Melayl's page

Melayl wrote:

Studpuffin wrote:

It doesn't seem right that a quarterstaff should be able to utilize Finesse. The weapon is a large stick, essentially a double club. Can you finesse a club? Heck no!

This just doesn't make sense.

You've never seen someone use Escrima sticks, have you? Totally finessable. And no, that's not the training of the wielder, it's the nature of the weapon.

The quarterstaff should be too. Yes, it is a long stick, and seems like it should be ungainly. Wielded in two hands, however, it becomes much more like two smaller sticks that happen to be attached to each other.

An Escrima is nothing like an actual quarterstaff. Its more flexible and thinner. A quarterstaff is a fairly thick strait stick with a more considerable heft than an escrima. It is a big club. :p

Even if stat wise an Escrima is like a quarterstaff the rules pretty clearly state that its too big to use with finesse and isn't one of the exceptions.

eh...

My comment on Escrima sticks was referring to your comment on clubs not being finessable.

It doesn't seem right that a quarterstaff should be able to utilize Finesse. The weapon is a large stick, essentially a double club. Can you finesse a club? Heck no!

This just doesn't make sense.

You've never seen someone use Escrima sticks, have you? Totally finessable. And no, that's not the training of the wielder, it's the nature of the weapon.

The quarterstaff should be too. Yes, it is a long stick, and seems like it should be ungainly. Wielded in two hands, however, it becomes much more like two smaller sticks that happen to be attached to each other.

I gotta vote against the change for wizards and rogues. d4 and d6, respectively, were appropriate, I thought.

The wizard spends much time hunched over tomes and inhaling questionable fumes as they learn their trade. This takes a toll on one's overall physical health (and probably mental health, as well).

The Rogue (still the Thief, in my opinion), spends much of his time avoiding real work, always looking for the easy way out. This does nothing to build his constitution or health.

But that's just my point of view.

Papa-DRB wrote:

This does not work with Open Office, right?

-- david
Papa.DRB

Sorry, I'm not familiar with Open Office so I can't answer your question.

Open Office is supposed to work with all Microsoft Office files, so it should work, although I must add that I've never used Open.

I agree with the OP that Fighters are already good. I also agree with whomever posted that the DM should tailor the game to the characters and players.

That said, I do think the Fighter should have access to combat abilities that noone else has.

How about a feat (or chain of feats) to allow a fighter to get one (or more) of his iterative attacks after moving? I.e. allowing a partial full attack after a regular move action, up to a full full attack after moving.

note that basic riding does not call for checks though, special manoeuvers do unless it has been changed now...

You do have a point. I shouldn't read or post when I'm this tired... I didn't read the OP as well as I thought.

Hmm... The first time I was on a horse (7th grade? -- decades ago, anyway) I didn't have any trouble, nor any of the other (rather infrequent) times I've ridden.

I must have had an easier horse than you each time, or rolled better on my checks.

I'd have to agree with you on pretty much all of the above.

I liked the Original Star Wars RPG method. Everything was based of d6. You had (I believe) 18d6 to distribute among your 6 attributes. Attack rolls were based on the number of d6 you had in that skill/weapon + the number of d6 you had in Strength. Skills were the same.

You added bonuses +1 at a time to each skill/attribute/etc, until you reached +3. The next point you added turned that +3 into another d6 instead.

Smooth progressions, smooth bell curves. More reasonable DC's relative to skill die/boni.

I was quite disappointed when they switched over to d20 in later iterations.

Of course, switching D&D to a d6 system would totally destroy any backwards compatability...

@Melayl: Thanks, I'll try to check that out... (Man, her last name... OUCH! ;-))

You won't be disappointed. Some of the best books I've ever read (dozens of times each, I might add).

So correct me if I'm wrong...

But does the current XPH (errata and all) still allow a 20th level psion to effectively use all his PSPs to cast 9th-level psionic powers? If it does, then the system is still fundamentally flawed, in my opinion.

Here's how I understand things: Leaving bonus spells/bonus PSPs out of the equation, a 20th level sorcerer can cast 6 ninth level spells a day. He can cast a lot more lower-level spells, of couse, but he can't "swap out" 3 3rd level spells to cast another 9th level spell. He's still limited to his 6 9th level spells a day, and when he casts those, he still has 54 spells of levels 0 to 8 to rely on through the day, and after casting his 6 9th level spells, he can keep going and doesn't have to sit down and rest to recover those spells. If a psionic 9th level power and an arcane 9th level spell are both balanced so that they both do 100 points of damage per use, that sorcerer can do 600 points of damage a day with his 9th level spells.

The 20th level psion, on the other hand, has 343 power points a day. Casting a 9th level spell is 17 points. Since his potential is not locked in to specific tiers of power, he can use all his points to use a 9th level power 20 times in a day (with a little change left over). Sure, he does 2,000 points of damage, but at one spell per round, he's used up pretty much all of his power in 20 rounds, whereas the sorcerer has stuff going on for 60 rounds. Of course, the sorcerer's powers are increasingly less potent... in the end, the psion does more damage FASTER than the sorcerer, and depletes himself three times as quickly as the sorcerer.

In the end, what this does is lets the psion go nova; he unloads a disproportionately HUGE amount of power (which marginalizes all non-psionic classes; this is bad) and then has to stop for the day to replenish his stores when the rest of the party is only 1/3 depleted (which either makes the psion player have to spend 2/3 of his time being a high-hit point commoner or gives the game a 15-minute day...

Yes, they can still do all those things, if they wish to be stupid. The DM doesn't need to stop the action just because they decided to blow through all their points, though. Yes, the psion would probably die (being, as you said, a glorified commoner -- with the treasure of a 20th level adventurer...). I figure if the psion dies a time or two, the player will decide to be a little more responsible.

You can, if you choose, decide to put in a "cap", so to speak, on using higher-level abilities. Some sort of penalty if they use too many in a row, or too many per day -- ability burn or such. I've done so with the magic system I converted to points. Although, we never do that high a level of play, so it really doesn't matter to us.

The folks at Dreamscarred Press may have come up with something else.

I have a question:

Does anybody know any literary sources where "Psionics" exists parallel to Wizards and Sorcerors and it's NOT just treated as a different approach to "The Force"?
(I'm asking because there's definitely tons of literary Psionic precendents, but NOT in parallel with "Magic", as far as I know)
I feel that Star Wars dealt with this well by saying "There are many ways to access the Force", meaning all Supernatural Powers share the same fundamental mechanics, but have slight niches, influenced by their base culture's perspective, etc.

Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books come instantly to mind.

I believe Matthew Morris pointed out a few in his original post, as well.

Add me to the Epic Meepo and Matthew Morris camp.

See Dreamscarred Press (if Paizo doesn't keep psionics in the XPH/point system style, I'll just use their stuff anyway).

I like the point system so much, I've converted magic to it in my games.

Intriguing ideas... I'll have to watch to see where they lead.

Melayl wrote:

Uhmm... where is the link to download the Prestige Classes?? I can't find it.

It's in "My Downloads"

D'Oh! Thanks!

Uhmm... where is the link to download the Prestige Classes?? I can't find it.

It's not bad, but I still think the Rage Points system is more flexible and more enjoyable. I'll continue to use that, no matter what comes out in the "official" final version.

Melayl wrote:

As a suggestion for balancing powers, look at similar powers from the Psychic Warrior and Psion and the casting classes. Make the Rage Powers of similar level to their equivalents, with similar boni, duration, etc. Then figure out a Rage Point cost for each "level" of ability.

This analogy right here is why I hate, hate, hate barbarians having to spend a variable number of points on "powers." They play like psychic warriors now. I've playtested them and that's been my experience every time.

If you absolutely must have rage powers that aren't always-on or free-once-per-round, then make every single rage power cost one point. You spent one rage point per round to rage/greater rage/mighty rage, and spend one additional point if you want to also use a rage power this round. No variable costs for anything.

I don't get the feeling that they play like Psychic Warriors. To me, they play like Barbarians. Barbarians with more choice, more flexibility, that are more fun to play.

As for having all powers cost 1 point per round, how would you balance that? For example, how would you balance Low-light Vision, or even Animal Fury against Mighty Swing or Powerful Blow or Surprise Accuracy if they all cost 1 point?

I am most definitely in favor of #1.

As a suggestion for balancing powers, look at similar powers from the Psychic Warrior and Psion and the casting classes. Make the Rage Powers of similar level to their equivalents, with similar boni, duration, etc. Then figure out a Rage Point cost for each "level" of ability. If you don't want to break them down by level, try the Least, Lesser, Greater, Dark/True breakdown like the Warlock, and cost them accordingly.

Melayl

We like:

(3d6, drop the lowest, add 8) six times, then arrange as desired. You can take points from any scores and add to any other scores. I allow one score to be up to 25 (yes, we play a rather high-powered game), as long as it is one that has a racial bonus (any, for humans), and one to be 20 (same rules).

I had created this mana point system some time ago. It still probably needs some balancing factors to prevent overcasting of high-level spells, and it does involve a bit of math, but I think it's balanced.

It should be relatively easily backwards-compatible, as well.

I like iterative attacks. Alot of the fantasy I remember reading/watching involved the warrior characters making multiple attacks at a time.

That said, I do think only the melee classes should get them, possibly allowing other classes to do so with a feat (possibly at a greater penalty to their roll). Or a Fighter only thing, with a feat option for other melee classes.

I can't remember who posted the "-2" instead of "-5" suggestion, but I agree with it.

I like this idea too.

@ magamundo: I'd like to see it as well

@ robert: your idea also looks good

I understand that from a strict interpretation of the rules, you can't do it. I thought, however, that we were looking for ways to make animal companions useful and survivable at higher levels. I tend to view the rules more as guidelines, though.

THE DRUID’S ANIMAL COMPANION

A druid’s animal companion is superior to a normal animal of its kind and has special powers, as described below.

Class Level Bonus HD Natural Armor Adj. Str/Dex Adj. Bonus Tricks Special
1st–2nd +0 +0 +0 1 Link, share spells
3rd–5th +2 +2 +1 2 Evasion
6th–8th +4 +4 +2 3 Devotion
9th–11th +6 +6 +3 4 Multiattack
12th–14th +8 +8 +4 5
15th–17th +10 +10 +5 6 Improved evasion
18th–20th +12 +12 +6 7

Animal Companion Basics: Use the base statistics for a creature of the companion’s kind, but make the following changes.

Class Level: The character’s druid level. The druid’s class levels stack with levels of any other classes that are entitled to an animal companion for the purpose of determining the companion’s abilities and the alternative lists available to the character.

Bonus HD: Extra eight-sided (d8) Hit Dice, each of which gains a Constitution modifier, as normal. Remember that extra Hit Dice improve the animal companion’s base attack and base save bonuses. An animal companion’s base attack bonus is the same as that of a druid of a level equal to the animal’s HD. An animal companion has good Fortitude and Reflex saves (treat it as a character whose level equals the animal’s HD). An animal companion gains additional skill points and feats for bonus HD as normal for advancing a monster’s Hit Dice.

and

SIZE INCREASES

A creature may become larger when its Hit Dice are increased (the new size is noted parenthetically in the monster’s Advancement entry).

A size increase affects any special ability the creature has that is affected by size. Increased size also affects a creature’s ability scores, AC, attack bonuses, and damage values as indicated on the tables below.

Table: Changes to Statistics by Size

Old Size* New Size Str Dex Con Natural Armor AC/Attack
Fine Diminutive Same –2 Same Same –4
Diminutive Tiny +2 –2 Same Same –2
Tiny Small +4 –2 Same Same –1
Small Medium +4 –2 +2 Same –1
Medium Large +8 –2 +4 +2 –1
Large Huge +8 –2 +4 +3 –1
Huge Gargantuan +8 Same +4 +4 –2
Gargantuan Colossal +8 Same +4 +5 –4
* Repeat the adjustment if the creature moves up more than one size.

Table: Increased Damage By Size

Old Damage (Each)* New Damage
1d2 1d3
1d3 1d4
1d4 1d6
1d6 1d8
1d8 2d6
1d10 2d8
2d6 3d6
2d8 3d8
* Repeat the adjustment if the creature moves up more than one size category.

I would imagine that this would allow some animal companions (wolves, bears, eagles, etc) to advance in size as they gain the additional hit die. That'd keep the survivability rate up there...

You can make it more realistic by saying that lethal damage must first "heal" to non-lethal damage, instead of directly to "whole and hale". After all the lethal damage has upgraded to non-lethal, you can heal the non-lethal damage. That 10 days suddenly becomes 20, which is much more realistic.

As an example, a 1st level commoner (such as most of us are), with d6 hit die and 10 Constitution takes a stab wound from a knife, 4 hit points of lethal damage. Since he is 1st level with no Constitution bonus, he'll heal 1 hit point of lethal damage per day. After 4 days of complete rest under a healer's care he has 4 points of non-lethal damage. 4 more days of complete rest under the healer's care will see him fully healed.

That's about right for a "real" person recovering from a stab wound after surgery and a hospital stay.

To start with I will admit that paladins as a class annoy me and I do have an instant dislike of them, I guess its my nature.

But for the game I have decided to run (initially as 4th ed till I read it and found out how much it sucked, so we decided to try out pathfinder) I created a whole new world from scratch. Lot of this world is still under construction but for paladins we have had a few interesting conversations which could as far as I'm concerned take them to a new level.

For starters I don't like that palidins are ment to be lawful good. As far as I'm concerned this makes paladins more or less the same. They should have a set of goals codes something that defines them and their personality and alignment be it lawful good, chaotic evil or any other. One way of doing this was to tie paladins in to domains in one way or another. (Similar to the champions from arcana unearthed) this could lead to one person playing a paladin that was chaotic neutral and a beacon of destruction. While another could be the lawful good paladin of protection.
the choice of domain could lead to many different abilities and varieties of paladin like what you did with the sorceror. To top it off you would not even need to tie the paladin in with any god, but if they chose to worship they could quickly find themselves a god that shared smilar tenents to themselves.

The other idea was to completly take paladins away for the gods and tie them and their powerd into the different planes. For example a lawful evil paladin would draw power from the nine hells and a chaotic evil paladin would draw power from the abyss. These two paladins would have a similar set of morals but a completly differwnt way of approaching it and much like their devil and demon allies they would probably find themselves at conflict and may even be part of the blood war. This would be similar for lawful good, and chaotic good paladins and each group would have access to different abilities and powers. We also talked about keeping the restriction to those...

I agree. I like the option for more variety as well. I'm working on a different way to build them, similar to your Domains idea, in the new world I'm working on. Unfortunately, it may take me months or years to nail down...

I think a gallon of fluids is too much. Maybe they are counting the water we get from food, like the juices in fruits and vegetables. Real humans need 8 cups of water per day, which is 1/2 a gallon which sounds more...

Speaking from a medical perspective (I'm a nurse), a gallon of liquid per person per day is the recommended intake to maintain proper health. Yes, not all people consume this amount -- some need less or more, and many people (in the US, at least) are chronically dehydrated to some extent.

I have to add my support to the ability drain/damage argument. I hated SoD's the way they were, this (in my mind) perfectly fixes it.

If you want to do the 1d4 thing, but still not compete with real magical healing, here's an idea.

You improve 1d4 points of lethal damage to nonlethal damage. Yes, you'll still get knocked down just as quickly, but you won't necessarily be dead. And if you rest for a few hours, you're good to go.

I'm tempted to do that with alot of the magical healing in my world, but it could get tough...