There's one more item that should be noted: in version 3 of the Alpha rules, the point buy they propose makes it more expensive to buy a score of 16 (and quite a bit more expensive to buy an 18). So characters using a point buy aren't really any better than their corresponding 3.5E point buy counterpart (and may be worse in some cases).
Ok. That may balance it out better. I'll keep that in mind once I download Alpha3 and look it over.
Honestly, I don't want to do too many 'once per day' feats. I dislike those in v3.5, so adding more just doesn't appeal to me. If anything, those 'once per day' items might be more okay as class abilities where the player chooses one every so many levels. Even then, I'm not sure.
And thanks for pointing out this thread elsewhere. I'd love to get even more feedback.
Ok, those are some pretty fair answers. Sounds like more of an arbitrary change than something that was absolutely needed. (Except, as I mentioned, the half-elf and half-orc.)
What Chris Perkins 88 says about cleaning up the messier aspects of 3.5 is what I was expecting as well. The races weren't really that messy and in need of this sort of change.
The Paizo combat feats seem especially weak in that you can't combo them, and they often have very limited effects. Seriously, even if you could use all of them simultaneously its just attack options. I can't imagine any combination of feats that would actually be broken in any sense that involve swinging a weapon at something.
Feats definitely need to be better, and freely combinable. Anything else is just another kick in the poor melee class crotch.
Yeah. For the most part, the feats in Alpha 2 don't really do it for me. Some are nice, and can certainly be kept, but there needs to be more beef, and less crap like the +2/+2 feats (talk about a waste of space).
I didn't actually write them with using them in combination, but if that's something that actually works out, that's fine. Much better that for the 'pointy end goes in the other guy' crowd than just yet another feat that grants a +1 or +2 to something.
I just went down through the list of posts, and I couldn't find anything regarding this subject. I'd bet that this has come up previously, but I didn't see anything. If there is another thread about this, just let this post die and I'll repost it over there.
What's the deal with adding another +2 to the races?
Setting aside the half-elf and the half-orc, the races of 3.5 weren't a broken aspect of the game. Don't get me wrong, just adding more little bonuses here and there will make a lot of people happy and get them to jump on the band-wagon and defend the choice. Many people like bigger bonuses.
However, reading the intro to Pathfinder, there seems to be little need to grant all the races a net total of +2 to their scores from either a balance or compatibility standpoint. While there are certainly areas of the game that actually were broken (spells!), the racial layout wasn't one of them. So, is it merely to be different and/or to increase the bonus total? If so, that's cool. I don't mind that explanation; at least it's honest.
Honestly, it comes off as yet another change that ignores their design goals of backward compatibility and a re-balanced game. (That doesn't mean this change is unbalanced. Just that the change wasn't really needed to re-balance the game. The only races that actually needed to change were the half-elf and the half-orc, and there were plenty of suggestions floating around to balance those two better with the v3.5 races.)
Anyway, I'm mostly interested in one of the previous threads on this subject, but couldn't find one with a scan of the boards. Like I said, I highly doubt I'm the first one to question this issue.
This idea reminds me of counter-tumbling (Sword and Fist, IIRC).
The tumbling check is an opposed roll instead of a static DC. I've used that for some years, and it works just find. Those NPCs/PCs/creatures that are practiced at tumbling have an idea of how the tumbler will be moving, so have a better chance at making an AoO. Those without practice at tumbling, don't have an idea of how the tumbler would be moving to avoid AoOs.
It just involves making the die roll to counter-tumble accessible untrained. That gets rid of size and Str bonuses influencing the DC (except the Dex penalty associated with size changes, but that's already figured in).
That owlbear skeleton, for example, would set the DC at d20+2 (avg. 12.5). Since that creature has no practice tumbling, it's not good at anticipating how the PC would tumble, thus a mere +2. However, it would be a long time before the PC in question could automatically make the DC. Certainly higher level than just needing to make the DC 15. Honestly, most monsters don't even have tumble, and would be relying purely on Dexterity.
Recently, I've been working on ideas for feat changes in my game. One particular idea that intrigued me was to make feats dual purpose.
Previously, I had run a game where more benefits of feats were unlocked as the characters leveled up. This worked ok, but was a bit much. I toyed around with a few ideas, then decided to write up a few feats that gave a normal, always-on benefit, plus one special benefit limited in some way. The easiest limiter was once per encounter, of course influenced by Tome of Battle.
As I began writing them, the idea really started to gain momentum. Now, I find myself with 100+ feats. So, I thought to myself, 'why not share them on the Paizo board.' Even if it's too radical for Pathfinder, feedback is always appreciated.
I'm only going to post a few of them, and the link to the website I put them on for all the feats.
I also really disliked the phenomenon of needing multiple feats/minimum BAB/minimum ranks required on so many feats. I feel that for most cases, if a minimum character level is desired before taking the feat, just plain say it: Prerequisites: ECL 6+, or whatever. That's not to say I don't have feats with more prerequisites than just ECL, but the vast majority are either ECL minimum or ECL plus one feat.
What this does is still allow a lot of backward compatibility, while bringing the power level of feats up so they're closer to level-appropriate, instead of the vast majority of them being stuck as appropriate for low levels.
Anyway, here are the examples:
Weapon Focus Benefit: Choose one weapon group you are proficient with. You gain a +1 attack bonus to hit with weapons from one chosen weapon group.
Special: Once per encounter, when you make an attack of opportunity with a weapon from the chosen weapon group, you may roll twice to hit and take the better of the two rolls.
Iron Will Benefit: You gain a +2 save bonus to Will saving throws.
Special: Once per encounter, as a free action, you may re-roll any saving throw against an enchantment spell or effect which you failed the previous round.
Greater Two-Weapon Fighting Prerequisites: ECL 12+, Dex 13+, Two-Weapon Fighting
Benefit: Whenever you make an attack of opportunity, you use both weapons to do so. Each attack is rolled separately, as is damage. Even though you attack with both weapons, it only counts as expending one of your attacks of opportunity when you do this.
Special: Once per encounter, when you make a full attack, you may make a 5 ft. step each time you hit with either your primary or secondary weapon.
Acrobatic Recovery Prerequisites: ECL 9+
Benefit: If an effect causes you to fall prone, you may make a DC 20 Acrobatics check to remain standing.
Special: Once per encounter, when you use the normal benefit of this feat, you may also shift to any adjacent space.
Anyway, that's four examples. The remainder can be found by following the links found here.
Anyway, let me know the what you think. Especially problems with implementing this, even if it wouldn't work for Pathfinder.
(Note: There are references to some other changes which I haven't yet finalized. Skills and Hit Points are the two main areas referenced, but that doesn't really affect the overall scheme of these feats.)
Spoiler:
As usual...
This material uses the Open Game License.
All material in the above post is Open Game Content. Open Game Content on this page is copyright 2008 by Donald Senchuk
And now your minotaur is down by 2 skills. He should be getting 3 maxed out by alpha, but only has Perception. It may not be entirely fair to say that the CR remains unchanged.
Which brings up another point. What happens to the racial HD skills with the new consolidation? Again, the DM ends up going back and figuring out what else he gets that he didn't have before, right?
Or is that another 'just guesstimate it' area?
Honestly, the more guesstimating and fudging going on, the more it becomes a question of why bother having new system at all? After all, keeping skill points allows you to just dump all points into very few skills for monsters and mooks (accomplishing the same thing as the new system), while retaining the ability for players to fine-tune their character's skill point allocation. Or, for those players that want to just max out a few skills, they can still do that with skill points.
Perhaps, for me, it just really boils down to one thing; in general, skills weren't broken. There are two individual skills that had problems -- diplomacy and use magic device -- but the skill system itself isn't really broken. Fabricate is broken. Polymorph is broken. Fighter dead levels are broken. Shapechange for infinite wishes is broken. Modifying skills to be more like 4ed seems to be the opposite direction that Pathfinder was originally touted to be: a continuation of 3.5 for the previous Pathfinder series. Skills just didn't need to be changed this much.
Certain spells and/or the Big 3 (Cleric, Druid, Wizard) need changing.
The half-elf and half-orc need changing.
The feat system needs changing.
That's the first three items that need changing, anyway.
See, I was looking at this the same way until I realized something...you don't really need to do that at all if you don't want to, or can make a pretty easy on-the-fly conversion just by looking at the monster stat-block if you want to adjust.
Sure, you can guesstimate the monster's/mook NPC's skills on the fly without worrying about making it exact. But then why take away the ability of the players to more finely customize their characters' skill expenditure?
In fact, if you're fine with guesstimating the monster/mook skill bonuses for conversion to pathfinder, you can totally do that while using skill points ala v3.5.
Our group has been doing that since 3.0, and it's worked out great - it really helps the fighter take a few ranks in something without having to spend all of his limited skill points on it. I know that a number of other posters on these boards have a similar houserule for their campaigns, or at least have suggested the same thing.
I too have been using it for some time; perhaps the last 2 1/2 years. It's not uncommon from what I've gathered. All anecdotal, of course, but it's certainly not some genius idea that I've come up with.
Since cross-class skills seem to be a sacred cow (and I do respect the idea of them - I want magic missiles in the game) I think that this is a better solution than the Epic Meepo one. It solves the problem of figuring out if the stat block shows the right number of ranks.
So, skills cost the same for everyone, but if it is a cross class skill you still have the maximum rank limit. I'd actually be fine with that.
Precisely right.
I, too, like the idea of cross-class meaning something, and the maximum ranks limit for cross-class skills does this.
nope I want them gone.over 8 years I as a dm and a plyer have grown to see them as more trouble then there worth really.and sorry I dont buy into the lack of customization thing. 2 or 3 ranks in a skill at 15th level is not better then untrained really.They were a good ideal at the time but really need to go I think.Its not a that big of a change but will help alot of folks games.Also makes dming so much easier I found.
No, not really.
The DCs are typically low enough that even dumping a couple skill points into something like a trained only skill makes it so that you can actually make pretty damn good use of that investment.
Seriously, just check out the DCs of some skills. You really don't need to suddenly have a +18 to make those checks. (Not to mention how it breaks the story aspect.)
Balance, with a fairly reasonable +2 from Dex, those 3 skill points make you able to traverse the next harder category.
Or, how about Handle Animal. Adding in those 3 skill points and you suddenly have the ability to teach most tricks (8 out of 12).
Not to mention something like Open Lock. Spend a single skill point with v3.5 to be able to open simple locks. Pick Theft in Alpha and you suddenly gain a huge bonus to Picking Pockets, Opening Locks and two other abilities (for the mentioned 15th level, it's either +18 [class] or +9 [cross-class]).
That's a big change, not a small one.
Onward to lack of the ability to customize. You end up with a bunch of skills at either level+3 or half that. That just doesn't seem like customization. Or, rather, I should say it looks like a lot less customization than 3.5 offers, not the same degree.
I agree. I've always like plugging a few skill points in here and there to round out a character. This became especially true when I dropped the 2:1 cross-class bull****.
I do agree somewhat with combining skills. In fact, if backward compatibility weren't such a buzz-word, I'd combine them even more. Probably get it down to around 20 skills or there about.
Part of the thing with the v3.5 skill point system, is you could specialize the way Pathfinder is forcing you to, or you could generalize if you wanted that more well-rounded character.
What I really don't understand -- and I hope someone can explain it without all the anger that I'm beginning to see expressed -- is what about the alpha skill system follows the design goal of Backward Compatibility?
I keep hearing this and having used the system to make an adventurer for my group . and converting everyone over.I will say it does not affect it at all.its really easy to use the new system lets look at the ECS I have it laying right here.P.252 Demise 4th art2.necro 2 skills are appraise+3,alchemy +9,concentration+7,intimidate +4,know-arcana+5 know-history+5, spellcraft+9,use magic device+4
now you can use it just as it is sept concentration goes . now if you really wanted to do a full work up here we go here int+3 she gets 5 skills +2 thats 7 skills she has 7 skills lets run em down arti is the first class were work from there.I would eyeball em at 9 and have done with it myself but lets see
appraise 3+4+3=9
intimidate3+2+2=9
alchemy 3+3+4=10
know-arcana+3+3+4=10
know-history+3+3+4=10
spellcraft3+3+4=10
use magic device+3+2+4=9
see it really isnt and issue on that front.and yes the math is way easier . most states will not need adjusting or more then take the highest one and go across the board with it.only long term villains would i even bother doing a full write up.
So, the 'backward compatibility' in this instance is to redo every monster and NPC from all previous works? And to grant them all much larger bonuses, or expand their skills into areas where they had nothing previously?
Sorry, that's a huge failure on the 'backward compatibility' issue.
Sure, it may be simpler to create them at the cost of more dynamic and varied characters, but it's certainly not backward compatible in the sense that I imagine the term is meant to imply.
As for the math being way easier, yes it is. But so is just eliminating the cost of purchasing cross-class ranks of 2:1.
I'll do up a quick example...
v3.5 Fighter 4 / Ranger 2 / Wizard 2 (first character level is ranger)
His total number of skill points is easy to figure (30 excluding bonus skill points). Now, thanks to taking ranger first, a player that uses his fighter or wizard skill points to increase Hide or Survival suddenly has a much harder time figuring out how many ranks he should have.
Climb 11 ranks (spent 2 wizard skill points for 1 ranks)
Jump 9 ranks (spent only fighter and ranger skill points)
Intimidate 4 ranks (spent 3 fighter skill points, 2 ranger skill points)
and so forth.
By merely eliminating the 2:1, you know right away that the character will have 30 ranks (barring bonus skill points). Remember that the maximum ranks allowed will remain unchanged. If it was ever a class skill, the maximum ranks is level+3. If it was never a class skill, then half that amount.
So, in the above [incomplete] example, he would have spent 11 skill points for 11 ranks Climb, 9 skill points for 9 ranks Jump, 4 skill points for 4 ranks Intimidate.
-=-=-=-=-=
On to your example character. What I'm seeing from your brief demonstration is that the converted character ends up with a much better skill set than the 3.5 version. This, again, screams that it's not really good at fulfilling the 'backward compatibility' that has been claimed. (Note that nowhere did I claim the Alpha system is harder to use, or more math intensive.)
However, before I get too far into a discussion about this, I'll do up some NPCs from one of the splat books, and compare that to an Alpha conversion of the same NPC. I'll admit that it may not be as bad at powering up characters (PCs and NPCs alike) as it looks at first blush. It'll just have to wait until later tonight or tomorrow. :)
What I really don't understand -- and I hope someone can explain it without all the anger that I'm beginning to see expressed -- is what about the alpha skill system follows the design goal of Backward Compatibility?
If you really want backward compatibility, then skill points are the way to go. Remember, there are certainly things about 3.5 that are super-broken. However, skill points really wasn't one of them.
Also, it seems to me it's been shown that the alpha skill system really ramps up the skill bonuses a character gets compared to skill points.
The biggest legitimate complaint about the skill system is figuring out where and when your cross-class skill points got spent. I understand that can be problematic for some people/groups. No problem. Just get rid of the 2:1 cross-class purchase and you're good to go. The cross-class cap remains in place (level+3/2). If a character has a single level of a class where a skill was a class skill, the cap matches all class skill caps (level+3).
As for backward compatibility, it really don't affect characters or NPC nearly so much as the SWSE/Alpha system. Simply add up the total skill points your PC should have, and that's the number of ranks you should have. And, IME, most PCs have either spent no cross-class skill points or very few. You won't suddenly have some character become very good at some skill he barely used previously.
Well, damn. That link appears broken. I've added the entirety of the suggestion below.
I've never implemented it, but I think the skill bonus feats should indeed grant the skill as a class skill. In fact, with the amount of skills reduced significantly, I'd lose the +2/+2 feats (such as Acrobatic, Deft Hands, et.al.) and just go with Skill Focus granting a bonus and making the skill a class skill.
You're absolutely right about the 2:1 thing, and that's why I say to drop it. The classes that only have two skill points are already sacrificing to pick up ranks in Stealth or Perception or whatever.
I'm not going to touch the racial stuff, because I think the +2/+2/-2 is just a silly power-up that drifts too far away from backward compatibility. Leaving it at +2/-2 wasn't really a problem with 3.5 (aside from the half-orc). But, I'll get around to posting about that in the appropriate place some time after this weekend.
Spoiler:
The biggest problem with skills is that there are more than 61 of them. The skill point system itself isn't really broken and in need of a total overhaul in the way shown in the Alpha download. You can totally get away with very few changes, none of which includes changing the fact that classes get skill points and skill ranks.
First, group the skills together and reduce the number of skills. Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Languages, Mechanics, Knowledge (arcane), Knowledge (planes and cosmology), Knowledge (exploration), Knowledge (local), Knowledge (practical), Perform, Perception, Social Interaction, Stealth, Wilderness Lore
Then, get rid of the 2:1 cross-class purchasing of skill ranks.
That's pretty much it. This helps achieve the backward compatibility that's been talked about, without the comparison between the old and new character skill ranks so lop-sided.
Skill System Skill Ranks: A character spends his skill points to gain ranks in a skill group. One skill point spent gives a character one rank. The maximum number of ranks a character can gain depends upon if that skill is a class skill or a cross-class skill.
Class Skills: A character can have ranks in a class skill equal to his ECL +3.
Cross-class Skills: A character can have ranks in a cross-class skill equal to one-half of his ECL+3. Once a character has taken a class with a skill listed as a class skill, his maximum number of ranks becomes his ECL+3.
Skill Synergy: Drop this altogether. It really just boils down to ‘yet another tiny, often situational, modifier I have to keep track of’. With the new skill groupings, the bonus isn’t needed anyway. For example, if you have 5 ranks in Acrobatics, you essentially have 5 ranks in Balance, Escape Artist and Tumble. The measly +2 bonus from synergy is eclipsed by merely having these groupings in the first place.
Class Skill List: The class skills list changes a little bit, as does the number of skill points each class gets. With such a reduction in the number of skills in the game, I’d be tempted to adjust these more, including introducing odd number of skill points each level. The skill points listed here are the SRD skill points, followed by what I would assign if I were redesigning the game (6 SRD / 5 Me).
Bard (6/5): Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (all), Languages, Perform, Perception, Social Interaction, Stealth
Barbarian (4/3): Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Perception, Wilderness Lore
Cleric (2/2): Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (planes and cosmology, local), Perception, Social Interaction
Druid (4/4): Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (exploration), Perception, Wilderness Lore
Fighter (2/4)*: Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (local), Perception
Monk (4/4): Acrobatics, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (exploration, local, practical), Perception, Stealth
Paladin (2/3): Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (planes and cosmology), Perception, Social Interaction
Ranger (6/5): Animal Handling, Athletics, Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (exploration, local), Perception, Stealth, Wilderness Lore
Rogue (8/6): Acrobatics, Athletics, Craft, Knowledge (local, practical), Language, Mechanics, Perception, Social Interaction, Stealth
Sorcerer (2/2): Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (arcane, local), Social Interaction
Wizard (2/3): Craft, Endurance, Knowledge (all)
*Seems that one of the most common house-rules for the Fighter is an additional 2 skill points. The Alpha release also did this and I strongly recommend it.
SKILL GROUPS Acrobatics (Dex)*
Balance – balancing across narrow or treacherous surfaces
Escape Artist – escaping bindings or grapples
Tumble – avoiding movement attacks of opportunity and various other movement related checks
Animal Handling (Dex/Cha)
Handle Animal (Cha) – tending and working with domestic animals
Ride (Dex) – for riding on a mount
Wild Empathy (Cha) – influence wild animals and magical beasts
Athletics (Str)*
Climb – climbing surfaces
Jump – long jump and high jump
Swim** – swimming, including checks to avoid non-lethal damage from swimming
Craft (Int) [Individual skills]
Includes Forgery
Endurance (Con)
Concentration – for spellcasters to maintain spell concentration
Hold Breath – just like it says
Persevere [from Endurance feat] – avoid damage from forced march, starvation or thirst; continue running, avoid damage from hot or cold environments
Knowledge (Arcane) (Int) [Trained only]
Identify Item – determine a single basic functions of a magic item.
Arcana – knowledge of ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, cryptic phrases, constructs, dragons, magical beasts).
Knowledge (Exploration) (Int) [Trained only]
Dungeoneering – knowledge of dungeons, caves, caverns, oozes, molds, spelunking.
Geography – knowledge of lands, terrain, climate, people.
Nature – knowledge of animals, fey, giants, monstrous humanoids, plants, seasons and cycles, weather, vermin.
Knowledge (Local) (Int) [Trained only]
History – knowledge of royalty, wars, colonies, migrations, founding of cities.
Local – knowledge of legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids.
Nobility and Royalty – lineages, heraldry, family trees, mottoes, personalities.
Knowledge (Planes and Cosmology) (Int) [Trained only]
Religion – knowledge of gods and goddesses, mythic history, ecclesiastic tradition, holy symbols, undead.
The Planes – knowledge of inner planes, outer planes, ethereal plane, astral plane, shadow planes, elementals, outsiders.
Knowledge (Practical) (Int) [Trained only]
Appraise – determine the value of expensive and rare objects
Architecture and Engineering [Trained only] – knowledge of buildings, aqueducts, bridges, fortifications
Language (Int) [Trained only; Individual skills]
Language – pick a language and learn it; 1 rank is the basics, 2 ranks is passable, 3 ranks is fluent.
Reading and Writing – learn to read and write, or decipher unfamiliar text.
Mechanics (Int) [Trained only]
Disable Device – ruin the function of a mechanical device.
Open Lock – pick a lock.
Perform (Cha) [Trained only; Individual skills]
Perception (Int/Wis)
Listen (Wis) – hear sounds, determine direction and location
Search (Int) – searching for fine detail
Spot (Wis) – notice something significant
Sense Motive (Wis) – get a feeling about others, see through their lies
Social Interaction (Cha)
Bluff – lie through your teeth, also includes Disguise
Diplomacy – persuade through words
Gather Information – gather rumors and other information
Intimidate – use threat of violence to coerce specific acts out of an individual
Stealth (Dex)*
Hide – remain hidden
Move Silently – make no noise while moving
Sleight of Hand – loot retrieval, such as picking pockets
Wilderness Lore (Wis)
Heal – help yourself or others through non-magical means
Track – track a subject via footprints or through other means
Survival – survive in the wilds
You'll notice that I've dropped three skills, Profession, Use Rope and Spellcraft.
The profession rules don't work. At all. If you really want your character to have a profession other than Adventurer, go ahead and pick on. Yes, for free. Happy Birthday. Remember, nearly every NPC you interact with in a non-violent way will have a profession.
Use rope is hard to place. I guess it could fall under Mechanics or Knowledge (practical), but that means every sailor or teamster would know how to disable devices or appraise valuable objects. I'm content just to hand-wave this one into your profession. If you choose a profession that it makes sense for your character to know about Rope Use, then you do.
Spellcraft is a strange one to eliminate, I'll admit. However, I just don't see very much use in identifying a spell as it's being cast. If you really insist, just add it to Knowledge (arcane), where it makes the most sense.
OGL stuff...
Spoiler:
All original material is Product License and Copyright March 26, 2008, by Donald Senchuk
All other material is Open Game Content.
Legal Stuff
The following portions of this work are protected under the Open game License found below: All portions of any text found in the D20 System Reference Document. Parts of these portions originate from the D20 System Reference Document and are Copywrite 2000-2003, Wizards of the Coast. The remainder of these portions are hereby added to Open Game Content and if so used, should bear the COPYRIGHT NOTICE "Cragore, copywrite 2007 by Donald Senchuk
OPEN GAME LICENSE Version 1.0a
The following text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and is Copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc ("Wizards"). All Rights Reserved.
1. Definitions: (a)"Contributors" means the copyright and/or trademark owners who have contributed Open Game Content; (b)"Derivative Material" means copyrighted material including derivative works and translations (including into other computer languages), potation, modification, correction, addition, extension, upgrade, improvement, compilation, abridgment or other form in which an existing work may be recast, transformed or adapted; (c) "Distribute" means to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute; (d)"Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity. (e) "Product Identity" means product and product line names, logos and identifying marks including trade dress; artifacts; creatures characters; stories, storylines, plots, thematic elements, dialogue, incidents, language, artwork, symbols, designs, depictions, likenesses, formats, poses, concepts, themes and graphic, photographic and other visual or audio representations; names and descriptions of characters, spells, enchantments, personalities, teams, personas, likenesses and special abilities; places, locations, environments, creatures, equipment, magical or supernatural abilities or effects, logos, symbols, or graphic designs; and any other trademark or registered trademark clearly identified as Product identity by the owner of the Product Identity, and which specifically excludes the Open Game Content; (f) "Trademark" means the logos, names, mark, sign, motto, designs that are used by a Contributor to identify itself or its products or the associated products contributed to the Open Game License by the Contributor (g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content. (h) "You" or "Your" means the licensee in terms of this agreement.
2. The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License.
3.Offer and Acceptance: By Using the Open Game Content You indicate Your acceptance of the terms of this License.
4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.
5.Representation of Authority to Contribute: If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License.
6.Notice of License Copyright: You must update the COPYRIGHT NOTICE portion of this License to include the exact text of the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any Open Game Content You are copying, modifying or distributing, and You must add the title, the copyright date, and the copyright holder's name to the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any original Open Game Content you Distribute.
7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.
8. Identification: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.
9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License.
10 Copy of this License: You MUST include a copy of this License with every copy of the Open Game Content You Distribute.
11. Use of Contributor Credits: You may not market or advertise the Open Game Content using the name of any Contributor unless You have written permission from the Contributor to do so.
12 Inability to Comply: If it is impossible for You to comply with any of the terms of this License with respect to some or all of the Open Game Content due to statute, judicial order, or governmental regulation then You may not Use any Open Game Material so affected.
13 Termination: This License will terminate automatically if You fail to comply with all terms herein and fail to cure such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of the breach. All sublicenses shall survive the termination of this License.
14 Reformation: If any provision of this License is held to be unenforceable, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable.
15 COPYRIGHT NOTICE
D20 System Reference Document Copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Open Gaming Liscense as found at www.opengamingfoundation.org[/smaller]
One thing I noticed right away when reading through the Pathfinder PDF was the new skill system. It struck me that it really doesn't do two things that I thought this project was supposed to/rumored to accomplish.
1. Fix elements of 3.5 that were broken: IMO, skills were the furthest thing from broken in 3.5. While there are a few areas with holes big enough to throw a cat through, the underlying system really wasn't broken at either end of the spectrum, neither too powerful nor too weak.
2. Maintain backward compatibility: The new skill system fails at this an spades. It's already been pointed out how the new system basically just grants everyone an absurd skill increase across the board. That's only one worry though. Maintaining backward compatibility isn't just making sure the Pathfinder material that replaces core works ok. It also has to be backward compatible with the library of books that many people who are excited about this project certainly have. Even if someone just has Complete Warrior/Divine/Arcane/Adventurer, it becomes more problematic to switch to this pseudo SWSE system than just refine the existing system a little bit.
What I mean by that is really accomplished pretty easily. First, reduce the number of skills by combining some of them together. Second, get rid of the 2:1 cross-class skills purchase (but keep the cross-class maximum ranks).
I saw the thread over on the WotC message boards about the Pathfinder open playtesting. The whole idea interests me as my group isn't really ready to switch to 4ed. For more than a year, I've been using a massive set of house rules. I used to have almost all that stuff posted over on the WotC boards, but a little known rule over there is that, if it's on the WotC boards, they co-own it. (There are a few stories of material finding its way into books, and the original author being told to 'cease and desist' in questioning it, but I digress.) I guess, first things first, does Paizo do this as well [claim co-ownership of posted material]?
I downloaded the Pathfinder PDF and began looking through it. As with most everyone else, I've got opinions, both positive, negative and in between, about the material found within. This weekend, I'll be bringing it to the attention of my group to see what they think. I expect mostly positive reactions.
Anyway, the reason for this thread is mostly curiosity's sake. Hopefully, a few questions can get answered or explained.
As an open alpha test, how good is the back and forth between those giving ideas and the folks at Paizo?
When a suggestion is made, is it just a matter of hoping for feedback, or hoping that the fellow forum goers help hammer out the details?
I ask these two questions wondering how the community will know what ideas and aspects are being strongly considered or debated within Paizo. It would certainly help this community project if the community knew what ideas are an absolute no-go and which ones they consider to have enough merit for future considerations.
I guess that leads to the next question...
If an idea is chosen to be further used or expanded upon, how is credit going to be given? Obviously, everyone that's a member of a message board community will have input and impact on these changes. On one hand, it would hardly be fair to credit only the fine folks at Paizo. On another hand, it also wouldn't be fair to credit only the originator of the idea if many members helped forge it into a more polished form. On yet another hand, it seems impractical to list every single poster that has had any input on any subject that sees print in the final version. (I don't want anyone to think I'm trying to imply anything negative here. This is just outright curiosity speaking here.
