There's something very D&D about the Ooze monster type, but I guess I'll have to hand it to Magical Beast.
Search Posts
I'd personally handle it so that the opponent would have to make a fortitude save (DC = your grapple check) or fall unconscious for. He'd make the save for each round that he remains grappled. Seems logical and mechanically smoother.
I'd possibly allow it. What's the appeal of magical items if you limit yourself to strict guidelines? Be creative and push the boundaries. I personally wouldn't have it being sold anywhere, however. It'd be a one of a kind item with unique properties, available to the players after some harsh adventure. In terms of price I'd value it at around 15000 gp, but like I said, it wouldn't be some sort of essential accessory you could buy at any magic shoppe.
4 Bard (Sandman)/1 rogue You can get into Arcane Trickster at level 6 this way, all though your base attack bonus will be laughable.
New martial moves introduced as feats: "Oh cool, I really want this for my fighter, I'll have to spend a feat on it once I'm able! After I'm done getting some useless feats so I meet the prerequisites, of course. And that means I can't get some of the other new cool moves. Decisions decisions..." New wizard spells introduced: "Oh cool, new spells! I guess I'll have to spend some money on it, and not extremely limited resources such as feats!" New cleric/druid spell introduced: "Oh cool, new spells I can use!"
Yeah, but you should keep it to extremetiy aligned outsiders I think. All outsiders might be a tad powerful.
Some quick thoughts on a paladin revamp: Warden - Must be true neutral instead of lawful good. - Add Knowledge (Nature) and Survival to skill list. Remove Knowledge (Nobility). - Smite Evil targets the four extremes, lawful good, chaotic good, lawful evil and chaotic evil. Deals extra damage against undead and aberrations instead of the usual paladin enemies. - Replace Detect Evil with Detect Extremity. Tells you whether or not the target is one of the alignment extremes or not. - Replace all aura abilties with druid abilities like woodland stride and venom immunity - Rename Divine Grace to Nature's Grace - Replace the divine bond mount options with the ranger animal companion selection - Replace divine bond bonded weapon option with the option to shapechange as a druid - Replace paladin spell list with ranger spell list
In order, I would get: Core Rulebook
You'll get the most bang for your buck for the first three. The Advanced Player's Guide is the best supplement for more character options. The bestiaries are both ripe with options to challenge your players, although I think the second bestiary goes a little bit overboard on the extra planar stuff. Still good, though. The Ultimate Books are pretty cool but not quite as good. You shouldn't rush off to get them, since the Advanced Player's Guide will keep you busy for a long time. If you already have the Dungeon Master's Guide from 3.5 or you're already a seasoned GM, you won't need the Gamemastery Guide. It's a decent read and has some fun tables and lists, but it's probably the most disappointing book so far.
A Rogue does not use magic or supernatual powers to do his tricks and a barbarian does not either. It is up to you, I just find it far more fiddly then it need be. Well, who's to say rogue and barbarian powers have been handled correctly so far?
I like this, and have very little to add. This is what the pathfinder fighter should have been instead of getting endless bonuses to hit and damage. New moves are a lot more fun than new feats, too. Having a regenerating pool system is a very good idea, but having it regenerate 1 point every round is a bit excessive in book-keeping terms, but then again there's a lot of that in Pathfinder already (see prepared spell lists and the inquisitor). I'd have it regenerate one point every turn instead, but that's not the issue here. I haven't gone over all the maneuvers mechanically, but they look fun and some even have out of combat applications. You should consider adding something for intimidation, so they fighter isn't just a log in social situations. I'd really like to test this out some time, but I don't think my group is in the situation to do so any time soon. I'll be keeping my eye on this, though. Best of luck!
There's nothing wrong with those tradeoffs. You'll be fine.
Okay. If it's a more refined concept, a major reworking of class abilities, or a member of a group with a very different or a highly specialized way of working that's considerably different from the class norm, it's probably a prestige class. I agree with how you guys define the two concepts, but shouldn't stuff like the Assassin and Shadowdancer be better off as an archetype by these definitions? It's basically just variants of the rogue. I understand that you guys hadn't created archetypes at this point in development, but do you think you'll ever revisit some of the prestige classes that don't really meet the requirements and maybe even revamp them into archetypes?
Sailing really should be a skill instead of using endless Profession (Sailor) checks.
I don't think: That mechanically horrible feats and abilities are fine because they can contribute to roleplaying. That fighters are the best at fighting. That 4E is a bad system or "not D&D". That clerics aren't the most bland and dull class mechanically. That the full-attack isn't the biggest flaw in the system and needs to be reworked or removed in favor of more dynamic actions. That the amount of damage players can deal is fine. I think it's way too high.
Allow them to use either Charisma or Intelligence, whichever is higher, as a bonus to weapon damage instead of Strength.
Hm, yeah, the feint for the assassin is definitely an oversight. I guess I should make it apply to the first attack of the round only? Or just allow it when attacking from stealth. Or just allow it when using a single weapon.
The idea is that at level one, rogues can choose a specialization: Assassin or Swashbuckler (I'm aware that these are a PRC and an Archetype already, but bear with me). Assassin: The assassin rogue can only make sneak attacks when attacking flat-footed opponents, and not when flanking an opponent with an ally. The assassin's number of sneak attack dice are doubled when making sneak attacks against flat-footed opponents up to a maximum of 20d6 damage at level 20. Swashbuckler: The swashbuckler rogue can only make sneak attacks when flanking an opponent with an ally, and not when attacking flat-footed opponents, except if he has made a successful feint attempt against them. The swashbuckler can choose between either Intelligence and Charisma to add to his weapon damage rolls when using finesse weapons. This choice is made at level 1 and can never be changed. The amount of damage added to his weapon damage rolls can never exceed the rogue's level. So there you have it. Thoughts?
If you're going to add archetypes, I'd like to point out that the Guide is absolutely fantastic for dual wielding.
I'm so happy we're all reaching a consensus.
What about people that want to worship a certain god but still get domains that god normally doesn't offer? It's not as if the favored weapon is a big deal in all cases, anyways. (lol, unarmed strike)
Most of the stuff just seems better written. I felt as if a large portion of Ultimate Magic was filler, but I hardly get that vibe at all when browsing through Ultimate Combat. Except for the animal shaman archetypes for the druid. For the love of god, no more of those.
I call it D&D. If anyone asks me what edition, I say Pathfinder.
I just want to say that I'm very grateful that you guys are doing this. This is exactly the kind of stuff I want Paizo to do now that a bunch of stuff is released and out there; tune that stuff to perfection. I'd buy a book full of updates like this, but that might just be me. At a quick glance, this looks great and I think it's a big improvement to how stealth is currently described.
With the right builds, a monk can be a tank, a damage dealer or a supporter. There's no single role it has to fill.
My groups is generally not too harsh on things like this, we often allow swapping single feats here and there. We've never had to deal with a full overhaul, though. I'd probably allow a single overhaul per character.
Sharp Senses: Gain a +2 to perception checks! Not like Skill Focus isn't superior in every way or anything with its +3 bonus which later turns into a +6. Or Alertness with its +2 bonus that later turns into a +4. AND affects another skill.
Crafting is broken? HOLD THE FRONT PAGE!
Alchemical Gunner. Uses a firearm to shoot his "bombs" as bullets. No splash damage, but better range. Could also work as a prestige class. There's a feat in Ultimate Combat that sooort of accomplishes this, but not really. Needs to work with Fast Bombs to be viable.
I guess we can apply the old rule: If A says that X is underpowered and B says that X is zomgbbqwtfop, then X is fine. That reasoning crops up every so often (even from Paizo developers), and it always makes my blood boil. THIS IS NOT LOGIC, PEOPLE.
Why can't he just be a straight barbarian with awesome stats and ranks in stealth?
Unless otherwise noted, damage bonuses like that would only apply once per attack, similar to the Evoker Wizards ability. So it would only apply to 1 Scorching Ray, but to every target affected by Fireball. The Evoker's ability explicitly says it only applies once per attack, so the case is actually the opposite of what you just said. Unless otherwise noted, you can add the bonus damage to each attack. Go ahead and add the damage to each scorching ray.
Also, the rogue should get its dexterity bonus to damage when wielding light or finesse weapons, and half its dexterity bonus when dual wielding such weapons.
My main problem with the rogue is how dependent it is on full attacks to deal any kind of damage. As a class that needs to stay mobile, this is the rogue's biggest problem. Two talents that would allow the rogue to be awesome: - A talent to make attacks with two weapons at once using the attack action/charge. This would allow them to deal a lot of damage in surprise rounds and vital striking. This would also allow them to be a lot more mobile. - A talent to feint as a swift action. The rogue is more dependent on its teammates than any other class, and this would alleviate that problem big time. Until then, if you want to be a trap finder and damage dealer, go for a ranger with the urban ranger and guide archetypes. It's wonderful.
Abysmal archetypes: The Celebrity Bard
These aren't the only ones I think are bad, but these are the ones I find absolutely horrible. But go ahead, tell me how they're all NPC archetypes. Also, contrary to popular belief, the Geisha isn't that bad.
This thread is going to reach a conclusion which everyone agrees on.
Okay, the rogue can get a ki pool now, that's pretty neat. The big question is, can it get vanishing trick? If so, the rogue just got fixed, even if the ninja does outclass it. If not, you're all invited to the rogue's eulogy. What's everyone getting so worked up about, then? What's the ninja getting that the rogue can't get for two talents? And if those two talents bother you so much, just remember that the ninja can't disable magical traps with any number of feats or talents, and that's one of the main selling points the rogue or any skill monkey can have.
Okay, the rogue can get a ki pool now, that's pretty neat. The big question is, can it get vanishing trick? If so, the rogue just got fixed, even if the ninja does outclass it. If not, you're all invited to the rogue's eulogy.
Invulnerable Rager.
Because the cavalier has a lot of appealing abilities to it that have nothing to do with the mount. Tactician, challenge, orders and order abilities, various skills and more skills than a figther, as well as having the fluff of a medieval knight. If you take away the mount, there's still plenty left to go with. The cavalier is much more of a knight than a horseman, no matter what its official name says. Don't judge a book by its title. I mean, just look at the magus.
Very exciting preview, with a lot of cool sounding archetypes. Too bad I didn't like the one previewed, it seems immensely meh. So, which one of the cavalier archetypes will allow for a mount-less variant?
The discussion in this thread will reach a conclusion in which everybody is satisfied.
Good grief.
Halflings can get the Warslinger racial trait which allows them to reload their slings as a free action. It makes them better at using slings than any other race at higher levels. It also makes the sling a better option than a composite shortbow, in my opinion, since you don't have to buy a new one when your strength increases. It's not great, but it's not terrible, either.
Before 3e, spells could take all round - if not multiple rounds to cast, and being hit at all inturrupted them and made you lose the spell. I'd like to see something like this again, actually. At least 1 round casting times. Powerful crowd control spells like Black Tentacles shouldn't be a standard action to cast.
I don't think the idea behind unlimited cantrips/orisons is bad per se, but there are individual spells that are open to abuse. I do think a few of them can be too powerful when used over and over again, such as create water, mending and acid splash. I do like the idea that wizard school/sorcerer bloodline powers should be unlimited though. They might even work as beefed up cantrips, limited to said school or bloodline.
I would like to apologize for not having read the description of the Geisha well enough. I thought the Tea Ceremony replaced the normal performance of the bard, most notably inspire courage. Now that I see that it doesn't, I think the Geisha is a pretty nice archetype, if situational.
How can you do any of these aspects better as a Geisha than as a regular Bard? Nobody's arguing that the concept is solid. It's the mechanical representation of said concept that's not.
1 or 2. There are a lot of things I'd like to see changed, such as the fighter getting something a bit more exciting than more bonuses to his damage while casters are creating demiplanes, but I still like the Pathfinder system a lot, so I wouldn't want it completely changed. Although it ain't broken, it could use a bit of fine tuning and polishing!
Don't want, don't use. I don't like this way of thinking. With this logic Paizo could just chuck out a bunch of mechanically wonky classes that nobody would use, but they'd still be there on the astronomical off chance that somebody would want to. There are a lot of classes and archetypes that fall into gray areas, but I can't see a scenario where spending 10 minutes preparing a 10 minute buff would ever be viable when adventuring, or at the very best extremely situational. I'd personally be fine with it if it was 10 minutes preparation for a 1 hour buff. Kind of sucks because I like the rest of the Geisha's abilities.
Trip up a goblin when an allied fighter is already on top of him and he's meat. That's not how it was traditionally used :(
|