Did they get rid of the playtest updates?
Search Posts
I think the idea of optimizing is dependent on what one does in the process. Making sure that your character is good at whatever their specialty is, can be fun, and rewarding for game play; making every PC without flaws, can make for boring fights and less than fun RPing. If I have a scout type, then I want him to excel at that role, whether that means he's not very socialable, or not. I can't imagine it being much fun playing a scout type character that lacked in either stealth or perception, but him being a rogue without diplomacy or escape artist makes him a specialist, not flawed. He's loads of fun to play, but limited in what role he has...love that!
Wow, this has been an interesting addition to the base rules folks! The Inquisitor looks to be the best of the six ceated, but maybe I'm a little biased toward divine classes!
I've gotta say I don't see the need. While my players opted for a dice roll start up, I look at the points buy rules and I see a number of separate options to offer every party a valid source for their needs. I see the problems they were talking about, but I have always thought that classes were designed with the idea of ability requirements in mind...if you want to play a martial hero, but you only have 1 or 2 good stats, then you won't want to play a ranger or pally...likewise, you can look at the rogue versus bard in the same way...it's a part of the game, and I for one don't like the idea of changing that aspect of the game! Again I come down arguing for retaining rules based on the old way of doing things, so perhaps that is an issue we should discuss some where as well...
Ok, so roll ups have been done! I started the group at level 8 to see what sort of mid-level rules we could break (find fault with). There were a few highlights that I wanted to throw up here! 2 Barbarians! That was the funniest part to the process. We did the roll up in two sessions due to some sceduling issues, and there was one in each group. One said how the liked the added abilities that the rage powers offered, and the other thought that they took away from the main power that the barbarian possesses. He had an interesting suggestion that might be of interest to others. Instead of breaking down the rage into one point but system, why not integrate these powers into the rage, and allow the barbarian to use particular powers while raging only...I am not certain that I prefer that option, but as I told him, it was an interesting option to consider. Holy warrior: My girlfriend chose the holy warrior option with her cleric, and even though it meant loosing her domain powers, is very excited to play a "fighter with cleric spells!" There was a thread a while back about making "holy warriors" out of paladins, and so when we saw this we had to give it a shot! I would have to say that this is a better version of the holy warrior than altering a paladin, because really it takes loads less work to make it work for any alignment. Sorceror/Wizard: The fellow who eventually created a sorceror was heard complaining "Damn Paizo for balancing classes!" Although he went through each class with a fine tooth comb, he was after 3 days still uncertain as to which would make the more powerful caster, so he went with easier to play...I thought the quote was a good reflection on the Beta rules! The other main character...One of my players had to make a monk, mostly 'cause I usually don't have them in my campaigns for rp reasons. He went through the revisions with pleasure, knowing that it would irk the DM ... not really that much, but well, ever since 1st edition added them to the core rules, I have thought they were really only valid in an oriental campaign (or one where there is a lot of traffic from an orietal area, as eutropean monks were not exactly martial). He had one suggestion to which I had to completely agree, in respect to the selection of bonus feats for monk. None of the "stance feats are listed there, and it seems to me that they should be available to a monk, if they are available to anyone! So there's a start for the campaign!
Our gaming group has been utilizing the rules as they have been released, but recently decided to try the full package as it is presented in the Beta and the campaign setting. As much as we can argue the various virtues/failings of the rules, there is no better test of a game system than seeing how it runs... My intent is to post a variety of commentaries as we go through the rules. We have begun the character development stage, and within a day or two I should have some preliminary reports from that portion of the test. I think that testing the whole system requires a new start, but definately requires a group to play the game for a few sessions at least... Also, if anyone has any campaign ideas for Ustalav this would be a good time to help a DM out!!! Please and thank-you
I keep getting the screen of death when I try to access the My Downloads page. I don't have my hard copy yet, so I want to look at the pdf...cry...
This is so deeply, unutterably wrong I'm going to need to take a moment. Optimization does not take away from roleplaying. The two are not mutually exclusive in any way. Every time you give your fighter Strength as a high score, you're optimizing.
Furthermore, we are talking about DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS. It is a crunch-heavy, combat-heavy game by design, and optimization is one of its draws. One of the most enjoyable things about the game, for many players, is playing around with the crunch. If you [i]don't enjoy that, why are you playing D&D, rather than one of the roleplaying-heavy, rules-light systems out there, many of which actively support roleplaying in a way that D&D doesn't and can't? Even Exalted, a system as crunch-heavy or heavier than D&D, has things like the excellent Stunting mechanic, or the Virtues system. Giving wizards special abilities instead of extra slots just gives them extra abilities. It doesn't help you roleplay at all, unless by "roleplay" you mean "use your character's mechanical abilities". That wasn't really where I was going with the statement, but lets see if I get where you're coming from??? If I say that I'm more oriented toward Role-playing than power optimization, then I shouldn't be playing D&D??? That being the case, then why do we develop story lines and plot structures? When I make characters in D&D, I make them from a basic idea of a character I'd like to play, not from an idea of the types of powers I'd like to optimize. Perhaps that's an out of date concept, but it is still one that belongs in D&D! Perhaps I'm being a little too literal here, but the distinction is very real for me...and in response to the other statement, I'm a clean, not too weird guy who works a regular job, has a regular family, but still remembers when role-playing was firstly about playing a role, and secondly about all the fancy powers a particular class gave you...
As far as I know they do not have the system ready yet for stores. Sometime in Sep, "I think." Thanks!
The adept has Polymorph on its spell list! I know that since the spell no longer exists, this is a typo, but what spells should we use to replace them?
There may be an answer somewhere, but I can't find it! I'm trying to register my store on here as a location for Pathfinder Society play! How do I do it, do I have to register separately somewhere??? Can someone email me?
Pathfinder #1 is Awesome!!!!!!!!!!
I may be the odd duck on this one, but I view Paladins as a special class with benefits tied to their order (read vows and oaths here). I would have even gone so far as to suggest, like someone in the thread has, that they should have been made into a PrC. I don't consider them just holy warriors, because that is the role of clerics! Clerics have long been stripped of their warrior heritage for some reason! I believe that they have much more versatility than they seem to be given credit for by the majority of players. I played a cleric in a Kalamar campaign a few years back. He was a cleric of the three strengths (body, mind and spirit). His primary role in the party was as a holy warrior, demonstrating the values of his faith as depicted in the description of that deity! He smashed foes in the name of his god, and preached about the value of the three strengths to those who witnessed his personal prowess. The fighter and the ranger in the party converted to his faith along the way! Paladins are restricted to their alignment, because that is the key mechanic used to dictate his strict code of ethics! There are many warrior variants in the game, but only one is based on a code of behavior. Taking the code of behavior away from the paladin, takes away his paladinhood. I always make players, who wish to play paladins, write up their specific code of ethics and submit it to me for approval. By doing this, the player uderstands that he is not simply playing a restrictive holy warrior, but a warrior with a cause to fight for throughout the campaign. In my Rise of the Runelords campaign, the paladin is a member of a group who have sought the aid of Apsu in defending Varisia from the demon worshipping hellknights. He developed a strict code of ethics, and also a levelling process by which he attains titles and authority in the region. He is accompanying the bard-priest of Desna with the expressed goal of defending the realm from those who would destroy it...this is not merely a holy warrior of Saerenrae fighting the good fight, but a noble warrior defending the values and freedoms of his home and people! I don't know that this will help in any way, but I thought a different perspective might be valuable!
Our first attempt at Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. *Fourth level party.* Night one;
Night one, take two (after pretending that this encounter didn't happen);
Night two (the third attempt at 'night one' had no encounter);
Apparently, these monsters were all at the very high end of the random monster chart, and we were just horribly unlucky. Note that we couldn't run away from any of these encounters. Two were with flying creatures, and the third was with creatures that could hit us with boulders with a *180' range increment!* Random encounters drove us back to Vampire for two years. Man...that was a sucky way to experience random encounters! I've been running random encounters for 20 years in my campaigns, and only once was it cause for character death! That incident was when the party decided at level 4 to cross mountains that armies didn't cross due to the monsters living there, and well the easiest encounter for those mountains was a CR 8! They died at the hands of an ettin! Otherwise random encounters are used to add a little excitement to overland travel. Knowledge skills or information gathering should let players know the danger of various creatures found in a given wilderness, and there-by restrict overland transit to level of creatures found there. I also like to add a few random encounters to some typical "dungeons" (if you're invading a keep, there should be a chance to encounter guards and guests in various hallways). Having said all of that, I don't believe that the core enjoyment of D&D has ever been hack and slash mayhem over and over. Most times I find it most enjoyable to have a few combats along with some mysterious events, and some traps, leading to a main encounter (read an evil boss that must be defeated!). I was giving xp for good role-playing long before there were any specific rules for doing so, and I have always thought that this was a core part of the game! I've found that the pathfinder adventures are not all that high in loot anyways; leastways, that's been a conplaint from a couple players! I like low magic grit, with a lot of trouble shooting and planning to defeat enemies, and I'm seeing that a lot more here than many printed editions!
There's a lot of good thoughts here, but really, I've always thought it was the DM's job to teach new players the rules! You don't have to show them everything the first time you sit down, and most players are fine with learning a bit at a time! Paizo has enough on their plate already without teaching new players a soft core version of the game. Having one main sourcebook makes the job of selective teaching much easier, and players like the idea of only one book. The Rules Cyclopedia contained all the rules from the basic set (a very fun game if I do say so!), but it was not designed to be simple!
Thank you! How about a thread that doesn't care about 4E! I love Pathfinder!
James, any chance of a "Pathfinder Manual" or something, detailing the society, members, prestige classes, new core class?, feats, spells, monsters, etc? Something like the Complete X books only tied together by the Pathfinders theme? That would be so awesome, since other 3rd Ed. material never gave much attention to guilds as a focus. Now this is a cool Idea!!!! I know that the staff are working on a dozen items already, but I'll volunteer to work on a project like this!!!!!! I love the idea behind the Pathfinder Society as a world wide society, and think it compares very favorably to any organization developed on other worlds! I own virtually the entire library from Kalamar (produced by Kenzer), and one of the big appeals there were the independent organizations. It's nice to have a "thieve's guild" for members of all classes, and while many DM's prefer to create their own, I like the idea of allowing players to select a society to which their characters belong. Any thoughts on other societies that might be appropriate to the campaign setting??? I have developed a Varisian defence society based on the worship (of all imaginable deities) the worship and support of Apsu!
I have a 256-page hardcover to edit. Is that the same? *goes back to work* So, how large a section can we expect on the deities??? I'm running a group that are slowly edging toward exalted, and I'd like more information!
I'm in Saint John, New Brunswick, the Canadian detachment! We've got two playing groups that I know of running the first adventure path, very interested in carrying on with Society events as I work in a book/gaming store!
Wow! Some of these are soooo Dwarven...I am just reading this thread now, and like what I see! I like that there is a craftsman feat. They are very cool additions to rp ideas...my group tends to come up with character ideas that we have to modify feats for, and this is the sort of thing we end up with (style wise at least!).
Really, when it comes down to it, this is a discussion more suited to DM campaign rules, than a general rule addition! Pathfinder has already added to the fighter's skills in Gazetteer! This, of course, was written as characters from a particular training program. I think that individual fighter's are going to have different focii, and that is as it should be...the cool thing about the skill system is that it rewards the characters with high Int scores!
Our group began using the original skill progression from the alpha rules, and we're sticking to it! I like the way each character began with a skill set defined by his or her class. The definitive change to the skill system for me was the combining of similar skills so "skilled" characters (rogues and bards) are able to learn most, if not all skills at their most effective level. As the DM, I love the fact that our bard chose to place the +2 stat modifier in her Int to gain the extra skill! She also commented that it allowed her to really use the knowledge skills! We intend to continue to use that option, so I'm wondering if it might be valuable to include both skill progressions in the final product, so groups can choose the one that best suits their style!
So, picked up 4E and wow...or should I say WoW, 'cause that's what it reminds me of...I like playing WoW, and I also like the Minis game, but I want my D&D!!! I have a feeling that there will be a lot of folks unhappy with the new editions play style, so here's the place we're all gonna meet!
Oh Wow! I've been buying Pathfinder products since they first started arriving at the game/book store where I work! This one is well above anything I've seen like it in years...The closest sourcebook that I have sampled was the original Kalamar atlas, and that was a while ago: Version 3.0 if that says anything! The Gazetteer reminds me of the old Gazetteers from Basic D&D rules fame. For those of you who remember, I still wish I could find them somewhere, but Pathfinder feels like I'm back home! I hope you folks can keep it coming! My group is really enjoying the first adventure path, although they're taking their good old time completeing anything! (it seems to me they're having too much fun with the encounters in Sandpoint to leave on adventure!) This world has everything! I fully intend to start writing a campaign for the River Kingdoms/Ustalav ending up most likely in the Worldwound or Belkzan! That region feels like a good home for me, so if there are any towns/city maps out there for those regions, I'd love to see them! Above and beyond Folks!!!!!!! Thank You!
Hmmm...there are so many suppliments, and so little time to discuss them all...I made it very clear to my players; for the first campaign, we were going with the base books, basic classes, and I'd use a few tidbits here and there from some of my Kalamar setting resources... We're developing our own prestige classes on a character by character basis. The city campaign will be different in that we'll be trying out variant classes with the pathfinder system. I say all this to say that I think it's a flavor thing with reference books, as I believe it always was a selective process... Special note though...I really appreciate the generic reference books: PHBII, DMGII, Magic Item Compedium, and the Races of series! They are all valuable for added dimension for characters and setting! |