biggest issue is the Armor Training ability. We like the +1 AC bonuses but the bonuses to Armor penalty and Max Dex we find to be a little to much. If a character has a high eneough dexterity, it really gets over board especially when he starts doing flips in platemail.

This past week we changed armor traing to "defensive training: with the following rules:

This was also a good alternative for a fighter who wanted to be more along the lines of an archer with out having to play a ranger.

Other minor changes were just name changes do to feats used from other sources. Changes are as follows:

Play tested the night before with a few streamlined rules and pathefinder alpha 3 for 4 hours at diffferent levels (1st, 5th and 10th).

The 3 big things used were:

1) Skill Consolidation: (most left unchanged)
- Perception (listen, search and spot)
- Stealth (hide and Sneak)
- Atheletics (climb, jump and swim)
- Acrobatics (balance, fly and tumble)

2) Saving Throws: 1/2 level + ability + (if class had good saving throw we added +1 at 5th and +1 every 5 there after)
Spell DC: 10 + spell + 1/2 Caster Level

3) Minor Changes:
- Favorered Class give +2 skill points at 1st lvl (thats it)
- Changed Fighters armore proficiency to Defensive Training ( most players didn't like idea of doing acrobatic flips in platemail)
- a few others i can't think of right now.

Anyho...
It worked out very well. Conversion took 2 seconds, and no player issues, (even when the players had to swim across a river and climb a small cliff). NPC's were much faster to make (probably the biggest positive.

The continuation of 3.5 Realms after DR-1384…

I plan to keep using the 3.5 rules (maybe add some Pathfinder changes or use them entirely or re-write my own PHB house rules).

That said…I also plan on ignoring the 4e FR spell plague and what happens in DR-1385 in regards to the weave being destroyed (per The Grand History of the Realms). I also plan on waiting to see what 4e FR lore will eventually happen, and if I like it, I will use it.

As of right now I have a list of (very rough ideas), events dated from DR-1385to DR-1401 that will happen in my campaign (ideas come from varied sources, many my own). Before writing a finalized version I do plan on waiting to see what 4e Realms looks like first so as I can include them in future time lines if I like the story ideas.

With so many people looking to continue the history of the 3.5 realms and not necessarily follow 4e Realms lore, does anyone plan on creating a general time line of events and story ideas after DR-1384? Would anyone here be interested on working on a “what happens after” DR-1384 3.5 Realms with a timeline with events and stories that could be shared here or elsewhere with like minded 3.5 FR fans? This would be similar to what Brain James did for post DR-1385 (Grand History of the Reams).

I like some of the ideas of 4e. If it's smart and usefull why not make use it?

I think your missing the whole point.

To use your example of 2 12th level clerics, one with a religion of 15 ranks the other with 5. For arguements sakes lets say they both worship/serve the same deity. It's an easy skill challenge in regards to know something of thier own faith. The Religion skill primarily would come into play with regards to knowing another deity's dogma.

Heres were I still say it doesn't define the 2 clerics "over-all" because you are totally focued on one small aspect of these 2 clerics (thier religion rank). Theres the role-playing aspect, the attributes, feats, other skill ranks, ect. Religion ranks alone would not define one cleric from the other, same deity or not.

Throw in the element of the d20 and a difficulty of 20 as another example: both clerics "could" still know the same thing if they bolth made a good roll. Does one have a better chance than the other? Of-course he does, but ranks in just religion for these 2 clerics would not define the characters as a "whole."

"Over-all and whole" are the key words here.

A few skills grouped together would not hurt the game in the least bit. This includes "over-all" character development.

Going back to my example of jump, swim, climb being combined into one skill group called Athletics:

I have 5 players...one is a pirate, multi-classing with the fighter/rouge classes. Unlike the other 4 characters, this "pirate's backround" comes from having few years at sea before he went adventuring. Again for arguements sakes lets say they are all 6th level and all of them have the Athletics Skill at max rank of 9. Perhaps the pirate should swim better then the rest of the characters? I say yes for this character and he makes a little note with a +2 for swimming and -2 for jumping when he uses his athletics skill.

As a continued example, perhaps 1 player's backround comes from an inland kingdom and he's never seen a major water source before per his backround. Perhaps he can't swim at all. So I either increase the difficulty rank for this 1 player when swiming or just take out swim all together till he is taught from the pirate. Being the character has a maxed rank in Athletics it shouldn't take to long till he learns.

"Over-all" the grouping of those 3 skills saved time because 3 didn't have to make any modifications at all.

The easiest solution is not changing the characters rank in Athletics at all for any of the characters. As my final example: 5 players all from previous example. They are on a ship...ship rolls over in a storm...all characters have to make a difficult swim check of 15. For the pirate I make the difficulty a 12 (because hes been at sea) and from the one who doesn't know how to swim I make it a 20 because regardless hes a good athlete. I'm the GM so my word is god (in pertaining to the game).

This would all take all but 2 secounds to do. It was also the characters "backround that defined the characters more than any of thier skill ranks."

Even when skills are grouped it's easy to make fast alternations ingame (a very important aspect). Out of game, it's faster for players to assign ranks when creating and adjusting for new levels, for GM's its faster for npc creation, monsters creation and all of thier uses.

Once again I will state that I fail to see how the grouping of some skills would remotely hurt the game (including character development) other than to make it simpler and faster "over-all and as a whole."

I wasn't being literal with Character A and B. Thought I was being funny...err guess not.

It defines them in that character A actually had a decent shot at this and B didn't. Luck (or the absence thereof) decided on how it went down here, but it a less extreme situation these ranks show the player what his (viable) options are.

Character B did live because of "luck". Well my friends, that is this game for you...luck, everytime you roll that D20. That said, its a "small" role to say it "defines a character" in regards to who has a higher skill rank in jumping, when you roll that D20, or very little to be honest and fair.

Does a Cleric with a Religion rank of 15 define a character who has a religion role of 5? Yes but only a "small" amount providing there are 2 clerics in a party. In the over-all outlook of a character again, NO.

"Over-all" choice of skills, feats, class, race, role-playing, ect defines a character. A character having a high rank in religion opposed to a character having a high rank in "Athletics/Jump" constitutes defining a character. Who has a higher jump rank or even jump vs climb doesn't or very little. It most certainly doesn't define a character when you take a "over-all" look at the character.

Again, consolidating some skills makes for better, faster game play, especially in regards to NPC's, GMing, and Monsters. This is the key point.

I fail to see, how jump and climb being consolidated makes for improved game play and/or any significant character definition in regards to the "over-all" wellfare of the game.

Making a big deal of a few skills combined is nit picking. Futhermore...in character creation a player saids to me...I have a pirate and he should be a better swimmer but my swim skill is combined with athletics...easy fix...I give him a +2 rank adjustment when swimming but a -2 jumping. I don't need to do that with every character and every npc, ect.

I have always used a combining method for skills as house rules myself.

Athletics: Climb, Jump, Swim. Included also Escape Grabs.
Acrobatics: Escape Artist, Balance, Tumble, Dex based Stunts.
Endurance: Endurance, Run, Hold Breath, How long you can swim, ect.

I like the way Pathfinder has already combined skills such as listen and spot into Perception.

It speeds up the game and there is less to keep track of. This to me is the most important feature of combing/grouping skills.

I don't understand where skills define a character. To me role-playing and how a character makes use of his skills ingame defines a character. The over-all selection of trained skills defines a character too. If characters are defined by who had more ranks in jump or climb then it's a sad day for role-playing.

As an example: Character A has a jump rank of 10. Character B has a jump rank of 5 and is wearing plate mail. Faced with a wide jump of 15ft and a ton of monsters behind them both characters decide to risk the jump. Character A rolls a 1 falls and dies, Character B rolls a 20 and clears the jump and lives. Now answer me this: at what point does this example define a character other than who lived and who died?

When it comes to GMing and using tons of monsters and NPC's, its also much easier to use a simpler skill set.

Perhaps in ending, there are those that want a simpler/grouped version of skills and there are those who like tons of skills. I don't see why both systems can't be included with the latter being optional. In an advanced skill set being used give each class more skill points, and thats that.

Thats my 2 cents.

Oops wrong section.

-Every pc should start from the base of 1/2 level + ability modifier
-Every class should have an almost static bonus in one or more saving throws, maybe that scale a bit with class level (ex fighter could have a +1 fortitude bonus at first level and another +1 every other 4-5 levels.

(the same for armor class could be GREAT!)

I agree. It's simple and it's easly to convert from 3.5 rules for the most part.

I too, like the idea of adding the "1/2 level" to the armor class. It keeps an honest challage to an AC at higher levels, rather than automatic hits.

I'm not a fan of 4e after playing it but it does have a few useful ideas. The using and adding of "1/2 Level" to Saving throws and AC is one of them.