![]()
Search Posts
![]()
Really I realize that the fly skill is supposed to simply maneuverability categories, but I just don't see the point. Having to make random checks just to move is a bad idea, because it really slows the game down. And there are also a lot of complex rules to memorize. Most players just don't want to deal with that. I advise just getting rid of the fly skill and going back to maneuverability categories but simplify them quite a bit. Forget about the turning radius, because quite simply, it's just too complicated to figure out in play and it makes even less sense in a game that doesn't even have facing rules. Further just about every group I've ever played with has ignored the maneuverability class rules in the DMG, and I suspect that they'll ignore the fly skill checks as well. It's just too much work trying to figure out how fast you turn in midair and how many movement points you're spending to turn in place or what not. I don't think most groups even want to deal with that. It's clunky and it's cumbersome. Here's what I would do. Three maneuverability categories: poor, average and good. Poor: Your standard action becomes a move action while flying and thus you can only use it for move action related tasks. You cannot make attacks of opportunity while flying. While flying, your space (But not your size), doubles. So a 15x15 creature takes up a 30x30 space while flying. If it must squeeze to enter an area, then it crashes. Average: You cannot make attacks of opportunity while flying. While flying, your space (But not your size) doubles. So a 15x15 creature takes up a 30x30 space while flying. If it must squeeze to enter an area, then it crashes. Good: Your space while flying is equal to your normal space. If you enter an area where you must squeeze, then you crash. And that's it. As far as crashing goes, you'd have basic damage assigned for hitting an object, and possibly have some feats that allow you to avert crashes (or maybe even keep the fly skill specifically for that purpose). So you might get scenes where a creature is flying in tight quarters and must make a check each round to avoid a crash if you want those sort of close quarters cinematic tense crash scenes. I feel like my presented system is something that most groups are going to use, instead of the ignored maneuverability class rules, and I suspect the new PF flight rules, which are just too complex for most groups to care about. ![]()
Diplomacy still seems outrageously powerful. I mean, you can go into a magic shop and ask the shopkeeper to "let you borrow" his most powerful magic item, and you can reasonably expect to succeed most of the time if you build a diplomacy based character. With the massive bonuses capable by 3.5 skill manipulation, skills like diplomacy really need to be cut back in terms of what they can do. Because you very well can have characters rolling huge diplomacy checks. ![]()
With the addition of CMB, there's an easy way to help out maneuver based fighters and prevent them from turning into one trick ponies (that is, prevent the lame "I trip every round" fighter build). There should be one feat to give a +4 to CMB, period. However everytime you use the same maneuver in the same combat you suffer some penalty, either a -2 or a -4, depending on playtesting. This allows fighters to really mix it up, it's simple, and it prevents boring archetypes like the guy who does nothing but trip people. The concept of CMB was a great addition because it centralizes maneuvers. We should take another step forward and truly combine them into one coherent category by combining the Improved Maneuver feats into one feat. ![]()
As far as I can tell, nothing has been done about increasing the hardness of dungeon walls, meaning that as far as I can tell you can still take your sword and hack a path through the dungeon. Isn't it about time that PF made the simple fix of giving walls and metallic doors a bigger hardness so you can't simply chop through them in a few rounds with a big power attack? ![]()
Overall, the spell changes seem pretty good. Since other people are already talking about the spells that got nerfed (and if those nerfs went too far), I figured I'd bring up spells that I think may still be too powerful. Here's a list of spells that I found that are still problematic and may warrant some changes still:
I'm sure I missed some in this list, so feel free to add some others if you think of them. ![]()
I have to wonder, why was there no changes for spells included in the alpha release? The single most gamebreaking elements of 3.5 were the spells and the druid. Two things that you've ignored in the alpha version. As far as making 3.5 better, I really doubt you can do that without fixing the spells. The polymorph mechanics (starting with alter self) especially need a complete overhaul, as does planar binding, charm person and command undead. Hell, pretty much the entire 9th level list of spells with gate, astral projection and shapechange need to be looked at. You've also got a ton of fighter screw spells that should probably get toned down, like maze and forcecage. We've known about these problematic spells for a long time. They really should be fixed. Linnt Flox has not participated in any online campaigns. |