Though there are several classes that would be good for that, I just have to pitch in my support for the Alchemist.
They can get their ACs up astronomically high, they have great melee attacks with their mutagens, great options for ranged between bombs and Throw Anything, also some great debuffing options like Dispelling Bomb and Tanglefoot Bomb.
Alchemists can use Wands and Staves. Something that often seems to get missed, somehow. This opens up Cure Wands and Haste Wands as an option.
"An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so)." (Emphasis mine.)
Spell-trigger = Wands and Staves. Spell-completion = Scrolls.
All told, the Druid probably is the overall best for this, but I just really like the Alchemists.
It looks like it's been a little while since there was discussion on this thread, but I still wanted to jump in on it.
I've been using the system that Darkholme linked to, and LeDM independently reinvented, for over a year now and my players and I are very happy with it. I should also point out that my NHEP system is an independent reinvention developed after erian_7 developed a system he calls the Advantage Point System.
As discussed briefly above, I actually have added Pearls of Power, as well as Metamagic Rods, to the system. It all works pretty seamlessly, eliminates treasure grinding, requires very little treasure re-writing and almost completely divorces Power from Wealth.
A few notes and quirks of the system that have arisen:
Spoiler:
-Players will be constantly searching for ways to use their money to circumvent the system and find a way to purchase "plusses". You have to be pretty firm. If it gives a "plus" it is almost certainly under the system. Items like Ring of Force Shield and Bracers of Archery will eventually be held up as possible cash purchases to increase their bonuses. As these things arise, give them a point cost for it. Usually that just means drop the last 3 digits of the price. So, 8000 gold becomes 8 points.
-After some soul-searching, I have added magically enhanced ammunition back into cash purchasable items. It's a common device in low-level adventures that the PCs are given magic arrows to be used to fight an otherwise nearly unbeatable foe, such as Ghost-Touch arrows and Incorporeal undead.
-When altering treasure, you'll often find that the "Boss" of the adventure (if it's a pre-written one, anyway) has nearly all of his/her treasure in the form of magic "plus" gear: Ring of Protection, Headband of Intelligence, Cloak of Resistance, etc. It would be a real buzzkill if the PCs defeat the foe, then find nothing. I add up 10% of the buy price of those items and replace them with jewelry of that value, or other magic items totaling up to something around that amount.
My number one recommendation for players who are entirely new to D&D is to play a Fighter.
Just have them take feats that give all-the-time bonuses and aren't real tricky to track. Weapon Focus, Dodge, maybe Power Attack as sort of a "Special."
They get to play a strong, useful character, while learning the basics of movement, actions, combat, etc. All without having to fiddle around with spells and adjudicating tricky bonuses and ranges.
They are not too likely to get killed. Just give them armor and a sword and let them run wild.
No, you misfire 11 out of 36 times(30.555555...%). Ultimate Combat pg. 140: "Because this ammunition forces a saving throw instead of making an attack roll, the misfire rules are slightly different. If you roll a 1 with either of the damage dice, the firearm misfires."
Ah, I see. I was including an attack roll misfire with the damage misfire.
If you take Dragonchess Player's numbers a little further, you'll misfire 37.5% of the time (7 or 8 times out of every 20.)
It looks like if you have Grit to spare, it just takes a move action to fix the gun and can carry on with the fight just giving up your full-attack.
Maybe if you have more than one gun, you just drop the jammed one and keep fighting with your spare?
I guess in your original post, Starbuck_II, you were saying that you were concerned that it doubles your chances of misfire, but it looks like it nearly quadruples your chances. I guess if you're really counting on your character not misfiring you shouldn't use the cartridge.
It seems worth it to me in certain situations if you feel you can spare the Grit to fix the gun, or spare the Standard action to fix it if you can't spare the Grit, or you can spare the gun because you have extras.
This is actually an awesome idea and I think I might steal it. Not just for Sorcerers, but anyone who takes the Scribe Scroll feat. Even an Oracle can have a "Spellbook" this way. They just add spells to the sheets of paper as scrolls. When they use the page, the magic writing disappears and can be replaced later with a new spell. I think it's pretty cool.
Agreed. It is a cool roleplaying idea. I would not let one of my players have any kind of discount on the craft cost for doing it, but I don't think it breaks anything to let a player bind their scrolls together into a book.
Furthermore, I think it would be a pretty awesome way to hand out treasure scrolls. A book full of all the 0 and 1st level scrolls for a given class wouldn't be a bank breaker, but still useful in many situations.
It looks like Ultimate Combat diverges from the Core Rulebook when it comes to crafting Firearms and ammunition.
Near as I can tell, you have to have the Gunsmithing feat to craft that stuff. In which case there is no craft check or DC, you just automatically succeed in the time frame given in the feat description.
Bullets, pellets and blackpowder cost one tenth market price.
Guns and cartridges cost half the market price.
Alchemical cartridges require that you have a rank in Craft (Alchemy), but there is still no check.
It's a little wonky, but I guess it allows a Gunslinger to function in a setting that does not necessarily have guns. He might as well make all his own stuff anyway since he gets Gunsmithing for free at 1st level.
For example, it would take a Gunslinger 1 day and 99 gold to craft 90 bullets and 90 doses of blackpowder.
Alternately, 1 day and 495 gold would net the Gunslinger 66 metal cartridges.
I think this is a viable role playing approach as well.
In a recent campaign I GM'd, I allowed a Druid in the party to think of the animal companion almost as if it were some sort of incarnation of Nature that could morph from one animal form to another, but using the same time and trouble as releasing one and calling another. The rule crunch is basically the same, just a different flavor and it allowed her to give her animal companion a personality that carried forward, regardless of the shape of the animal companion.
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
6 people marked this as a favorite.
Some of these may be old information for most people, but I haven't seen them mentioned yet in this thread and all of these have caught me by surprise at one point or another.
-Dispel Magic no longer has an Area effect. It also no longer has a +10 maximum on the caster check.
-Greater Dispel Magic has the Area effect, but can only remove 1 spell per 4 caster levels on the Targeted version. No more chance to strip off all the buffs from the evil wizard in one cast.
-Criticals and Sneak Attacks work on almost everything, but Oozes, Elementals and Incorporeal Undead.
-Mirror Image is mostly the same, but now if you randomly determine the attack is on the real person, but miss the attack roll by less than 5, you destroy an image.
-Ray of Enfeeblement has a different duration and there's a save now.
-Power Attack no longer has a variable attack penalty and is instead based on your Base Attack Bonus. The Damage Bonus is better than before when compared to the same penalty as 3.5.
-Cleave and Great Cleave no longer require you to drop an opponent to gain additional attack(s), but you can never combine it with a full-attack so no more cleaves on iterative attacks.
-Concentration checks are basically just caster level checks and the DCs are generally higher. (I've been playing Pathfinder for awhile now and for some reason, up until a week ago, I thought you were supposed to roll Spellcraft to make a Concentration check.)
Now that we have both the APG and (soon) Ultimate Magic, how would these classes fit into Cheliax/Westcrown?
Alchemists
Cavaliers
Inquisitors
Magi (the gramatically correct plural of "Magus")
Oracles
Summoners
Witches
And, aside from Tieflings, would any other of the exotic races (from either Bestiary or Bestiary 2 fit the feel of adventure path? (Which ones?)
One of my players is an Oracle who worked as a Fortune Teller, but became so fed up with dire and miserable readings that she decided to sell her Harrow Deck and buy equipment to do something about the troubles in Westcrown. To rewrite the city's fate, so to speak.
There's a great chase scene in Curse of the Crimson Throne. The Chase Scene mechanics described in the Game Mastery Guide seem to be based off the CotCT chase scene.
Anyway, in the adventure the PCs are supposed to chase someone across some city rooftops. The chase can be sort of abstractly described with a bunch of movement spaces that represent an abstract obstacle of some sort along the chase.
When I ran this scene for my players, I just drew a bunch of 2 inch by 2 inch squares on a piece of paper that they could move their miniatures along as they pursued their quarry. In each square are listed two skill checks. Usually, one is a lower DC and one a higher, but it's good to mix things up as much as possible.
On each character's turn, they have 3 options:
1) Use a move action to move 1 square for free, and then take a standard action such as firing an arrow or casting a spell, or if they've caught up, attempting to initiate a grapple.
2) Use a full-round action to attempt one of the two skill checks, and if successful, move forward two squares. Failure means no progress, failure by 5 or more means you fall off the roof.
3) Use a full-round action to attempt both skill checks, and if successful, move forward three squares. Same penalties for failure as above.
In the CotCT scene, the skill checks were usually Balance, Climb and Jump checks to take little shortcuts or maybe Spot checks to notice easier routes.
It creates this really interesting scenario where more agile characters like Rogues and Monks move rapidly after their target, whereas Wizards and Clerics are often unable to make the skill checks and move slowly, but support with spells.
This could probably be adapted for long range pursuit over days and weeks, but you would probably want to use Diplomacy, Perception, Knowledge skills and Survival to determine rapid progress.
2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.
On the Double Defending Quarterstaff:
By RAW, it totally does stack with itself and you are not required to attack with the weapon to get the AC bonus, only to hold it. The point of the Free Action deciding whether the bonus is added to attack or AC before making attacks is so that the character does not just take 2 Free Actions to get full bonus to attack, then full bonus to AC immediately afterward.
It's really not that cheesy because this is the most expensive way to buy AC bonus and it's probably considered balanced because a character is, theoretically, choosing to spend all his Weapon money on AC rather than being better at damage.
It gets a little weirder when it's a character like a Wizard or Sorcerer that doesn't get into melee much, or a Monk that can fight while holding the weapon, without using the weapon. But the money they spend on this would have otherwise gone into things like Metamagic Rods.
For the casters, in order to get the full +10 AC bonus from both ends, they would have to hold the Quarterstaff in both hands, just as though they were holding two +5 Defending daggers, negating somatic casting.
It seems like a Neutral Inquisitor values something outside the Moral or Ethical axes. Maybe, for example, a GM could allow an Inquisitor of Nethys to use their alignment-based powers on those that are specifically enemies of Nethys, or who are violently opposed to magic use.
That should be a houserule, not an actual rule. Personally, I'm kind of fine with those on the fence missing out a little on some things.
The last time I did anything with the planes, I was running a 3.5 edition Planescape campaign. However, I've come to terms with the fact that no one will ever care about the Planescape CS as much as I do, or did. No one I've met really wants to play in that setting. If I do anything with the planes in the future, I'll probably stick fairly close to the Pathfinder version.
One way to try to get around the inherent imbalance of classes who are more or less handicapped by the lack of equipment is to shackle those classes at the beginning in some way.
The Wizard has no spell pouch and no spellbook, so he's not much more than a commoner. He is not shackled in any way because the slavers did not see him as a threat. He quickly finds a crossbow to help him contribute when the adventure begins.
The Sorcerer would be shackled (Spell Failure Penalty) and gagged (no verbal component). Once the adventure began, the Sorcerer would lose the gag, but not immediately the shackles. The Spell Failure would help balance the Sorcerer to the others. He's got some spells, but they don't work all the time.
A monk could also be shackled, but perhaps more thoroughly. The shackles would give the Monk a penalty to his/her attack rolls and slows him/her down a little. About the time the Fighter finds a club, the Monk can get some or all of the shackles removed.
In Curse of the Crimson, there's a part where the PCs won't be able to sleep for a couple of days. After the first night, the PCs are pretty much automatically Fatigued. Or maybe there's a Con-check or Fort save, I don't remember.
I kind of don't like using non-lethal damage, because then a punch in the face is more likely to knock you out. In reality, if you're sleepy, a punch in the face is more likely to wake you up.
What about this:
Suggested Sleep Deprivation House Rule wrote:
You start making Con checks at your usual bedtime. The first failure makes you Fatigued, the second Exhausted, the third Unconscious. Unconsciousness is like the sleep spell where slapping or damage automatically wakes you up.
You make the checks every 4 hours, and the DC goes up by 1 each time. If you fail a check, you are given a pass on the next check, that way you can stay up for at least 16 extra hours even if you fail every check.
At normal bedtime - DC 5 Con check
4 hours later - DC 6 Con check
etc.
This is a great example of false errata, actually. The concept of elves not sleeping is, in fact, a Forgotten Realms campaign-specific thing, one that's sort of virally spread to other campaigns. As a result, we'll be downplaying this facet of elves in Pathfinder RPG products. Elves not sleeping is more on the side of a campaign specific bit of flavor, in any event, so we didn't mention it in the Core Rules. Note that we also don't mention that they DO sleep—that bit of flavor is up to the GM, basically.
The whole city is supposed to be one huge mega-dungeon extending deep below the surface.
Developing this further would help out those groups that want to more fully explore the city during Rise of the Runelords.
Or it could be set after the events of the AP and the players are intrepid treasure hunters drawn to the promise of treasure from the newly rediscovered city of wealth.
I imagine a sort of frontier, gold-rush style settlement would develop on top to take advantage of all the looters and their need for supplies. Ancient cults would be arriving to find lost secrets. Wizard guilds would arrive for research. All these groups would be vying for wealth and control of the city.
After playing in and running games for 17 years, I've learned that the only person who will ever run the game you really want to play, is yourself.
I spent years developing campaigns that none of my players cared about as much as I did. Slowly, over time, I've stopped trying to design the perfect campaign for myself and started trying to really determine what sort of things my players respond to.
Now I have more fun running than playing. My players seem to prefer my games to other DMs'. I invest a lot of time into making the game into something that is as close as possible to what my players would think of as the ideal game and I am rewarded with player loyalty and enthusiasm.
I kind of doubt I'll ever get to play in a Planescape game or in any of the Adventure Paths that particularly appeal to me, but it's okay, my DM expectations are probably way too high now.
I think I'm gonna sit down and see how many of the current spells bleed into each other- it might be a bit easier than rewriting the spellbooks.
I've actually spent quite a bit of time researching that. By and large, very few spells bleed together. There's the ones everyone thinks of off the top of their heads. Fireball and Delayed Blast Fireball. Teleport and Greater Teleport (and Dimension Door to a lesser extent.) Protection from Evil, Magic Circle vs. Evil, Dispel Evil and one other I can't remember right now. The Cure spells.
Often, when you really examine them, the ones you think might bleed together end up having really different mechanics to them. Cone of Cold and Polar Ray are almost nothing alike except for cold damage. Fireball and Meteor Swarm have a few similarities, but are ultimately pretty different, neither of them are really all that much like Burning Hands or Scorching Ray.
I'm not trying to talk you out of doing it though, it was a fun project.
I was trying to see if there was an easy way to make sorcerer variants based on a spell theme. Like a Fire Sorcerer that gets all the fire spells or a Force Sorcerer that gets all the force spells like Magic Missile, Mage Armor and Forcecage.
What I discovered was that no matter how you choose your themes, you end up with really unbalanced spell lists where some of them have tons of useful spells and others are pretty sparse and unappealing. There's also big gaps in the lists with large piles of spells elsewhere. Like if you had a sorcerer of cold, he might get a bunch of cold spells one level, then go a couple of levels with no new spells.
I suppose to keep the spell list from getting "boring" there's virtually no linearity to the spells. Sometimes though, I think it could still be "fun" to have more of a feeling of connectivity to a caster from one level to another. If he uses burning hands a lot at 1st level, maybe he would use a lot of fire spells throughout his career.
One possible way to use this idea would be to require a feat for every spell you wish to be able to cast this way.
Flexible Spell Casting
Requirements: Ability to cast 2nd level spells, Heighten Spell Metamagic feat
When taking this feat, choose one spell to which it applies. The caster gains the ability to cast this spell at any spell level from I to IX to achieve greater or lesser effects.
You make take this feat as many times as you like, each time it applies to a different spell.
The main problem with allowing all casters to cast spells at any level, is that it ultimately gives casters a boost in power and flexibility. A boost they arguably don't need because many feel they are already more powerful than other classes. I sentiment I don't necessarily share, but nonetheless this is how a lot of people feel.
By having to spend a feat on it, it carefully regulates it, but could give a real boost to certain spellcasters, like sorcerers, who really have to choose their spells carefully.
I think I know what you mean about a certain kind of attitude. Maybe it's not what you mean, but I can tell you that there will always be those who drop into threads for no other reason than to crap on them. It really has nothing to do with your age.
You might be 13, but you're now at the maturity level where you can say "I like what I like, you telling me you think it's stupid is not going to change that," which basically puts you at a maturity level past many adults I know.
Personally, I have way more respect for people who share opinions about what they think is awesome, as opposed to those who only post to say something is lame.
Anyway, that makes you awesome in my book!
By the way, if someone seems like they are just saying really crappy things to you, my best advice is to not respond, because they feed off the conflict.
I've been looking forward to this one, but don't have it yet.
I enjoyed VIII on the PS2, but felt like it just took too long to get anything done. It's been a long time since I played an RPG that made me feel like I had to run around and level for an hour before fighting the boss.
DQ IV on the DS absolutely hooked me. I could hardly put it down once I started playing it. Mostly because the story felt just as involved and epic as in VIII, but you could just get right to it. Fights moved faster, traveling took less time, etc.
Have you played IV and do you feel it compares favorably to IX?
Another option would be to allow arcane caster access to divine spells and vice versa but at a level higher.
IE
Cure light wounds is a level 2 wizard spell.
Magic Missle is a level 2 cleric spell.
Ohhhh....I kinda like this idea. Thanks.
I do too, but you might require Clerics to cast the spell at 2 levels higher. Otherwise, the better HD, attack, saves and armor proficiency would obviate clerics as the only choice for casters.
Unearthed Arcana (3.5) provides a system with only 3 character classes. I can't remember for sure, but I think they were called Warrior, Expert and Adept. Anyway, the spellcaster could pick any spells they wanted. If I remember correctly, they were sort of like 3.5 sorcerers, but with a broader selection to choose from.
You might also look at Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved. The campaign setting describes a world where many people believe in deities, but there's no proof of them. There are lots of different caster types, but no clerics. I believe at least some "divine"-like spells are available to most casters. In any case, it's a pretty interesting look at alternative classes and casting, but is compatible with 3.5 gaming.
The important thing here is... what's the value gained.
A greater variety of spell effects.
LazarX wrote:
Is the game better served by having a spellbook that's nothing but magic missle and fire dart versions 1-9 instead of having different spells altogether?
No, but that's not what this homebrew is suggesting.
LazarX wrote:
And what would be the point of a first level version of meteor swarm?
I'm sure there's a 1st-level caster out there somewhere that would like to have the option to use a range touch spell to deal bludgeoning and fire damage.
What if instead of having nine versions of each spell, what if you only gained spells at 1st level and every spell levelled? So, you would start with Magic Missile, which would gain at every level, or Fireball, which would do 1d6/level. Perhaps every few levels you could add a new spell or replace one you know. Or maybe every other level you would get some other magical effect. Like metamagic or customizable spell effects.
Somehow I missed this earlier. I think that's an awesome idea.
It could be kind of cool to have a spell-casting class with a very small selection of spells, but their spells would level up with them. Rather than having spell slots, they can just use their magic a certain number of times per day.
It could be a little like a Cleric's Turn Undead or a Paladin's Lay on Hands. They are spell-like abilities that get more powerful as the character levels.
Let's just say we made a class, we could call it a "Warlock" or whatever. A Homebrewed Pathfinder version. Anyway, they get maybe 3 or 4 spells at level 1. They can cast maybe 3 (plus the Charisma Modifier plus their level) spells per day, in any combination. They cast every spell at their highest Spell Level.
It almost sounds like a more Vancian Psionicist, really.
I would estimate that there are roughly 440 spells in the Core Rulebook. If we went to the trouble of fully implementing the idea, there would probably be somewhere in the vicinity of 400 to 420 spells.
No new spells are being added. Very, very, very few are being removed. All the fancy flavor of the various spell names is still preserved.
A (probably imperfect) example:
This is just one spell, but it has some additional text at the end to explain how the spell changes depending on what spell slot it is cast from.
School conjuration (creation) [acid]; Sorcerer/Wizard
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (rhubarb leaf and an adder's stomach), F (a dart)
EFFECT
Range long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Effect one arrow of acid
Duration At least 1 round
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
DESCRIPTION
An arrow of acid springs from your hand and speeds to its target. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. The arrow deals an amount of acid damage instantly, plus an additional amount each round based on the Spell Level cast from and Caster Level, unless neutralized.
I - The arrow deals 1d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round + 1 round/3 levels (Max 4 rounds.)
II - The arrow deals 2d4 acid/round. Duration 1 round + 1 round/3 levels (Max 7 rounds.)
III - The arrow deals 2d4 acid/round. Duration 1 round + 1 round/2 levels (Max 10 rounds.)
IV - The arrow deals 2d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round + 1 round/2 levels (Max 10 rounds.)
V - The arrow deals 2d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round/level (Max 12 rounds.)
VI - The arrow deals 3d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round/level (Max 15 rounds.)
VII - The arrow deals 5d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round/level (Max 25 rounds.)
VIII - The arrow deals 8d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round/level (Max 30 rounds.)
IX - The arrow deals 10d6 acid/round. Duration 1 round/level (Max 36 rounds.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
This is just an off-the-cuff description of what a spell might look like. I'm sure it needs fine tuning. Anyway, spells that could be scaled, like this one, would be. Ones that don't scale very well, like Phantom Steed, would be left as is.
To the OP, I would like to ask - in your idea, how would a Fireball IX differ from a FireBall III cast by an 18th level caster? If the the difference is that Fireball IX allows 9d6 and Fireball III allows 3d6 the amount of damage doesnt scale with the caster level, then all that does it makes the spells weaker, and have too many 9th level spells to choose from when you can really only memorize 2 or 3.
...
To the OP - in short the reason why you won't see this in Pathfinder is that they are trying to stay similar and compatible with 3rd edition products of D&D. Changing that much of the magic system and spells would break any semblance of compatibility.
I guess it wasn't clear from what I wrote. Fireball III works exactly like Fireball does now and is still based on the caster level. Fireball III cast by a 5th level caster = 5d6. Fireball III cast by a 10th level caster = 10d6. Fireball III cast by an 18th level caster, still = 10d6, since the regular Fireball stops advancing at 10th level. As for Fireball IX, hard to say at this point. Maybe it would be 18d8 or 18d10 or 18d12. Or maybe the area would be larger. Or maybe it would be a Swift version of a lower level Fireball spell. It would have to be developed and balanced with existing 9th level spells.
So, just to be clear, any scalable spell cast at its "ordinary" spell level, such as Fireball III or Meteor Swarm IX, would do exactly what it always did for the given caster level. No spells are being eliminated. Spells cast at their "ordinary" spell level are fully backwards compatible.
Also, I really appreciate the comment from James Jacobs. However, I never even considered thinking of this as a genuine suggestion for a Pathfinder product. This is purely an idea to kick around for the "Homebrew Hobbyist." A fun what-if to think about.
Thank you everyone for thoughts, constructive criticism and discussion.
Yet another thread where people post custom made magic items seeking help determining the price and prerequisites of custom designed magic items. :-)
The Staff of the Apprentice
I assume the +2 enhancement is to only one end of the weapon. The +2 to ranged touch spell attacks sounds to me to be the equivalent of a +1 special ability, so that's a +3 weapon. 18000gp right there. The +2 skill bonuses are worth 400gp each. Another 800gp. It has to be a masterwork quarterstaff, so thats 300gp.
Total = 19,100gp
Staff of the Antimage
This one is tough. It's a +2 weapon, with a Bane ability that affects a peculiar type. Anything with SR covers a lot of ground. Most outsiders, high level monks, someone with a Cloak of Spell Resistance. I'd make that a +2 special ability. I've seen somewhere what a +2 to caster level to overcome SR costs, but I can't remember. Throw in the bonus to Dispel and it probably rounds up to 10,000gp. I guess?
Total = 42300gp (Though that seems maybe a little low to me.)
Loremaster’s Staff
MW quarterstaff = 300. +2 = 8000. +1 to 10 skills = 100 each or 1000
Total = 9300gp
Ring of Reciprocation
This is a tough one. It's sort of like casting a spell modified by the Twin Spell Metamagic feat, but effecting you and another rather than the same creature, but twice. Twin has the same requirement as Quicken. Hmm, I'd say it should cost half as much as a Metamagic Rod of Quicken, Lesser.
Total = 17,500gp
Ring of Friendly Extension
Tricky. Those are all fairly low level spells. 1 hour/level is a lot more than just an Extend effect, so it would be more than the cost of thinking of this item as some sort of Lesser Extend Metamagic item. I'd say half the cost of a Metamagic Rod of Extend.
Total = 5500gp
Ring of Personal Amplification
Under 3.5 rules, I'd definitely say it should just cost the standard for a +2 enhancement to an ability score. So, 4000gp. But pathfinder like to only put these sorts of bonuses in particular slots. I guess I would increase the price by 50% for the unusual slot. This is all assuming that the ring does not stack with other existing enhancement bonuses.
There was a bunch of new posts between when I started writing my last post and when I actually hit "Submit." Cool.
Spes Magna Mark wrote:
Wouldn't work well. Once it got to where you started working on wish I-IX, what would be the point of the other spells? :)
I was sort of thinking about that one. Off the top of my head, Wish I would have an expensive material component, or at least expensive for a 1st level character. Maybe 10 or 20 gp. It would allow the caster to duplicate any 0-level Arcane spell or summon a mundane, non-masterwork item worth less than 100 gp with a duration of 1 minute/level before disappearing. I think the expense and the fact that Wish is, by definition, generally creating an effect weaker than other equivalent level spells would be what balances it with the others.
Charender wrote:
The biggest problem is that it renders metamagic obsolete for wizards.
Charender makes an excellent point about meta-magic. The only solution I can see would be to either somehow require the feats in order to do this, which might make players feel required to take the feats. Or to completely dispense with the feats, which may make many feel as though Casters are getting a very much unneeded boost in power.
I'll have to look into Rolemaster, GURPS and Arcana Evolved.
I think Lathiira makes some excellent points. I do want to clarify some of my intentions in regards to this idea that might satisfy some of Lathiira's concerns.
I was sort of thinking that every spell gets a I-IX progression. So it would not really matter that there's more 1st level spells than 9th level spells. What we currently think of as Fireball, would become Fireball III. Fireball III works exactly as it currently does. There would also be a Fireball IX that is not Meteor Swarm. Meteor Swarm would, theoretically, have a I-IX progression as well and would hopefully be balanced with Fireball, but work somewhat differently.
Basically, the same would be true for all spells, the only exception being if multiple spells seem to "obviously" be a progression of each other. So maybe Cure Light Wounds would become Cure I and Cure Moderate would become Cure II and so on, but there would also be Heal I-IX which would work differently. Also, there would be Mass Cure I through Mass Cure IX, all with a different mechanic from Cure and Heal.
This could become super complicated, but I think it could be fun to play.
For example, you could take Heroes' Feast at level 1. Heroes' Feast I, would probably be a pretty limited buffing spell, maybe just a +1 bonus to Fear and Poison saves and 2 or 3 temporary hp. But it would be a nice little bonus that lasts all day.
Magic Missile I - 1d4+1/missile (max 5 missiles)
Magic Missile II - 1d6+1/missile (max 5 missiles)
Magic Missile III - 1d8+1/missile (max 7 missiles)
etc.
The point to something like this would be to ultimately allow a caster to cast any I-IX version of a spell they know; they could choose how they wanted to use their slots.
It would be a ton of work to try and develop balanced versions of every spell for every level, and it would probably eliminate the Heighten Metamagic feat as well as require careful examination for exploits. I guess it just makes more sense to me that a caster could use their spells this way.
Also, there's probably quite a few spells for which this idea makes no sense. Some things just don't scale. However, looking over the list of spells, I feel like I could think of a way to scale most of them.
Honestly, this seems like a pretty obvious idea and I would not be surprised if it's thoroughly been discussed before. Your thoughts are welcome.
I don't like the Robe of the Archmagi. Each Archmage in my world does not have the same abilies and prefernces so why not make a Archmagi robe for each school of magic instead of the Good/Neutral/Evil versions.
I like what you've written here. What would you write for a Universalist School?
Correct. If we EVER intend for an XP award to be given to a single player, we'll say so out loud and clearly in the text.
Frankly, those type of XP awards go against Pathfinder philosophy. It's kinda lame, in my opinion, if everyone's at the game and playing but for some weird reason some of the players end up getting more XP than the others. Lame, and frustrating, and prone to causing dissent and hurt feelings at the table.
Now, if you're a GM who enjoys handing out individual XP awards for things like good roleplay or for a player achieving a long-term personal character goal... that's fine, as LONG as the rest of the players at your table understand and are cool with the rule. It's not something we intend to build into the rules though.
RPG socialism!
I prefer a more capitalistic approach of giving 90% of XP to my favorite player and the other 10% gets divided up amongst the other players. It encourages healthy competition.
Is one or more of your players playing an arcane spell caster? Are you at a point in the campaign where a 75k magic item is appropriate treasure? Why don't you want it to give the Armour Bonus, SR, or Save bonuses? What do you want it to do and more importantly what do your players want it to do? Are your players even interested in getting one in the first place if it isn't the traditional Robe of the Archmage?
How inquisitive. :)
Well, I think the answers to the first two questions are obvious.
I don't want the item to give defensive bonuses for two reasons. First, in my experience, by the time the player is likely to acquire such an item, it is nearly obsoleted by their existing equipment. They want the bonus to overcome SR, but their bonuses from other items are better. Second, I'm using an alternate system where Big Six bonuses come from leveling rather than items. I eliminate Big Six items, which this one basically is, but what wizard does not want to wear a Robe of the Archmagi? If the item is obsoleted, the player feels cheated out of an item that should be awesome, but is instead disappointing.
I want the item to be something that a wizard or sorcerer would want to wear as soon as they could get it, and then all the way to level 20. My players want the same thing. I have not yet discussed with them what they think the item should do, but I wanted to have some options on the table for discussion before I do.
Twin Agate Dragons wrote:
Breakdown of Price
Thanks for the breakdown, that is very helpful. I do have some questions, though. I'm wondering how you got some of these prices. Since the Robe is not a slotless item, wouldn't the value for the Armor bonus by 25,000 and the value of the save bonus 16,000? It was my understanding that an alignment restriction only takes 30% off the price.
Lathiira & Ash Mantle wrote:
Good stuff
Thank you very much for the excellent suggestions! I like the bonus to save DCs especially, but that would be tricky to price, I think. Do you suppose just making the Robe give +2 to CL for overcoming SR AND +2 to all spell save DCs would be roughly appropriate for an item of this price with these restrictions?
I want to offer an alternative Robe of the Archmagi in the campaign I'm GMing. I would like a Robe that does not offer an Armor Bonus, SR, or Save bonus. The bonus to help overcome SR is fine and so is the alignment requirement, but I'm not married to either of them.
Basically, I'm looking for a Robe that is worth at least as much as this one, but does something different than just give a few defensive bonuses, but still fits well with the name. Any and all help/brainstorming/advice/suggestions welcome and appreciated.
This normal-appearing garment can be white (01–45 on d%, good alignment), gray (46–75, neither good nor evil alignment), or black (76–100, evil alignment). To most wearers, the robe offers no powers or has no effects unless the wearer's alignment doesn't match that of the robe (see below). Only an arcane spellcaster can fully realize this potent magic item's powers once the robe is donned. These powers are as follows.
* +5 armor bonus to AC.
* Spell resistance 18.
* +4 resistance bonus on all saving throws.
* +2 enhancement bonus on caster level checks made to overcome spell resistance.
As mentioned above, all robes of the archmagi are attuned to a specific alignment. If a white robe is donned by an evil character, she immediately gains three permanent negative levels. The same is true with respect to a black robe donned by a good character. An evil or good character who puts on a gray robe, or a neutral character who dons either a white or black robe, gains two permanent negative levels. While these negative levels remain as long as the garment is worn and cannot be overcome in any way (including restoration spells), they are immediately removed if the robe is removed.
Titan: You grow one size larger when raging. When you get to Mighty Rage, you grow 2 sizes larger. Various other titan-related powers. Maybe instead of DR/- you get a larger DR, but overcome by Law.
Aberration: Immune to criticals while raging, extended reach.
Elemental Stone: Str and Con go up when raging, Dex goes down, but you gain a bonus to Natural Armor so that there is a net gain to AC, but touch AC lower. Also, you move slower.
If you want more ideas, I'm happy to brainstorm with you, just let me know.
Unless you just absolutely hate Psionics, you might consider using the Psionic class for both Black Mages and White Mages. The spell point system is much more like Mana and the psionic powers are much more like the Fire/Fira/Firaga type spells you see in FF games.
Let a white mage pick spells from the cleric list, but burn power points to use them. If you do decide to do that, it would not be unbalancing to let the white mage have domains and powers. Likewise, black mages could have wizard or sorcerer school/bloodline abilities, just to give them a boost.
If I remember correctly, everyone gets a Summon in FF6. You could just use the Summoner Eidolon rules, but let everyone have one. Of course, you'd have to make encounters tougher.
