Naszir's page

Would it make any sense in addition to +1/level, UTEML also created a ceiling? Untrained could only get a max of +3 if they are untrained, trained could get a max of +6 etc ... That way you get the best of both worlds.

I would like to see this to changed to something more generic like Treat Injury or perhaps just Recovery.

I know there is some disagreement on how people look at this but wouldn't it be better for this to be more generic?

This also dovetails into the discussion of how it should be possible that characters should be able to recover some hit points after being involved in combat. Since the loss of hit points does not always represent being physically injured the recovery of hit points representing a character catching their breath or getting some stamina back makes sense and can help with extending the adventuring day.

I haven't played Starfinder but the Stamina mechanic sounds intriguing. However I would not like to have to track something additional.

Instead of 4e healing surges, how about more access to temporary hit points. Call it adrenaline, inspiration, vigor, luck or whatever. It serves as a buffer for the permanent hit points, allows for a longer adventuring day without having to take rest in between encounters and its not something that needs to be tracked in a real way. You have them in the encounter and then when the encounter ends there gone.

I dislike the idea of CLW wands and it is time for them to go. It has seemed to me so utterly artificial even from a game stand point. There has to be a better way and I am glad they are attempting to change it.

What about temporary hit points? If there were more ways to gain temporary hit points in combat, it would mitigate the reduction of hit points and allow for a longer adventuring day. Characters would still have to be concerned about their hit points but over a longer period of time (and that is what we are looking for right?) and this also helps with those who dislike the heal to full after ever fight. With more ways to gain temporary hit points, a character could still have his hit points decreasing but also not have to worry as much going into a fight without his hit points maxed out.

Flavor the temporary hit points as the luck and adrenaline that happens during combat. It all goes away at the end of an encounter and characters would need less "healing". We all know that hit points don't just represent how much physical damage a character can take and maybe temporary hit points can thematically be the intangibles that a character has while in combat.

Where does it say how many spell points a bard starts with? The entry reads that "Your maximum number of Spell Points is equal to your key ability modifier (minimum 0)."

It doesn't say "You start with Spell Points equal to your key ability modifier (mimimum 0)."

To me that is two different things so it is not really clear. Feats can increase your pool of Spell Points. Is that beyond the maximum number of Spell Points? If it is then that's confusing because then the maximum number is no longer the maximum number.

In the playtest rulebook it states the maximum spell points you can have is equal to your Int modifier. What I don't get is how many spell points you start with. Is it 1? If it is then it should state that in the rulebook with the class feature that gives you your initial power.

Am I reading things incorrectly or am I missing something in the rulebook?

This is something I've come up with and used. I wouldn't consider it self healing but just a way of saying that a certain amount of damage taken in one hit actually represent a physical wound. All other damage is fatigue, luck etc. that hit points encompass. That all comes back to you at the end of combat.

Wound Threshold

Anytime a character takes damage equal to 1/3 of their hit points in one shot they take a wound. Wounds can only be healed quickly through magic. Otherwise the character must rest.

Wounds also have some negative effects:

1st 1/3 = Battered
Effect: May only take a Standard and Move action during a round.

2nd 1/3 = Badly Injured
Effect: Movement is reduced by 10'.

3rd 1/3 = Incapacitated
Effect: Movement is reduced to 0. No actions can be taken by the character. Character is unconscious.

All other damage taken during the encounter goes away at the end of combat.

Why not STR and DEX?

Someone with both a good STR and DEX should be better a combat maneuvers than someone with just a good STR or a good DEX.

Seems to make sense since combat maneuvers as an abstract encompass actions that use both STR and DEX.

Just throwing a thought out there:

What about having to take a feat to get into a certain skill range? This could cut down on the "all of a sudden, I'm awesome at this skill" syndrome.

1-5 ranks Untrained (no need to take a feat to be in this range)

6-10 ranks Trained (need to take the feat Skill Training to get in this range) When you take Skill Training you are able to gain this range in two skills of your choosing. Same would go for Skill Expert and Skill Master.

11-15 ranks Expert (need to take the feat Skill Expert to get in this range)

16+ ranks Master (feat Skill Master)

I think this is somewhat along the lines of the Hybrid skill system that people were thinking of. The issue here is what kind of effect does turning Skill tiers into feats have on skill based characters?

Also what about keeping all the 3.5 skills but adding a feat called:

Skill Combination

For example if you take the feat Skill Combination: Stealth - combine the ranks you have of the skills Hide and Move Silently and divide by 2. You now have a Stealth Skill. Instead of adding skill points to Hide and Move Silently you now may add skill points to Stealth. Any check that involves Hiding or Moving Silently is now resolved through Stealth.

I haven’t thought too deeply about how ability modifiers would come into play when the two skills have different stats attached to them.

Anyway, it was just a quick thought.

Personally, I really like the options I have heard in this thread for iterative attacks. They allow the same variety and boost that the various divine combat allow clerics and paladins. I agree those options should not become too broad in their scope though. I think limiting them to:

1) trading an itertative attack for extra damage
2) trading an interative for an extended move (10 foot adjust without provoking an attack of opportunity
3) trading an interative attack for a boost to AC
4) trading an interative attack for an attack bonus to the highest BAB (represnting the patient strike...waiting for that perfect opening in the opponents defenses).

-Weylin Stormcrowe

#2 What effect does this have on mobility and spring attack? I do like the inclusion of the extended move but it looks like mobility and spring attack become a lot less desireable.

I just read through the change to fighter weapon training in the Alpha 1.1 development notes, and I'm a bit surprised. I like the idea that fighter weapon training works like a ranger's favored enemy, in that old weapon groups get better as new ones are added.

But why does fighter weapon training work like the favored enemy ability of the 3.0 ranger instead of the more versatile 3.5 ranger? (The 3.0 ranger was stuck with his first favored enemy always being maxed out; the 3.5 ranger gets new favored enemies and chooses which old ones get improved.)

Or even better:

"Starting at 5th level, a fighter can select one group of weapons. Every four levels thereafter, the fighter chooses one additional group of weapons.

"Whenever the fighter attacks with a weapon from any of these chosen weapon groups, he gains a bonus on attack and damage rolls equal to the number of weapon groups chosen with weapon training."

In other words:
5th-level fighter - weapon training (one group, +1)
9th-level fighter - weapon training (two groups, +2)
13th-level fighter - weapon training (three groups, +3)
17th-level fighter - weapon training (four groups, +4)

That way, a fighter who finds a cool new magic weapon on 16th level can get the most out of that weapon upon leveling up, even if that weapon wasn't in the weapon group he chose way back on 5th level.

Don't you still run into this problem because of Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization? Why not just rename this ability Battle Training and give the Fighter a flat +1 attack and damage bonus to any weapon he is proficient in? Would that be overpowered?

Instead make some feats for customization of weapon groups. For example make a feat called Bash that allows you to daze an opponent for 1 round when you roll a critical. This feat may only be used with bludgeoning weapons.

What not just call it Defense Training and let the fighter gain a +1 competence bonus at 3rd, 7th, 11th, and 15th levels to AC? Would that be too overpowering?

Aristodeimos wrote:

Has anyone brought up the fact that iterative attacks at higher levels are useful for special attacks like Disarm, Sunder, or Grapple?

It has been mentioned, yes, but I don't know if anyone took any notice.

It's a totally valid point; if you think that your last attack bonus is weak, why not use it for a maneuver that just requires a roll vs touch AC?

I think that when it comes to mid through high level encounters the monsters you go up against don't translate well to being disarmed, sundered or grappled.

Sure going up against another fighter type monster (ogre, giant, human npc etc.) these combat maneuvers can be used effectively. Going up against an owlbear, ankheg, otyugh, or dragon what commonly effective use is disarm, sunder or grapple?

I like the concept of feats. However, I've never completely understood if there is a way to balance feats. Some feats only happen at certain times and other feats are permanent bonuses.

It seems to me that feats can be split so we have:

Feats

Feats are something you can do. They involve an action and specific uses.

Enhancements

Enhancements are bonuses or abilities that are gained permanently. They can increase Feat effectiveness, boost skills, give you bonuses to your saves or bonuses to attack, damage or armor class. There is no action to activate enhancements.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

If feats/enhancements are done this way I understand that this makes them more like 4e. However, I think this would make it easier to balance and create new actions under 3.5.

Would this be backwards compatible with 3.5? I'm not sure.

So is it better to create options through feats (benefits fighters to a greater extent) or to just make them available to everyone when they gain iterative attacks?

I lean more towards feats because of the distinctiveness that it can offer fighters.

Naszir wrote:

Golarion Goblin wrote:

Naszir wrote:

ELVEN BOW FOCUS

Elven archers with their keen senses are deadly accurate with their bows.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain +1 to attack and +1 to damage when using any bow.

ELVEN BOW SPECIALIZATION
Elven elite archers are renowned and feared.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows, Elven Bow Focus
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain an additional +1 to attacks and +2 to damage when using any bow.

(Yes, these feats are better than their generic conterparts but they are supposed to represent that elves tend to be better at using bows than any other race.)

Would these stack with Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Point Blank Shot?

I was thinking that they would replace Focus and Specialization. I guess a note would have to be placed within the feats to say that very thing.

Now let's say my elven fighter takes Elven Bow Focus at first level and wants to take Weapon Specialization (Longbow) at fourth level. Would the EBF replace WF (Longbow) for the Specialization prereqs?

I would say:

Elven Bow Focus replaces Weapon Focus Longbow.

Elven Bow Specialization replaces Weapon Specialization Longbow.

So, your Elven Fighter would take Elven Bow Focus at 1st level and then would take Elven Bow Specialization at 4th level.

Naszir wrote:

SWIFT OF FOOT

Your light weight and long strides gets you places faster.
Prereq: Elf
Benefit: +5ft to base movement if wearing light armor.

Change that to "[...] if wearing light or no armor." and you're golden.

Yes, of course that makes more sense.

Naszir wrote:

ELVEN BOW FOCUS

Elven archers with their keen senses are deadly accurate with their bows.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain +1 to attack and +1 to damage when using any bow.

ELVEN BOW SPECIALIZATION
Elven elite archers are renowned and feared.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows, Elven Bow Focus
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain an additional +1 to attacks and +2 to damage when using any bow.

(Yes, these feats are better than their generic conterparts but they are supposed to represent that elves tend to be better at using bows than any other race.)

Would these stack with Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Point Blank Shot?

I was thinking that they would replace Focus and Specialization. I guess a note would have to be placed within the feats to say that very thing.

I still like suggestions earlier in the thread talking about trading in iterative attacks for other things. I'd like to see these as part of the rules for everyone and not as feats mainly because the purpose of this thread is discussing the removal (or keeping) of iterative attacks. So, instead of removing them and messing with 3.5 compatibility, you allow options. Something like this:

Iterative Attack Options

As part of a full attack action, you may sacrifice one iterative attack to gain one of the following during your round:

• An extra movement of up to 1/2 your normal movement rate
  
• A bonus to damage equal to your Strength bonus on all other attacks
  
• A +2 dodge bonus to AC

I'm unsure what to do about two weapon fighting people with 7 attacks at high level having these options. Should they give up an attack with each hand to utilize one of the options?

When attacking with two weapons, those attacks aren't considered iterative attacks are they?

I probably should know this but if you have an 11th level fighter with two weapons how many attacks does he get in one round? 4? Are all 4 considered iterative attacks or are only 3 of them considered iterative attacks?

Then we create racial feats that play to the strengths of a race but make it so you do not have to take them if you want to play against the gain.

This allows the races to feel distinct if the player would like that kind of feel but not force the races into being pigeonholed.

Dang, beaten to the punch by grrtigger. I guess that is because that is what tiggers do best.

Then we create racial feats that play to the strengths of a race but make it so you do not have to take them if you want to play against the gain.

This allows the races to feel distinct if the player would like that kind of feel but not force the races into being pigeonholed.

ELVEN BOW FOCUS
Elven archers with their keen senses are deadly accurate with their bows.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain +1 to attack and +1 to damage when using any bow.

ELVEN BOW SPECIALIZATION
Elven elite archers are renowned and feared.
Prereq: Elf, Proficient with Bows, Elven Bow Focus
Benefit: Elves with this feat gain an additional +1 to attacks and +2 to damage when using any bow.

(Yes, these feats are better than their generic conterparts but they are supposed to represent that elves tend to be better at using bows than any other race.)

FEY HERITAGE
Elves, by nature, have an enchanting way.
Prereq: Elf, Wizard Level 1
Benefit: +1 caster level when casting enchantment spells.

Yes, I did modify yours a bit but Caladors should be credited with the Elven Grace idea.

ELVEN GRACE
Your fluid movement and keen senses often get you out of harms way.
Prereq: Elf
Benefit: Once per day when you have been hit you may reduce the amount of damage you take from one hit by one half.

I am ambivalent about this variation on the rules simply because it contains the original system, this way I can simply house-rule it out since I don't like it.

I don't think the Pathfinder RPG should go down that route because I don't see it as justifying its own existence as a break from backwards compatibility. Squeezing Move Silently and Hide together justifies itself. This I don't think does - what value does this system contribute to the game vice the original system? (My 10 cents.)

For one, you get away from the disappointment of "Yes, I rolled a threat! Guh, I missed on my second roll. That 20 was nothing special."

For B, you get away from the major disappointment of "Yes, I rolled a threat! Yes, I scored a CRIT!! Guh, I did minimum (or near minimum) damage. That CRIT was nothing special."

Having the option to score maximum damage gives a sense of accomplishing something. While keeping the option of the Threat/Crit roll as an ability to accomplish something even bigger, if you are willing to risk it.

I am ambivalent about this variation on the rules simply because it contains the original system, this way I can simply house-rule it out since I don't like it.

I don't think the Pathfinder RPG should go down that route because I don't see it as justifying its own existence as a break from backwards compatibility. Squeezing Move Silently and Hide together justifies itself. This I don't think does - what value does this system contribute to the game vice the original system? (My 10 cents.)

For one, you get away from the disappointment of "Yes, I rolled a threat! Guh, I missed on my second roll. That 20 was nothing special."

For B, you get away from the major disappointment of "Yes, I rolled a threat! Yes, I scored a CRIT!! Guh, I did minimum (or near minimum) damage. That CRIT was nothing special."

Having the option to score maximum damage gives a sense of accomplishing something. While keeping the option of the Threat/Crit roll as an ability to accomplish something even bigger, if you are willing to risk it.

I like the way 4e went with max damage when rolling within a critical range. However, I do understand the reservations people have with this and was thinking there may be a compromise that Pathfinder could include.

Here is my thought:

If you roll within your threat range on your attack you can -

1) Automatically do max weapon damage but you do not get the weapon multiplier.

or

2) Choose to roll the d20 again. If you are successful then you gain the weapon multiplier and roll damage normally.

One addition to this. If you fail at choice 2 you roll damage normally.

I like the way 4e went with max damage when rolling within a critical range. However, I do understand the reservations people have with this and was thinking there may be a compromise that Pathfinder could include.

Here is my thought:

If you roll within your threat range on your attack you can -

1) Automatically do max weapon damage but you do not get the weapon multiplier.

or

2) Choose to roll the d20 again. If you are successful then you gain the weapon multiplier and roll damage normally.

I’ve been trying to brainstorm racial feats. Rather than giving races bonus feats at certain character levels these feats should just be additional options for a character of that race.

Here is an example of some Elvish feats I’ve come up with.

Add Elven Racial feats to the Elven Racial traits page:

BREADTH OF KNOWLEDGE
Your long life has allowed you to experience many things.
Prereq: Elf
Benefit: +1 to any three different skills of your choice.

IMPROVED DODGE
You are exceptionally quick.
Prereq: Dodge, Elf
Benefit: Your dodge bonus increases to +3.

ONE WITH NATURE
Your power is bolstered by your connection with nature.
Prereq: Able to cast spells, Elf
Benefit: +1 caster level when casting animal, plant or weather based spells.

SPELL KNOWLEDGE
Your mind comprehends magic better than most.
Prereq: Wizard Level 1, Elf
Benefit: At each new wizard level, an elf gains three new spells of any spell level or levels he can cast for his spellbook.
Normal: A wizard gains two new spells of any spell level he can cast for his spellbook.

SWIFT OF FOOT
Your light weight and long strides gets you places faster.
Prereq: Elf
Benefit: +5ft to base movement if wearing light armor.

WHIRLING ATTACK (COMBAT)
Elves with fighting prowess can be dangerous to flank.
Prereq: Elf, Weapon Focus with Long Sword or Rapier, BAB +6
Benefit: Those who take this feat gain the ability to make one attack against opponents who flank them. If the attack is successful against the highest AC of the two flankers the damage done is split evenly between the two flanking opponents.

How about giving access to Bonus Feats every four levels starting at 4th level. Of course you still have to meet the prerequisites but an extra 5 feats over 20 levels doesn't seem like it should make this overpowered yet this would make your race something that matters beyond 1st level.

For example, if you are an elf, you gain these bonus feats to choose from every 4 levels:

Agile Maneuvers (Plays into the grace and quickness of the elven race)

Deadly Aim (Plays into the skill with Bows that the elven race has)

Far Shot (See Deadly Aim)

Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Shot on the Run, Many Shot

Any Metamagic feat (Plays into the fact that elves are good with magic)

Lightning Reflexes

Magical Aptitude

Spell Focus

Greater Spell Focus

Spell Mastery

Spell Penetration

Greater Spell Penetration

I'm sure there are more that could be added to the list.

Just as a small aside it would be nice if the races could get rid of those tiny specific bonuses to saves. Just give Elves a +1 to their Reflex and Willpower saves. Give dwarves a +2 to their Fortitude saves. Give Halflings a +2 to their Reflex saves. Give Gnomes a +1 to their Reflex and Fortitude saves. Give humans a +1 to all their saves. Give Half-orcs a +2 to thier Fortitude saves. Give Half-Elves a +2 to any one save and a +1 to any one save (cannot be the same as the +2 save).

Quick Suggestion after taking a quick look through the Alpha:

Make it so that race can be a bigger part of the character. Make a lot of racial feats and maybe even make it so that during even levels you gain a racial feat.

To me this just makes so much sense if you want to take 3.5 to the next level.