You may remember the Witch from the 3.5 Dungeon Masters Guide (how quite that book sounds now).
The witch was a sorcerer with an unique spell list. And that was it.
The spell list was essentially a hybrid of druid and wizard with a few cleric spells.
The overall focus was charm and nature with some healing, illusion, divination, and polymorph thrown in. And almost no damage-dealing spells. If I recall correctly, that list had no summoning, but I think a witch should be able to summon some creatures (fiends, etc) -- summon monster, no; planar binding, yes.
Anyway, the Pathfinder sorcerer bloodlines clearly allow a witchy theme, but the lack of access to witch-like spells in the druid and cleric spell list is a challenge.
And I wonder, what if we went one step further to make a druid / sorcerer hybrid? The mechanical elements would likely remain like a sorcerer (Hit Dice, weapons, Charisma-based spontaneous caster). However, the class abilities would be more like the druid (wild shape, one thousand faces, etc). And witches stereotypically engage in protracted rituals. How do we represent those? I have some ideas but I'd like to hear from you all first.
What would YOU want to see in a Pathfinder RPG witch?
Hi. I'm one of the 3rd-party folks offering Pathfinder RPG compatible material in August. I've seen the new book and am very pleased. Anyway...
I'm writing an article for Kobold Quarterly's fall issue. The topic: Offering an artificer for PfRPG. This is unrelated to Adamant's announced book.
In the spirit of beta-testing... what would YOU would like to see in an artificer?
Motivations: You likely know from the Pathfinder Beta that converting the WotC Eberron artificer requires more than a quick once-over. Also, Pathfinder RPG is about options. My aim is a flexible class (with varied paths of specialization) that requires only the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook to use. Because this is a magazine article, space is limited. I can include several (2 to 4) new spells / feats to fill essential holes but that's it.
This is what I have so far:
Artificer
--d8 with medium BAB and good Will save
--4 skill points per level, with appropriate class skills
--simple weapons, and light and medium armor proficiency
Focus: The artificer's focus is crafting and using alchemical and magical items, including armaments, constructs, poisons, traps (definitely traps!), and so forth. In some ways it is like a wizard / thief, but with a strong creation focus, mostly utilitarian magic, and less stealth.
Spells: Creation spells span various existing class lists. This is a main reason for the class. So the artificer gets a class-specific list of its own with spells like identify, magic weapon, detect snares and pits, align weapon, wood shape, keen edge, glyph of warding, tiny hut, etc all the way to 9th level spells (though I am hard pressed to select relevant 9th-level spells). In contrast, the Eberron artificer had access only up to 6th level spells and a bunch of new spells that can't be included here.
Room for More Spells: I would like room for artificers to add spells to their spell list from other relevant supplements such as the two-dozen construct-related spells in the Free City of Zobeck Gazetteer. I'm exploring how to do this in a balanced way.
Spellcasting Style: The artificer feels like a prepared caster with reliance on Intelligence. Charisma and Dexterity are also important.
Bonus Craft Feats: I like the idea of slightly early access to magic item craft feats but that's not essential.
Item Creation: An artificer can use scrolls and such easily enough with Use Magic Device to craft items involving spells from other spell lists.
Menu of Tricks: In the spirit of the rogue's menu of tricks, artificers select from their own menu of options. I like the idea of two menus, one for lower levels and one for higher levels.
Mixed Feelings: I am tempted (but not convinced) to let the artificer shadow the cleric and act as a minor medic and food provider. This might lead into fleshcrafting and monster creation later (ha!). Wait, can artifice include making undead war-machines?!
Surprise! There is something incidentally relevant in the Pathfinder rules that makes binding of souls into magic items a breeze by just adding a little class feature. I suspect Jason didn't intend this. But I would love to suggest this option for (naughty) artificers (perhaps in a sidebar).
Constructs and a Construct familiar: I am waiting on more info about the Bestiary before addressing this.
OK, Your Turn!
Will there be options for 3rd party vendors at PaizoCon? Naturally, I mean folks who are interested to support Pathfinder RPG come August and presently have relevant (d20/3.5 etc) material of interest to attendees.
Our local meetup group of 8 played PF-RPG today. 12th level PCs all. The GM was very familiar with PF. The rest of us less so, but it was pretty smooth. Some questions came up.
1. How are the fog spells affected by fire spells? Can burning hands or fireball burn away a fog cloud? Regardless of how it was handled in 3.5, it would be nice to have something in the fog cloud description about fire, even if the effect is "none".
2. Please put in the Spellcraft skill table the DC to maintain concentration on a spell while moving. We searched around for this all-important info.
3. What happens when a character puts his ear to the ground in an attempt to hear a creature's tremors? Characters in movies do this!
4. What are the costs of the various poisons. Yes, PCs buy and use poisons? Knowing the cost is necessary to stat. character wealth too.
And some comments:
1. Death to minus Constitution score or -10, whichever is more generous, is a nice change. Alas, it wasn't enough for 2 of us. When a character is knocked from above 0 to death in one blow, perhaps a successful Fortitude save (DC 15?) to instead be reduced to -9 might be a nice compromise. It's what we did.
2. Combat maneuver vs 15+foe's CMB is definitely too high. I realize this isn't a new perspective, but I thought I'd add my voice to what many have said. 10 or 12 felt more reasonable.
3. Half the party was half-elves. Are half-elves the new best race? (Well duh, half-elves ARE awesome, I mean come on! ;-) I'm actually very happy with the current half-elf. But wondering if other gamers are seeing more of this race as well?
4. One of our foes, a level 15 halfling rogue with boots of speed and multiple daggers of returning (and lots of spell scrolls) averaged 180 points of damage per round when he could sneak attack. Is that "normal?" At level 15, maybe so. For some reason, I was expecting to see rogues limited to one sneak attack per round (perhaps I'm confusing PF with 4E?!?) Just checking....
Overall, it was a smooth experience and there are definitely a lot more options for building interesting PCs. I played a sorcerer/aristocrat/eldritch knight, hoping the "gish" archetype was more doable. It was, though I miss the days of the havoc mage PrC which allowed limited spellcasting and weapon attacks in the same round.
One of our number had only played 4E and Neverwinter Nights. Except for the saving throws, which were pretty confusing for him at first, he didn't seem to have any problem. I thought it was funny when he looked at the wizard/sorcerer spell list (by level and school) and, referring to the brief 1-line descriptions that come with each spell, asked "are these descriptions all there is?" 4E is certainly training a new generation of players away from the classic D&D experience!
Thanks!
A quick note to everyone who doesn't know about the Paizo Fan Meetup this coming weekend (April 25-27). Jason and other Paizo folks will be there, in part to play-test the Alpha 2 rules with 30 fans like myself.
I will be one of the DMs. The last 48 hours have been hellish, trying to absorb the new rules to create a half dozen play-test characters and make sure I can DM without major delays and mishaps. Unlike the PCs, the monsters and NPCs will remain 3.5 stats (mostly). I will be using the new trap, poison and curse rules, though! ;-)
I don't know how much I or others will be posting over the next few days. After all, I'll be in Seattle to game. But I hope to post when I return.
A few very random comments after spending many hours absorbing the Alpha and crafting PCs:
-- Giving the sorcerer Use Magic Device is a major power up for the class, assuming one invests ranks in it. I made a 6th-level half-elf sorcerer. Half elves get Skill Focus for free. She has a 17 Charisma. Her UMG is +15. Let the wands roll. And did I mention she wears glamered mithral chain?
-- The new skill rules really support taking Profession and Craft. When these are class skills (as they usually are), the automatic +3 after taking 1 rank means my human fighter has 4 ranks in Profession (soldier), really playing up his background and fluff with only 1 rank invested!
-- Deciding between bloodlines, domains, schools, etc is proving pretty taxing on my imagination -- so many potential possibilities, but only 1 or 2 are possible. Honestly, I don't think they are meant to be powerful, you know. The abilities support the character's place in the game world, and spellcasters are already the bomb. Oh, proficiency with claws when you are grappled (as the sorcerer PC likely will be this weekend!) might be very useful.
-- Favored class, combined with the +1 hp / level rule, has a noticeable impact on characters. I made an elf paladin. In light of his -2 Con and no bonus hp, clearly a "sub-optimal" choice. But it works well in other ways (which I will post about later).
-- A paladin with an evil outsider bane weapon and divine bond and 2 attacks per round is a nasty SOB. The divine bond ability with a weapon is sweet.
Like everyone else I had some immediate reactions to the Alpha 2. After spending many hours prepping an adventure and PCs, however, I feel... rather impressed. Please everyone, leave the vitriol and power build questions until after we've explored it for real.
The binder contest continues!
Have you submitted your creative endeavor (spirit, anima, vestige, demon) to win a spot in the upcoming Villains of Pact Magic?
So far you all have posted 10 wonderful legends with mechanics to boot for binder characters.
There are only TWO weeks left. You can have your name in print and a nice reward after a few hours of creative play this weekend (or next!)
To current submissions, post your own, or just roam around the pact magic site, visit:
Contest board here!
Note: You can find a PDF of Secrets of Pact Magic here at the Paizo store.
There is talk about keeping Pathfinder RPG familiar to D&D 3.5 yet shining and new.
After running two polls from these boards and reading a whole lot (as others have), I suspect the underlying values of this community also include Choice and Balance (along with dollops of ease, realism, and specialness).
Consider how some proposed changes have been received.
-- Three XP Tracks, Not Just One: This is fairly well received, notably when the rationale was explained.
-- Multiple Starting-HP Methods: Folks aren't demanding Jason pick "one best method" and there are calls to keep a sidebar with options.
-- The Fighter: More feat options was received well. In contrast, chained combat feats requiring two or three rounds of required, sequential setup was poorly received. Note that these fighter feats were to balance the fighter in an easy way and help make playing a fighter more of a special experience.
-- The Rogue: A menu of unique skills that rogues can choose at lower levels (as well as higher levels) has been very well received.
-- The Wizard: Bonded item or familiar? The presence of this choice is praised. In contrast, 9 fixed tracks of ability progression for specialists has been criticized as imbalanced, lacking in choice, and to some extent lacking specialness.
-- Skills: The new system is easy to use. I stated out some characters and liked it far more than I expected. But it does lack realism and some complain that having more skills does not compensate for having less choice in the details. Also note: removing the cross-class distinction has received a tepid response because doing so reduces specialness (too much choice).
-- Races: More power tends to give the impression (sometimes false) of more choice. One criticism of the Pf races is lack of a way to handle cultural variants. Fey gnomes are a great flavor of gnome, but what if I want the very other common archetype, the tinkerer gnome? Similarly, having wizardly magical elves fits tradition, but what about the foresty elves? Technically, I can role-play my race/s however I want, but....
Elsewhere on these boards, someone mentioned the hope that an updated D&D would include minor fixes to all the wonky stuff and a some integration of what people have come to love the most (from optional books), whether that be the Mage Slayer feat/s or Practiced Spellcaster or an artificer type of character. In the races & classes poll I ran, people overwhelming "loved" the idea of a sidebar for each class, detailing a common variant. I believe this will ultimately help maintain balance in people's games, by presenting just enough choice so that players are less prone to seek out splat books to jigger-together the PC they want.
Many of the Choice-and-Balance issues can be handled in similarly small ways.
- What if each race had two favored classes? (Gnome is bard or illusionist, elf is wizard or ranger, etc).
- To make an artificer, what if spellcasters could take a feat to gain XP usable toward magic item creation (25 XP / level, and unused points carry-over between levels)?
- What if the wizard specialist ability progression had two or three tiers like the rogue, with a small menu of options at each tier, and most options are unique to that specialty?
- What if...?
Considering the kind of folks that play D&D, I wouldn't be surprised if choice, balance, specialness, and similar values are held dearly by many. If I am wrong here, I hope to be corrected.
Otherwise, I hope Jason is wearing these value-lenses when doing the crunch and flavor stuff. It's a challenging juggling act!!! I believe that holding closely to a coherent set of values will truly transform Pathfinder RPG from a set of cool house rules (as some have said) to a distinctive and beloved "re-release" of D&D. That's where 4th Edition has failed many folks -- technically coherent, but the values are off. Which reminds me, which skill now handles juggling? :-)
Inspired by the description of "7 days to the grave", I'm creating a doctor: specifically, a human wizard with Heal as his bonus racial skill, the abjuration specialty, and the Arcane Disciple feat from Complete Divine (with Irori or Sarenrae as his deity). I like the power of arcane magic and don't want a combat-focused cleric. So this build seemed like a match. However, the Arcane Disciple feat doesn't interact well with the new divine domain system. I've posted the feat below. Any suggestions for how to apply the feat?
I suspect this is a typical example of the kinds of problems folks will encounter despite "backward compatibility." Some kind of cloistered cleric variant or white necromancer could solve this build as well.
ARCANE DISCIPLE [GENERAL]
Choose a deity, and then select a domain available to clerics of that deity. You can learn to cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells.
Prereq: Knowledge (religion) 4 ranks, Spellcraft 4 ranks, able to cast arcane spells, alignment matches your deity's alignment.
Benefit: Add the chosen domain's spells to your class list of arcane spells. If you have arcane spellcasting ability from more than one class, you must pick which arcane spellcasting ability this feat applies to. Once chosen, this decision cannot be changed for that feat.
You may learn these spells as normal for your class; however, you use Wisdom (rather than the normal ability for your spellcasting) when determining the save DC for the spell. In addition, you must have a Wisdom score equal to 10 + the spell's level in order to prepare or cast a spell gained from this feat.
Each day, you may prepare (or cast, if you cast spells without preparation) a maximum of one of these domain spells of each level.
Hi!
Many folks responded to the previous survey on Alpha 1.0. Thank you!
Now, would you like to see included in Pf-RPG an 8th race and/or 12th class?
Click here to take a quick, 6-question survey.
I will share results as they come in.
Note: Paizo has signaled that an 8th race / 12th class is unlikely. Nonetheless, there potentially might be some flexibility if a sufficient number of folks show preference for a race or class. Some of you have PCs or important NPCs of particular non-core races, and might like to see those come along with the Pathfinder upgrade. Plus, I'm just curious, aren't you? A smurf-type race is an option. :-)
I've created a survey to capture people's responses to the alpha release of Pathfinder RPG. Express yourself!
Click here to take the PRPG online survey
PS. Because this was made using a free account, it is limited to 20 questions and 50 people at present.
PPS. Paizo, can you make a sticky of this so folks see it?
I will report the results here. And of course you are welcome to post your responses below.
I love the new rogue with lesser talents (levels 1-9) and advanced talents (levels 10-20).
With all the debate about the new martial feats, why not have lesser martial talents (fighter levels 1,2,4,6,8) and advanced martial talents (fighter levels 10,12,14,16,18, 20)?
These talents would be usable once-per-round and taken from the new feats Jason B. made, and we can keep all the usual 3.5 feats as automatic.
Then maybe do this for wizard schools and cleric domains?
With the concern about spell schools and domains as too rigid... why not segment those abilities into lesser and advanced talents, allowing wizards and clerics to pick as they please? Because some of the highest level spells are so powerful, you might make a third menu of archmagi-like talents.
Similar to the fighter, the wizard selects from a menu of lesser wizard talents at 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th level; then selects from a menu of advanced wizard talents at 10th, 12th, and 14th levels; and finally, selects from a menu of archmagi talents at 16th, 18th, and 20th levels.
EXAMPLE:
Transmutation School - Lesser Talents
At levels 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8, select one lesser talent from the list below. You can use each selected talent as a spell-like ability 1/day. Options:
--physical enhancement
--telekinetic fist
--enlarge person
--spider climb
--haste (self only)
--alter self
Transmutation School - Advanced Talents
At levels 10, 12 and 14, select one advanced talent from the list below. You can use each selected talent as a spell-like ability 1/day. Options:
--change shape (as polymorph, but can use rounds over day)
--telekinesis
--disintegration
--ten's transformation
--plus a few more from the archmagi and loremaster prestige classes
Transmutation School - Archmagi Talent menu
At levels 16, 18 and 20, select one archmagi talent from the list below. You can use the selected talent as a spell-like ability 1/day. Options:
--ethereal jaunt
--iron body
--time stop
--fluid form
--plus a few more from the archmagi and loremaster prestige classes
It works from what Jason has done, but adds a feeling of choice.
The cleric domains would work in a similar way. :-)
I don't suggest this - in general - for the other classes (barbarian, etc) because they have their own class features, although a few overlaps (paladin and cleric talents, druid and nature-related domains) might be appropriate.
Thoughts?
News! Radiance House is entering RPG publishing with Secrets of Pact Magic by Dario Nardi.
The author wrote: Immerse yourself in the intricate rituals and legends of Goetian magic. Grab thick chalk, inscribe a geometric seal around yourself, and invoke the name of a terrible spirit to aid your quest. Follow steps once trodden by shivering demons and martyred titans, lost mortals and chastised gods. The vestiges of a hundred sundered souls lie at your fingertips, yours to command if you dare. Watch the video here!
Want samples? Visit: www.PactMagic.com
Explore 336 glossy pages in hardback for use with D&D 3.x. Or get the electronic (PDF) edition.
You will discover...
* Over 100 spirits to bind, including elemental, fiendish, and epic spirits.
* A rule for any spellcaster to try pact magic for a day.
* New races, plus base classes that allow your character to bind spirits the way you like.
* Dozens of feats, spells, prestige classes, magic items and creatures.
* Thirteen organizations that aid or hinder your cause.
* Adventure sites, from the Apocryphal Desert to the Outer Darkness and the Ravaged Sea.
* Tools to place pact magic into your campaign.
* Almost 100 unique, professional fantasy illustrations.
On sale now!
The website includes web tools for DMs to create NPCs and generate binder libraries (with maps ready to use!)
Perhaps you've heard of the grieving process? I'm wondering where everyone is in the grieving process regarding Dragon, Dungeon, 4E, 3E, etc? I've included 7 stages below (the oft-heard 5, plus 2 my Sicilian grandmother taught me).
1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
6. Revenge
7. Satisfaction
Examples:
1. "What?!?! I can't believe they canceled Dungeon and Dragon!"
2. "I despise WotC. And I despise anyone who doesn't despise them. They lied and betrayed us! 4E isn't fit for an otyugh"
3. "OK, the DDI sucks, but I may stick with Paizo even if they go 4E. Or maybe they'll do a 3.75? Pathfinder and Kobold Quarterly are filling my RP needs. And even if I disagree with half the people here, we can all be civil, right?"
4. "Gosh, it's quiet around here. To think I've gotten all worked up about a game?!? Maybe I should get a 2nd job instead?"
As for stage 6, the best revenge is success, right? Mammy Graul is dead. Long live Mammy Graul.
This week I DM'd 3.5 for a group on Wednesday and another group on Friday. The two games were pretty different, and I suspect I know why. I'm wondering how many others have the experience described below.
The two games:
Wednesday
---------
14th-level group
4 players, plus a co-DM to run the monsters
mix of role-play, travel/traps, and combat
preplanned encounters
spent many hours preparing
mediocre result
Friday
------
8th-level group
4 players
mix of role-play, travel/traps, and combat
improvised encounters
spent little time preparing
awesome result
I've had awesome experiences with the Wednesday group, so I know it wasn't just that group.
Looking back on games I've run, the ones with better results have used "improvised encounters" and the one's with worse results have used "preplanned encounters." Besides me being a boob at running modules, what's going on?
Well, I noticed something:
The Friday group approached a bartender as an early encounter in a tavern. I presented his personality clearly, but that MIGHT only be one side of him.
--I kept a mental list in reserve of additional, POTENTIAL sides. If the party were to need help, he might be a source of information or sell them a special item.
--If the players were getting bored or needed a fun role-play diversion, he was there for humor and/or romance.
--As it turned out, the party was heading too quickly into the final encounter and would likely get killed. So I turned the bartender into a low-level henchman of the BBEG. I hadn't planned this. I just slapped some hit points on him and gave him a 3rd-level vestige (which easily provided him with a thematic set of level-appropriate powers). The ensuing combat made for dramatic foreshadowing and knocked some caution into the PCs.
I improvised several times during the Friday game, offering the PCs information, red-herrings, diversions, obstacles, etc. as the need arose.
In contrast, during Wednesday's game, I did none of this. I executed encounters as preplanned. And when something didn't fit perfectly, I and the co-DM just modulated it tactically.
From now on, I'm thinking of separating NPCs from the roles they play. For example:
NPC Roster
------------------
tavern owner
bartender
tavern dancing girl
bounty hunter
dwarf miners
wilderness guide
treant
Role Options
------------------
wealthy patron
information source
secret henchman of BBEG
obvious mook
role-play diversion
the BBEG
rescuer if needed
So the dwarf miners might be there to rescue the PCs if needed, or they might be there as the BBEG's mooks. The PCs likely meet and/or hear about the dwarf miners early on, but the miners' "true" nature would not be revealed until later.
Of course not everything is improvised -- in Friday's group I DID have a basic set up (and desired outcome) for the players.
Anyway, three question for you:
1) Do you find you ever improvise this way?
2) Would you ever want modules to be published with this DMing technique in mind?
3) Might players meta-game differently if they think the DM is using a specific system to improvise?
THANK YOU!
|
