How will you announce future meetings?
Search Posts
...at you can re-cast when the subject makes its save. I don't know a fix off the top of my head... Why not use the common mechanic like fear effects, once you save you are unaffected by that DAZE spell for 24 hours. The Creation spells like water bug me too cause I've got a priest using it as a water boarding effect right now. I think the limiting it and other spells is going to have to be the way to go. Like giving the MENDING spell a duration of some kind instead of permanent, ie the magic just isn't strong enough to last.
I've currently got mt pc's using the creative tactic of using silence on/with the sorcerer's familiar giving the effect mobility and intelligence. I agree it can be difficult to deal with but nothing I'd call overpowered. And any tactic used too often against an organized foe quickly becomes something that can be circumvented. (like knowing to target the familiar) I agree that the mechanic for illusion/glamors should be applied or the spell re-categorized to transmutation perhaps different versions of the same spell effect?
You know what might make counter-spelling a more viable option without making it an immediate action. Change it so that all you need to counter a spell is a spell of equivalent level, instead of the exact same spell or a spell that says it counters that spell. Then the only time a spellcaster has to worry about loosing an action to readying to counterspell is if the opponent has higher level spells than them. Other than preloaded magic items counter spelling as an immediate action, I'll add that I've never seen a PC use it in game. I've only had NPC ever use Dispel Magic unless the PC's used a repeated tactic against an organized foe. Its a lot less frustrating for me to lose a readied action against the PC's than it is for a PC to lose an action against the NPCs. Lastnight's solution is about the only solution I've worked out myself but I've added that the spells need to be in the same schools unless dispel magic is used just to try and stay somewhat in spirit of the OGL rules.
I think the authors are worried about peole using the DAMAGE MULTIPLIER rule which states: Multiplying
but even that goes on to stipulate that it shouldn't be used for other instances of multipliers in the game typically.
I too want more options so put my vote in for adding the ability to use maneuvers with opportunity attacks if the Imp. Maneuver feats are taken in order to avoid the provocation chains and make the feats a little more meaty. I'm not particular where in the chain the ability should land, but I'd like the option available for those maneuvers that aren't' full round actions. Action denial and fighters being able to tank are aspects I want added to combat even if the players may get the short end of the exchange sometimes in the trade offs. I think such things encourage excitement and energy at the table. If not feats, as some suggest this would put the option solely in the realm of fighter types, then something that allows the option for the cinematic of situations then just a boff on the head when you can't ready an action. -------------------------- An example options for opportunity attacks that hasn't been mentioned thus far is setting spears against charges. I've rarely seen it happen in my games because the initiative mechanic. Either the target has readied the action before the charge (so you don't charge) or your target's initiative is after yours and therefore gets run over after a possible bonk on the head. To me setting a spear fits the provoked opportunity attack mechanic perfectly in that specific situation.
I'd support a merge of these maneuvers and related feats. I do see a fair amount of these maneuvers in my games likely cause I reward players for coming up with crazy ideas for stunts. I also suspect that people don't use these maneuvers cause tumble checks to get by opponents are so much more effective. If it gets harder to tumble past or that these maneuvers get more effective for strength based characters to push targets around the battle space then we'll see more usage. After all who doesn't like a good martial arts movie?
I extend the death threshold beyond -10 typically by the CON bonus. Extending it to the full CON seems excessive to me especially when we're talking about more than -25 point at higher levels. By that same token, I don't think extending that threshold by level is necessary since the defenses at higher level are already increasing. The other thing I recently adopted was extending the STAGGERED condition beyond exactly zero HP to negative CON bonus as well. I thought I read that idea here, but I haven't been able to find it here by searching.
There have been a NUMBER of threads in General and playtest about CMB and I expect they will be repeated here. So, I would like to see some comment from the powers that be in reaction to some of those discussions. I like that 3P has attempted to simplify these maneuvers, especially grappling, but those discussions have brought up a number of holes that need to be addressed in the final product Notably for me is how will specific conditions like being Fully Defensive or which magical bonuses effect CMB? I feel if i had a better handle on that then I could make better, more consistent judgment calls in the heat of the moment... your own miles may vary.
At this point, I've got a 3rd level Druid that is using Create Water for water boarding techniques that I'm eventually going to have to deal with as he gains levels. And I agree that I'll have to adjust the world in the VIRUS/ANTI-VIRUS kind of mode eventually, but that is nothing new to RPGs and I'd rather have players who don't have to ask the party to sit and rest for a day in order to be useful. I like the bloodline powers and the endless cantrips for that reason alone.
.. our biggest hitch has been the Gray Elf and Kobold that lack balancing against the new races. I wouldn't set your expectations very high. The point of the new PFRPG racial stat's is to balance the core races against the monster races and other races that came afterwards. Tweaking the more powerful races upwards defeats the purpose entirely. Besides, PFRPG is also suppose to be backwards compatible, so in theory those races should already be balanced as is.
I'm not sure if this belongs in errata or not but is it assumed that the Demoralize option of Intimidate skill still requires a standard action as v3.5 though isn't explicitly stated? Are there opinions on mechanics to demoralizing multiple targets or should that require a feat? +2 DC per highest target DC of the attempt?
At some point I realize it starts becoming "TURN LIVING" mechanic or crosses the line to become too much like the Bard's Dirge of Doom so likely should not be allowed.
Do I assume that the Demoralize option of Intimidate skill still requires a standard action as v3.5 since it isn't explicitly stated? [I'll try to repeat that as errata when we get to skills.] Opinions on mechanics to demoralizing multiple targets?
At some point I realize it starts becoming "TURN LIVING" mechanic or crosses the line to become too much like the Bard's Dirge of Doom so likely should not be allowed. And last, since it came up in the discussion of the Dirge of Doom being a little broken. Would some one be the blind guy to where FEAR effects stack and get worse in v3.5 or PRPG? I've missed that somewhere.
To be honest, I think Weapon Finesse should just grant the effects of Agile Maneuvers as well ... I've rolled Agile Maneuvers into Weapon Finesse too. I didn't see the reason for the yet another addition feat for the Dex fighters. I've also decided to let the Improved (Maneuver) feats scale to +4 at level 10 until more is decided upon what conditions effect CMB.
Since Monte Cook is consulting on this project I thought it'd be ok to mention that his second book of his house rules (The Book of Experimental Might II) have a lot of suggestions for feats with FIGHTER only boosts. Basically every class can take the martial feat, but if you take it as a fighter then you get a little extra. |