Ramses135's page

14 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


James Sutter wrote:
Andrew Crossett wrote:

A comic series would be licensed out to an existing comics publisher. It's certainly not something Paizo should try to do in-house.

Exactly. Licenses are the way to go. So if anybody has friends at a respectable comics house, feel free to nudge them our direction.

(Same goes for Bioware, Bethesda, Guillermo Del Toro, Peter Jackson...)

Hm, Bioware + Pathfinder, that would be sooooo cool! Just imagine "Absalom Nights" PC game !!! ;)


All other posts are like "if I own the old book, will I need / want the new book?" - I would like to get answer to the exact opposite. If I plan to buy the new book for sure, is there any sense in buying the old Campaign Settings right now?


It will all depend on which Rage Abilities will the barbarian have. Let's wait if he still possess THE rage, allowing him to enter a fury, seeing all red and smashing through enemies... :-) For cost of more RP, of course.

Greatest benefit I see would be adaptability. You need speed? Run Forest run! :-) Need to get through this portculis? Grog smash! It would be more interesting that just plain killing maschine.

Now, I will quietly sit and wait for the rules.


Quote:
I'm not trying to incite anyone here, but ToB is the Gateway to 4e according to WotC. I would prefer to stay away from this kind of new material.

True, true, TRUE! Hate it, hate it, HATE IT!!!! Ehm... :-))

So, a new class would be nice. Hexer would be awesome. If not my belowed Hexblade, so Hexer :-) Plenty, plenty of cursing abilities, spells that shape probability... Hexblade is a mix of warrior and arcane character in the same fashion as paladin is mix of warriow and cleric and ranger mix of warrior and druid. Yes I know, I'm simplifying now, but overall it's true.


Excellent review of the problem, Snorter. Agree on 100%

Pneumonika: Naming is only a secondary thing. Biggest deal is the difference between rage points and daily rage. And it is HUGE.

Test: Smurf me!


Because I really like many races with Level Adjustment, I think it would be good to change the concept a bit. Look for example on duergar. Ok, they can use invisibility. Otherwise, they are not too good as a race. Or Drow. Just from my experience:

Drow on low levels have pretty boosted statistics, it was not hard to get what you want - a perfect Ranger, great Hexblade. BUT with -2 CON and Level Adjustment +2, their hitpoints were laughable. Party on lvl 3 which included a drow character has a problem - the drow was still lvl 1 and had max 10 hp. On ECL 3? Terrible.

Drow on higher levels have other problems. Around lvl 15, stats boost really don't matter so much. Again, there was only one great aspect of playing a drow, and that's Spell Resistance. But, for example drow wizards (and dark elves should be EXCELLENT wizards) loosed 2 levels of their spellcaster class, which resulted in having spells of lower levels... Terrible.

So, what to do with Level Adjustment? I propose to "divide" race bonuses, grant some of them on higher levels. Back to my example, the drow - on first level, he could be the same as normal elf. Let's say on 3th level first race abilities will start to show. Well, if you want him not to became too powerful, you can use something similar to the mechanics from Unearthed Arcana. When getting enough XP for leveling up and getting some really nice race abilities (Spell Resistance) you can let the drow choose an option - progress faster, like a normal elf, or give up some fixed amount of XP to get your racial bonuses. Just a thought, it would be good to think about it more.


Shawn O'Leary wrote:
NO POINTED MANGA EARS on ELVES!

Amen.


I actually never played a barbarian, because I always felt too much limited with only few uses of Barbarian Rage (most of our adventures is low-level). For me, barbarian was like a fighter without some feats and with a feel of wilderness. On the contrary, my brother is a barbarian player. He always played them. Half-orcs mostly :-) And we both like rage points, it is something the barbarian really needed.

Now, it's a nice mechanics, but be careful. Give it to anyone and the game will get some strange, alien feel and we probably won't play it. The names has to be more descriptive as well, Eagle's something reminds me of Book of Nine Swords and, in the Nine Hells, how do I HATE this book. For me, it already has the "4e feel". So does using "special powers" from your "power pool", but in case of barbarian, (and only in his case) it may be a good way.

Thumbs up to rage points!


No hex maps for this game. Bleh. It's cool in Battletech, but... We have a kind of local clone of D&D played only in our country and the system uses hex maps. It's a tragedy.


Well the art is not bad, and I have to admit I just love that arabic look of the elven cleric in the classes section, but...

Hate these loooooong ears!


DracoDruid wrote:

If there is one thing I really HATED in D&D3.5 were the additional basic classes in the supplements!

If their system were ANY good. Their classes (including multiclass-rules and PrC) should cover all those ideas COMPLETLY!

Sorry but had to let that out.

It would be a waste to let go all these basic classes. Scout, Swashbuckler and Hexblade have great support between many players I know. I wouldn't mind these or similar core classes in Pathfinder.

So, what core classes will we have? Can we have some more? As I said, a class mixing arcane and martial would be great. And I still don't let the idea of Hexblade / Witch(er) / whatever. A (even male) Witch could have cursing abilities, many of them. 3.5e Hexblade has only one, battle curse. Please please give me more :-)

Alternative class features making Scout or Swashbuckler from Rangers / Fighters / Rogues would be perfect. Personally, I prefer core classes with more options on every level than multiclassing and the whole system of prestige classes.


Will non-PHB1 Basic Classes be included in Pathfinder? I mean, we have Hexblade, Duskblade, Warlock, Warmage, Favoured Soul, Spirit Shaman, Crusader... These are of course only marginally when compared with core classes, but people like them (not all people not all these classes, of course).

I have to start a lobby for Hexblade :-) From the beginning of my D&D days, I liked both ranger and paladin to be a mix between fighter and druid/cleric. But, as a player liking more arcane than divine, I always wanted to have a possibility to effectively mix martial and arcane skills in a way similar to ranger. Hexblade is just perfect, even with his own unique cursing abilities. Please, give me a Pathfinder Hexblade (maybe with some different name, but with the cursing mechanics)! Oh yes, and more curses - maybe some non-combat (all of us may imagine medieval witches said to curse animals, which broked their legs, got diseases and similar).


Stephen Klauk wrote:

Rangers & Paladins have had spell access from 1E, so as far as I'm concerned, they've always had it.

That said, their spell lists suck. That's been affirmed by my players as far back as 1E. If these two classes had their own distinct lists of spells that were useful to them (such as spells like Arrow Mind and Holy Weapon), that would be much better.

I am also not against allowing these two classes to swap out spellcasting for other abilities, but I would rather it be an option instead of the default.

Amen :-)

Absolutely. I like rangers and paladins with access to some spells, but give them something useful omg. Curse of Impeding Blades of Ranger is a good example, nice spell.

For some suggestions above, I really like the fighting-style-line of paladin. For example, my brother always hated paladin's mount. When he got the possibility to use paladin's holy weapon (some alternative class feature, not sure from which book - will give you a personal weapon instead of personal mount) his problems were solved. So a paladin which would be able to choose between mounted combat and normal combat (probably with two-handed weapons) could be nice. Plus, always good if your warrior character has not to spend all these feats to make himself a bit more effective (and still be worse than fighter).


Just a idea. Well, we all know that in means of effectivity, STR based fight is better than DEX based, right? I mean, with STR you get +attack and +damage, but with DEX only +attack and only when you take the Weapon Finesse feat. On higher levels the difference is huge (in amounts of damage dealt). So a suggestion:

Weapon Finesse will allow to use your DEX bonus to attack AND it will provide damage bonus as well (instead of STR bonus), which could be considered precision damage (=undeads and construct immune).

Boost for rangers? :-)