Next we have the fundamental force dragons: Gravitational Dragons, Electromagnetic Dragaons, Weak Atomic Dragons, and Strong Atomic Dragons. There is an entry for Time Dragons the people can perceive, but it doesn't really exist.
StuffStuff TheJeff is correct, there are parts of Pathfinder that I miss when I play 5E. I do play in a 5E game and a PF Game. The things I was gettinging at were as follows: 1) I think it would be a good idea for Paizo to consider doing a streamlined PF supplement or two (main book and monsters) for ease of running games for groups who don't have a lot of time in their sessions. 2) I think there are a couple things that could be looked at for implementation in PF. The style of Feats 5E has is could easily be used to compress the Feat tree. Scaling spells make a lot of sense and would save on a bit of space. Adding these things to PF would be easy. 3) The last paragraph was directed towards the OP's original comments.
One way to go would be 5E where a creature just takes 1/2 damage from particular effects. Works for ER too. One Idea I had I called damage threshold, where monsters got a pool of HP that refreshed on there turn. A creature with DR 5 might have a DT of 10 that PCs had to beat that round to do regular HP damage and on the monster's next action their DT would be back and the PCs would have to beat the DT down again,
I would be in favor of a streamlined version of Pathfinder, myself. not necessarily a new addition but not necessarily a new addition. There are several things I like from 5E that I have been enjoying. I like the Advantage/Disadvantage replacing a lot of status effects and modifiers because its fast and its super easy to work with. I like the iterative attacks better and think they're a better idea for fighting classes over 3rd's version. I like the fact that you can tank in AC and actually be a hard nut to crack. I like the scaling spells as it makes more sense having one cure spell than various cure spells at different levels. I also like their Feats better, though not the system of how you get them, because they are a big deal; and not just the equivalent of a major class feature or close to it in power level. Having a book dedicated to pairing off the flash of Pathfinder so you could focus more on running a story and not looking up status effects and rules. Most games I play in are 2 to 3 hours long. By the time you get to mid level in the PF games I play in, we can only really fit one medium or large encounter in a session. A Dungeon crawl might take months to do while in the 5E game I play in now we might do as little as a third of a dungeon in one session. This provides a real sense of accomplishment rather than frustration of slogging through a handful of rooms in a month. This is not to say I don't find 5E kind of shallow, but it does let you do a lot more in a short span of time. I do think there are room for things from 5E that could be added to regular PF, though, without major changes. Scaling Spells and big Feats for instance. Imagine for instance if the basic range combat Feat included Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and either a couple of Weapon Proficiencies or Far Shot. I like that better aesthetically and think it would condense the Feat tree. I wouldn't mind seeing the linked accuracy for attacks as well, but I agree I'd rather see +10 rather than +6. Poor BAB would be stuck with 1 attack, average with 2 and good with 3. I don't really care for 5E's skill system but I'm not a fan of what my group refers to submarine warfare, specifically directed at Stealth vs Perception, where you try to have the highest possible value for select skills but nothing anywhere else. I would keep base skill values with the same bonus for attacks but also have a skill rank system that allowed you to take a special skill ability, like Fast Stealth or Trap Finding, to represent actual training and mastery. I realize these would probably be a deal breaker for many as changes to regular PF.
What does realism have to do with DnD? I have a friend who is about 6'2", 250lbs, and has spent years studying many forms of martial arts and wrestling. I once saw him spare against a girl who was about 5'2" and 100lbs. As he's says "She was very nice and didn't break both my arms". She was on the US Olympics Judo team. If you train enough for something, you can usually do it, no matter what sex you are.
I was wondering if anyone was interested in a possible revamp of the skill system? The idea came about when going through the d20 game Legend. One thing I liked about the game was that their skill checks were laid out so that higher DCs got you more impressive effects. You could balance on tree leaves or treat your movement as flight for 1 to 3 rounds when jumping at higher DCs. While maybe a bit more fantastic than I want to aim, I think buffing the skill system would be good for classes that are deemed to be underpowered, like Monk and Rogue. Assuming that the system I have in mind is viable, it would require revamping classes, feats, some spells, etc. Here is the basic idea: Skills Ranks are equal to your Character Level + Stat + Racial Modifiers + Feats. Each skill has a series of eight tiers that you gain access to the next level once you have a total bonus of 6, 11,16,21, etc. Every one gets the first skill tier for free. Having a Class Skill automatically bumps you up one tier from where your current modifiers place you. Skill Focus would bump you up another tier. Skill Mastery would bump you yet another tier, though this might be Rogue only. What do the Tiers get you? They would allow you to just perform certain abilities at a DC equal to your Tier x 5 without rolling. You can just do those. In opposed checks you can either give your opponent a static DC, if your opposed skill is of a higher Tier or roll using your normal bonuses, which ever you prefer. This way a Rogue might be able to sneak past some guards with a higher Stealth Tier than their Perception Tier without a roll, while the GM might give the guard’s leader a roll against the Rogue’s static DC because the leader is the big opponent of this encounter. If the Leader and the Rogue have the same Tier in their opposed skill then it is a roll off. If the Leader has a higher Tier than she would have to roll versus the Leader’s static DC or, if the GM really wants to press the issue, keep it as a roll off. Note that you can always roll against the DC of a Tier that is higher than your current Tier. Now, aside from covering basic difficulty level, this would allow for a DM to increase the difficulty or a PC to do a simpler task with a greater degree of success for more risk. Now a basic DC 5 task is something anyone can do. You’re heroes, you can climb a knotted rope without rolling for it. However there might be conditions that make the task more difficult, meaning the DM has the ability to increase the DC by a number of Tiers which would increase the DC. A more hazardous climb up that rope might be while taking fire from below, increasing the character’s stress and desperation to get up and the Tier by 1 along with it. Climbing the rope up a cliff side in a storm might raise it two Tiers. At the extreme end, climbing a rope during a storm on a pitching ship might increase it by three Tiers. The PCs would also have the option of increasing the DC/Tier to try and achieve more. Some example would be:
What would Tiers get you beyond basic rolling? Here is the part that I’m having trouble figuring out all the details. Certain abilities I think should be part of skill checks. For instance Slow Fall would be good for any acrobatic character. Each Tier of Acrobatics might provide a certain level past Tier 2 or so, with the chance to roll for more. Higher Tiers of skill might allow you to heal HP for characters by 1d6 per Tier with one treatment of the Heal skill. Gaining access to abilities like Tracking or searching for magic traps are some other option. Increased affects such as being able to apply the Charmed condition to people with Diplomacy or increase the level of fear you install for Intimidate. Basically I’d like each Tier to mean more than your just an additional amount better at a skill, but you can still attempt to do higher Tiered abilities. That’s my sales pitch. Any takers?
And you are really going to buy that? You really think you can trust people to be honest as to their level of fetishism and what they fetishise? Bring out Freud, bring out House, people hide their lusts, people lie. The way they lie about themselves does not make it truth. anyone that thinks it is not a fetish and does not lead to sexual potrayals of part human, part animals, should check the material. Look at it, look at what is drawn, look at the purpose. It is that simple. Well you play D&D so that must mean that you are a fat white male between 30 - 40, who lives in his parents' basement, and doesn't know how to even deal with women. It is that simple. Hey, steroetypes are fun! You'd think that, as a community, we wouldn't paint others with broad strokes since we all enjoy a hobby that is a constant target for such things already.
So we can only play as a race that someone didn't make a porn about...dang I hate half-orcs;)Don't worry, half-orcs are banned too. Quick, someone go to the Homebrew "Sick of Humans" thread and tell them they got their wish. There shall be no humans ever, any more. From now on it's Thrikreen or bust!
Thank you for giving me a reason to actually want to play a Catfolk character. Personally I don't really care for them because there isn't really a mythology or fiction to draw from. They are humanoids with cat features and thats it. Now if you say "I'm using a race of cat-like people based off of the Kilrathi from Wing Commander" or right up a good cultural background for an original idea, I've got no problems. As an aside, this thread really suffers from X Player Type = Equals Y Character. It really reminds me of a story my friends told me of a gaming group they tried when they were out in Colorado. They are a married couple who went one time to this group, both have gamed for years, but when the wife rolled a d12 instead of a d20 by accident the group started in on the equivelent of "Girls don't know what dice to roll". They never went back. Personally I've rolled d12s thinking I had a d20 hundreds of times myself. Personally I'd say give your player a chance and if the character becomes disruptive, then you talk to the player.
First off, I would use magic in sci-fi, psionics in fantasy, and both in either. I don't like 3.5 Psionics because its big selling point was the spell point system and some psuedo science and new age terms thrown in for flavor. I did find the Wilder and improvement over Psion and Psychic Warrior but the only class I actually liked was the Soul Knife. Why should I car about a class that's big selling point is a different spellcasting system when I could just hack the system so that all the D&D classes can use spell points and still have character? Also the races didn't do anything for me either and were designed specifically for psionics, which made them more attractive to do than say a Gnome Wilder. As for Dreamscarred Press, their book seemed mostly like a update of 3.5 Psionics. I would have rather that they put more of their own ideas in. I bought it based on hype and was disappointed. I would much rather see Paizo do their own version of psionics.
I use my Everything Proof Shield and my wand of I Win to kill all Rangers and Wizards ever. :p
You could always give them Timeless Body as Monk or Druid. It would give them some mechanical benefit (immunity to aging effects at least). I'd personally swap it for Elven Magic as the ability is only a benefit for certain classes. If they gain Timeless Body again then they can become immune to dying of old age. This would be true if there was no such thing as exotic weapons... or you're a halfling. Elve get some of the best weapons as Simple Weapons and the Elven Curved Blade is nothing to sneeze at as a Martial Weapon. It's your game, you can do what you want. I just get annoyed when Elves get extras for free that aren't "mechanical". Elves only need 4 hours of meditation instead of sleep. It's not mechanical because they still need 8 hours to recover abilities. Then why do they need it? Why not make it a racial feature? Elves need only four hours of sleep, can go without it for twices as long without ill effect, and only suffer half the penalties to Perception checks when asleep. /Rant.
First, I honestly don't believe that high fantasy was developed by Tolkien and Lewis. We've had it for a while in myths and legends. While a far of land might not seem like another world, back in the day places like India were just as mindboggling to conceive, let alone popping down to the Underworld or visiting Vanahiemr. Homer telling the Odyssey might have been akin to Star Wars is to us. Also, Middle Earth wasn't completely original, as it drew heavily from myths of northern Europe and mixed liberally with Tolkiens wartime experience. I'll give the man credit, it is perhaps the most detailed fantasy world ever made, but it does draw inspiration from other sources rather than being completely invented. Though I fail to see how elves are a qualifier for determining if something is high fantasy or not. It's like saying high fantasy must be based off of medevial Europe. Personally I've always seen any form of D&D as sword and sorcery rather than high fantasy. Whatever you call it though, the system should be able to support multiple styles of game play.
I think racial progressions could work if it existed as traits and rogue talents. This way you could choose from a pool of characteristics that might work or change them around to fit your campaign. As long as you avoid any predjudices you might have (i.e. Halflings are useless comic relief) or make them class specific youshould be fine. For instance Humans and Halflings who spend most of there time up all night or in dark dungeons might develope Low-Light Vision. It would be useful to any class you play. As for stat bumps, one thing I've thought of doing was making a 1st level only Feat that negated a Stat penalty so you might find a Dwarf Sorcerer or Halfling Barbarian more of an option.
In honor of Halloween, here is my take on the Slasher:
One option could be a to just make a feat to use a two handed weapon one handed at a penalty. Bastard Swords, War Axes, and similar weapons ignore this penalty.
One of my first Rogues got stabbed in the back by the group Paladin for picking a lock in the dungeon we were in. He waited until after I succeeded. My Wizard that followed died because we were running from some monster and that same Paladin slammed and locked that very same door behind him, leaving me behind to be eaten. I also died from a Paladin for trying to fend off a monster polymorphed as a woman. The paladin comes around the corner, sees me stab "her", and then procedes to strike down his loyal friend he'd known for years. If some one is playing a Paladin I think they should read about Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files, one of the best portrayals of a Paladin I've seen.
I'm looking for a good world map maker program so I can actually layout my PF campaign setting. I like Autorealm better then Campaign Cartographer, but it tends to be unwieldy at times and doesn't do everything I want it to do. For instance, actually making a continent and then adding an area like a forest, lake, or desert is a headache. Any suggestions? |
