D&D and Pathfinder 1/2 combat rules are abstractions of combat. AC, hp, and the combat round with alternating initiative are all unrealistic.
I do not play the game because it is realistic but because it is fun, and in my experience, while AoO is an interesting mechanic it slows down the game unnecesarily. Most experienced players know how to avoid AoO with 5’ steps and cover. I for one do not have the patience or inclination to watch players that are not as experienced as I am sit at the table, loudly counting squares, doing and redoing their movement - that is simply not something that I find funny and it is an aspect of combat best left out of the abstract equation.
In addition I want to move away from the grid, that makes the game rather game-boardy, and AoO simply becomes to difficult to adjudicate in a gridless game, if you are not forcing everyone to move a single inch at a time.
My conclussion: AoO are a fun rule, that detracts from the fun of the game.
I support the idea of doing away with AoO for a couple of reasons.
Firstly it complicates the game.
Second, I am a long term martial artist and I think the AoO rules are supposed to be realistic. Realism in Pathfinder or D&D, really? I would say if somebody wanders past then something like an AoO would take place, but you are just as likely to AoO allies as foes and people who are moved or tripped into going past are also going to suffer AoO.
Exactly!
After removing AoO play has sped up a lot. No need to sit and spend time figuring out how to get from A to B without getting hit. As an experienced player I will rarely not be able to find a path, but I don’t think it adds a lot of quality to the game.
And even allowing reload, ranged attacks and spells to not provokere AoO does not fundamentally change game balance. Believe it or not… but once, there were no AoO
I might be interested in your project, but I am very much not interested in sitting through videos. If you want me to check out your game, provide feedback, maybe eventually buy it etc, give me something I can read.
I doubt I am alone in that respect.
I am currently done with ability scores, races, classes (mostly), skills, feats, Fate!, armor and weapons, as well as combat end the magic system.
When I am done with spells (hard at work), I will have something I am ready to share. I expect in a couple of weeks.
As mentioned earlier, if you are interested, I can send something in writing, if you write me directly. I will need an email to send you a pdf. :)
I have not heard anything concrete about Core Finder, but suspect that it may have some areas, where it can fuse well with Avern Fantasy, but others, where you will have to make a choice of paradigme. For instance, Avern simplifies action economy with three categories double-actions, single-actions and free-actions, does away with both attacks of opportunity and gridded combat, and introduces a magic system, where spell power is determined by caster power checks.
This far I have only been able to make playtests with one group, but the system holds up pretty well and is bringing a lot of fun challenges to the table :)
Interesting, with first edition no longer being supported the idea of homebrew versions of pathfinder being created could be quite interesting? I just hope that i wont lose too many options in this unofficial remaster because I really hope it will succeed but there is a limit to how much options I'm willing to lose, after all the whole point of first edition is the massive number of options.
What I am making is mostly thought to be selfcontained. With that said, the Avern Fantasy RPG has is built around the framework of D&D3.5/Pathfinder. While Avern seeks to do away with the huge backlog of archetypes, feats are thought to make up the core of the customizability in the system. Still, you will be able to mix and match very easily. incorporating Pathfinder 1e monsters, adventures, feats, spells, treasure etc. will require none to minimum work.
The greatest changes are probably with regard to ability scores, the combat system (and turn economy), and the magic system.
I checked out the videos and I really dig what you're working on, but like glass above I'd like to be able to read over what you have, as well. And thanks for taking on a project like this!
As i said to glass, write me directly, and I will be able to send you a pdf. in a couple of weeks. :)
I might be interested in your project, but I am very much not interested in sitting through videos. If you want me to check out your game, provide feedback, maybe eventually buy it etc, give me something I can read.
I doubt I am alone in that respect.
I am currently done with ability scores, races, classes (mostly), skills, feats, Fate!, armor and weapons, as well as combat end the magic system.
When I am done with spells (hard at work), I will have something I am ready to share. I expect in a couple of weeks.
As mentioned earlier, if you are interested, I can send something in writing, if you write me directly. I will need an email to send you a pdf. :)
In 2019 I was kind of lost at Paizo making the PF2 game and leaving the legacy behind. I stuck with the original Pathfinder until I came to a realization around a year ago; that if I wanted support and something new and fresh in my Pathfinder game, that I would have to be the one doing it.
I AM MAKING A PATHFINDER 1e REMASTERED!
I call the new game Avern Fantasy RPG and am taking what I find to be the best parts of Pathfinder and trim it down to make it a more smooth game. In addition, I am throwing in some new rules that I find enhance the game and add elements of early D&D/AD&D editions that give the game what to me is a better classic flavor.
Combat is more deadly and realistic, and the classes are moving away from boardgamy combat towards a more flexible game. The grid has been eliminated making for a more organic tactical combat experience.
I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT OF YOU GUYS FROM THE PF1 COMMUNITY.
I have made a series of YouTube videos about the design philosophy, ability scores, races and base classes, and this week (Thursday) I am coming out with the last video about the specialist classes (druid, monk, paladin and ranger). Next week I am planning to make videos with solo play and procedural explanations of the combat system.
I HOPE YOU WILL CHECK OUT MY VIDEOS & GIVE ME FEEDBACK ON AVERN FANTASY RPG.
If any of you want to participate in an actual organized playtest, please write me a direct message here, and I will get back to you.
In 2019 I was kind of lost at Paizo making the PF2 game and leaving the legacy behind. I stuck with the original Pathfinder until I came to a realization around a year ago; that if I wanted support and something new and fresh in my Pathfinder game, that I would have to be the one doing it.
I AM MAKING A PATHFINDER 1e REMASTERED!
I call the new game Avern Fantasy RPG and am taking what I find to be the best parts of Pathfinder and trim it down to make it a more smooth game. In addition, I am throwing in some new rules that I find enhance the game and add elements of early D&D/AD&D editions that give the game what to me is a better classic flavor.
Combat is more deadly and realistic, and the classes are moving away from boardgamy combat towards a more flexible game. The grid has been eliminated making for a more organic tactical combat experience.
I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT OF YOU GUYS FROM THE PF1 COMMUNITY.
I have made a series of YouTube videos about the design philosophy, ability scores, races and base classes, and this week (Thursday) I am coming out with the last video about the specialist classes (druid, monk, paladin and ranger). Next week I am planning to make videos with solo play and procedural explanations of the combat system.
I HOPE YOU WILL CHECK OUT MY VIDEOS & GIVE ME FEEDBACK ON AVERN FANTASY RPG.
If any of you want to participate in an actual organized playtest, please write me a direct message here, and I will get back to you.
If you are playing a bard with perform comedy you should check this YouTube channel out. It is full of RPG fantasy dad joke that will make any GM cringe!
1: This has not been relevant in our game yet. From a strict RAW perspective this question cannot be answered, since there is no clear definition of the word "ally/allies".
I would tend to rule for "no", since an ally (or enemy) must have some sort of will of its own, which a corpse does not have.
2: Poison (aswell as curses and diseases) are not conditions. blahpers rightly points out that they might cause a target to be affected by conditions, but in themselves they are not conditions.
I would not classify "poisoned" as a condition by neither RAI nor RAW. Just as a grappler and a rogues sneak attack are not conditions, even though they both may impose the "grappled" or "bleeding" conditions.
Thank you Mike for the kind words, and for coming to Denmark. It has been a pleaure having you here and I know for a fact that your pressence has meant a lot to Danish players.
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that I will step down as Venture-Captain for Denmark by the end of July (after PaizoConUK).
I have had a lot of memorable moments with the PFS and wish to thank Paizo, my fellow Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants, as well as all the people I have encountered and played with the last few years. It has been a lot of fun!
I especially wish to thank Mike, Mark, Hyrum and Joshua for creating and growing this awesome campaign.
For the time being Denmark will still have an active Venture-Officer, namely Jacob Trier, who can be contacted on pathfinder.jylland@live.dk
Viking Lodge Game Days will be held in Copenhagen. We have a venue planned in Nørrebro (north district of Copenhagen), which is not official yet.
In 2010 it was at the community center Støberiet and 2011 at the music venue Stengade. Both in inner Nørrebro.
This year we also want it to be in the heart of the city 1) to make transportation easy for all 2) to ensure a great ambiance 3) to give opportunity to all participants to have a good time after gaming, without too much fuzz.
While Nørrebro might have a perceived bad criminal reputation this is very exaggerated and newcomers will experience a lively and friendly neighborhood.
I'm curious about what language you use at the table. I have no idea if the Pathfinder books have been translated into Danish, but I have a strong suspicion that the PFS scenarios are not. When you run games in Denmark, are the players all English speaking, or do you translate things on the fly?
If you do game in English, does the language barrier hinder your attempts to find players at all? If not, what challenges do you face trying to translate things yourself?
Language has never been an issue. Most Danes speak English rather well. No Pathfinder products have to date been translated to Danish and I suspect if such an effort was made, it would only make sense with regard to the Beginner Box.
We generally run games in Danish. Often we choose to read flavor texts aloud in English but more often than not we translate them on the fly or just paraphrase them. Of course GMs should always make notes about key information.
Twice I have had requests for games to be run in English to accommodate a non-Danish speaker. The Danish players where OK with this and the games ran smoothly.
English speakers in Denmark are hereby encouraged to reach out to Danish gamers. We can and will play with you regardless of language :)
With RAW I have put together a gunslinger who can fire a colossal gun for 272 hp dmg/shot. "One shot one kill!".
The UC rules for inappropriately sized firearms allows the use of firearms of any size at a cumulative -2 penalty, but with no change to effort.
I am convinced that this cannot be intentional on part of the designers, but I would like to know what the intention of this rules exception is, and possible have an FAQ.
Right now this looks to me like a loop hole the size of The London Eye! Everyone reading this please press for FAQ.
My Math:
The Core Rulebook has the following to say about weapon size:
PRPG p. 144 wrote:
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can’t make
optimum
use of a weapon that isn’t properly sized for it. A
cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size
category of difference between the size of its intended wielder
and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn’t proficient
with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty
also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon
(whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed,
or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered
by one step for each size category of difference between
the wielder’s size and the size of the creature for which the
weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would
wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed
weapon. If a weapon’s designation would be changed to
something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by
this alteration, the creature can’t wield the weapon at all.
Whereas Ultimate Combat says this:
UC p. 136 wrote:
Inappropriately Sized Firearms: You cannot make
optimum use of a firearm that is not properly sized for
you. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for
each size category of difference between your size and
the size of the firearm. If you are not proficient with the
firearm, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies. The
size of a firearm never affects how many hands you need
to use to shoot it, the exception being siege firearms and
Large or larger creatures. In most cases, a Large or larger
creature can use a siege firearm as a two-handed firearm,
but the creature takes a –4 penalty for using it this way
because of its awkwardness.
This means a medium character could fire and load larger than medium firearms with no increase in effort.
In the extreme consequence that could be a colossal musket or worse a double hackbut at a -8 penealty. While -8 would normaly be a huge penalty for a firearm it is not so mutch, since it is often a ranged touch attack.
A semi-optimized 12th level dwarven gunslinger has Dexterity 22 (+6), BAB +12/+7/+2, Weapon Focus +1, Point-blank Shot +1, enhancement bonus +3, -8 inappropriate size, which sums up to +15/+10/+5 (with a double-barreled musket that is +11/+11/+6/+1). Considering that these are touch attacks they are not at all bad. On the damage side this character would be dealing 12d6+12 (avg. 54 hp/ shot).
With improved vital strike that is 36d6+12 (avg. 138 hp).
If we factor Deadly Aim, and a double-barreled musket into this we are looking at a +7 ranged touch attack for 72d6+20 (avg. 272 hp).
A semi-optimized 12th level human musket master gunslinger has Dexterity 24 (+7), BAB +12/+7/+2, Weapon Focus +1, Point-blank Shot +1, enhancement bonus +3, Rapid Shot -2, Deadly Aim -4, double barreled musket -4 which sums up to +13/+13/+13/+8/+3; for 1d12+20 (avg. 27 hp) which for 5 hits adds up to 135 hp / round.
I am sure someone can find minor errors in these calculations, as I am sure others would be able to squeeze even more damage out of this loop hole, but that is besides the point.
Yes. You can write your character up on a paper napkin if you must. There are no real requiremnets on format. But the guide to PFSOP has a charactersheet on the last page for your convenience.
However, I am confident your GM will appreciate a clean and easily readable charactersheet.
PaizoCon UK 2012 will run from 21-22 July with a pre-event Balti Night on Friday 20 July. So get those dates in your diary. Once again we will limit numbers for the comfort and sanity of players and GMs and we expect to sell out. Watch out for further announcements in the New Year.
GMs have a lot of influence on how every one experiences the game. An incompetent GM or one with poor social skills can ruin the game for everybody. I remember to have had this happen to me (as a player) once. It was not something I would care to experince again, that is for sure.
What I have tried far more than once, both as GM and player, is to have the game ruined by players. "Jerk players" by far outnumber "jerk GMs" and they have every bit as much ability to ruin the game as any GM. Even if the jerk player is kicked out of the game, the rest of the table can be left with a lingering discomfort by the antics/anti-social behaviour of a bad player.
So while bad GMing is a genuine concern it would be of far greater use to discuss what every player around the table can do to improve the gaming experience for ALL. Call it table rules or common courtesy, by supporting your fellow players and GM rather than antagonizing them we all can make RPGs an awesome experience.
related
From this I would extrapolate, that no sort of customizing is legal within PFS.
My understanding is that you cannot by or upgrade to anything not explicitly legalized in the core rules, additional ressources document, or a chronicle sheet.
Special items such as armor and weapons can therefore not be modified.
So many questions:
Sleeping characters do add +10 to the DC and every 10' of distance increase the DC by +1 (regardless of line of sight).
I would start roling Perception checks as soon as the DC is within reach of the character.
Speaking fighting etc. will trigger checks at much lower DCs (see table).
As for rousing I use the rules from Arcana Unearthed. According to them, a person that has just awakened from a successfull perception check must make a Concentration skill check (for PRPG i use Will save) DC 15. If the roll is successful the character can act normally next round. If it fails it is considered stunned next round.
But there are no set rules for this, so you can handle it however you want. If you think AU's approach is too harsh, the RAW assumes Perception checks are reactive, standing up from prone is a move action(that provokes AoO) and picking up a single item is also a move action (which also provokes an AoO), so there are plenty of RAW circumstances that will delay the characters ability to act effectively.
DSo many questions:
Sleeping characters do add +10 to the DC and every 10' of distance increase the DC by +1 (regardless of line of sight).
I would start roling Perception checks as soon as the DC is within reach of the character.
Speaking fighting etc. will trigger checks at much lower DCs (see table).
As for rousing I use the rules from Arcana Unearthed. According to them, a person that has just awakened from a successfull perception check must make a Concentration skill check (for PRPG i use Will save) DC 15. If the roll is successful the character can act normally next round. If it fails it is considered stunned next round.
But there are no set rules for this, so you can handle it however you want. If you think AU's approach is too harsh, the RAW assumes Perception checks are reactive, standing up from prone is a move action(that provokes AoO) and picking up a single item is also a move action (which also provokes an AoO), so there are plenty of RAW circumstances that will delay the characters ability to act effectively.
EDIT:
Scent does not automatically allow a sleeping creature to detect someone approaching within 30'.
Bestiary p. 304 wrote:
The creature can detect opponents within 30 feet by
sense of smell.
So can most creatures with sight, but that cannot be taken for granted while asleep. I would require a normal Perception check, unless the character/creature trying to sneak by has a particularly noisome stench.
As for the sleep hex, I assume it works like the sleep spell.
PRPG p.344 wrote:
Sleeping creatures are helpless. Slapping
or wounding awakens an affected creature, but normal noise does
not.
It normaly takes outside interference to wake a magically sleeping creature. Perception alone willnot allow the character to wake up.
.... Maybe have the baddies being led by Akiros who surrenders as soon as enough men fall and provides some insider info on the Stag Lord.
If you go by this suggestion I think it will work out better if Akiros turns on the bandits early in the fight and makes an obvious move to ally with the PCs.
... does a Full Attack Action encompass multiple attack actions OR is it something completely different.
The answer is, no.
This is why:
PRPG p. 180 wrote:
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of
actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out
of a threatened square and performing certain actions
within a threatened square.
Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually
provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening
opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding
such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed
in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as
you divert your attention from the battle. Table 8–2 notes
many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
Remember that even actions that normally provoke
attacks of opportunity may have exceptions to this rule.
Basically what this is telling us is that AoOs are provoked by individual actions actions.
PRPG p. 180 wrote:
Combat Ref lexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity:
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your
Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity
you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make
more than one attack for a given opportunity,
but if the
same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity
from
you, you could make two separate
attacks of opportunity
(since each one represents a different
opportunity).
Moving out of more than one square threatened by the
same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more
than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks
are at your full normal attack bonus.
What this tells us is that a single action can only provoke one AoO. I.e. moving through three threatened squares with a single action only provokes one AoO; Likewise only one ranged attack in a full-attack action provokes an AoO.
The system plays out like this:
- Making 3 ranged attacks with a bow in a threatened square with a full-attack action; provokes 1 AoO.
- Running through an ogre's 6 threatened squares with a single move action; provokes 1 AoO.
- Running through an ogre's 6 threatened squares with a two move action; provokes 2 AoO.
- Moving out of a threated square and into another threatened square with a move action, then casting an acid arrow spell without defensive casting, and then fireing the acid arrow at an opponent; provokes 3 AoO.
Off the top of my head I cannot figure out a way to provoke more than 3 AoOs from a single opponent. (Bear in mind that Combat Reflexes is ussually necesary in order to make more than one AoO)
EDIT: Until now I was also of the mind that an archer making a full-attack would provoke an AoO for each shot made, but after reading it through again and considering the text I think that this is one more subtle change in Pathfinder.
I ended up doing the Kaer Maga connection as an extended side trek. Here is what happened.
spoiler:
After AP3 The Hook Mountain Massacre was over the party had a lot of down time. They spent the winter crafting and had getting Ft. Rannick and Turtleback Ferry back on their feet. The party's cleric actually has the Leadership feat and was appointed master of the fort. He therefore set out to consolidate his positionby making trade agreements with Ilsurian and visited both Magnimar and Korvosa to make sure he would not get in the way of either city.
At this point the party has Wen Histani visit them at Ft. Rannick. The party knows her from AP2 where she was their advocate in their trial for the murder of the Foxgloves. So they kind of owed her one. She told the party the situation as per SSoS and they were off to Kaer Maga.
In Kaer Maga I spent some time describing the city for the players and tried to create an ambient like the one in the Pathfinder Journal in AP3. After 3 days of scouring Kaer Maga in search of Tirana they find the dwarven merchant who tells them where Tirana is holed up.
When they reach the Halls of the Council of Truth they are ambushed by the Splitstreet gangs leader and a couple of his thugs. When they defeat the leader the party unleashes the Granule construct swarm which ends up infesting the party's rogue. The rogue passes out in spasm but after a minute wakes up and seems fairly OK all things considered. It is obvious to all that the swarm is inside of her, but aside from that all seems ok.
I describe the general ide behind the Halls and the many devices and traps there, without going into further detail.
When the party reaches the laboratory of Dr. Parault and his holding cells I make a big deal about describing the scene as a very morbid one. On the operation table the party discovers an inanimate flesh golem. They also find the Dr's journal which describes his work and a leter from the Wanton of Nature's Pagan Forms (Xanesha), thanking him for the Scarecrow and telling that if he can produce more of these "children" her master would be very pleased.
The party goes on to the lava chamber and are faced by Dr. Parault (who has been seduced by Tirana), the Swordpriest (which has been freed by Tirana) and Gruenar (whom Tirana has forgiven and charmed). Gruenar is now armed with a giant sized dorn-dergar (from Dwarves of Golarion).
The party has a masive fight here which ends with Gruenar dead, the Swordpriest defeated (but escapes in gaseous form) and Parault dimension dooring to safety when all seems lost. However, the party has lost one of its two arcane spell casters at this point.
In a last ditch effert to stop Tirana before it is too late the party goes on to find her at her rune circle attempting to awaken the Seven Swords of Sin. In stead of a force barrier the party's way is blocked by none other than Viorian who has come in search of the blade Chellan.
At this point Viorian is only a 16th lvl fighter, armed with a +3 scimitar, has no champion abilities and her inherent bonuses are only +2. None the less Viorian has been endowed with some 24hour protective spells for this jaunt outside Xin-Shalast. Mind-blank and a major ring osf spell storing with a silent word of recall and invisibility purge.
Viorian's role in this encounter is to foreshadow events to come and to keep the party occupied until Chellan is awakened (5 rounds). Should the party deal 110hp dmg to Viorian she would activate the silent word of recall and leave for Xin-Shalast without Chellan... an important victory if the party could puul it off.
As it went down Tirana awakened Chellan in round 5 and Viorian immediately departs with it leaving Tirana to fend for herself. Tirana (in this version a 13th lvl wizard) is defeated by the party.
At this point the party travels back to Magnimar with the six remaining Swords of Sin.
My group and I have almost finished HMM and I just realized thei will make exactly 9th level by the end. That leaves them an entire level behind the start level of FST.
To make up for this I am weavin the module The Seven Swords of Sin in between PF3 and PF4.
I think the Thassilonian theme and the exploration of Kaer Maga make a good addition to RotRL.
At this point I have the material in the module itself and the Pathfinder Journal entry from PF3 to flesh out Kaer Maga. I am interested in fleshing the city out and making the dungeon fit in seemlesly with the PF AP.
I would love suggestions on how to incorporate the module into the AP. Suggestions to additional encounters and reference to further Kaer Maga material.
I will look forward to your replies and to discussiong your suggestions.
Isn't Jaagrath Kreeg described as taking pleasure in biting faces off in a grapple? I read that barbarian raging bite attack description and immediately thought they put that in the rulebook just for him.
Otherwise, thanks for saving me some work!!
That is a very good point.
Roused anger should probably be changed for animalistic fury in stead.
I don't intend to offend, but this is the lamest discussion (or close to) that I have seen this far.
I found it to be an entertaining read. Of course everyone knows that a wizard can have more than spellbook. They could have since the 70s. Only DM_Blakes' apparently mentally handicapped DM thinks otherwise. And strange as it be, there is nothing in the corebook suggesting you could have more than 1. On the other hand, there's nothing indicating you can't either except circumstantial evidence which you could also interpret for the other side.
Page 218 tips the favor in multiple spellbooks ;-)
However, every player knew that already... except for that DM.
I guess I am lacking of patience. :)
I often get frustrated when, to me, absurd rules interpretation are given credence.
Blake, just to talk to you about the using prepared spells from another person's spell book to scribe a replacement.
I think the obvious inference is;
Was the spell in the spell book you lost? If yes, then you can prepare it and cast it. When it checks to see if you can prepare a spell in your spell book, it isn't checking to see if it is lost or not, merely that you copied it into your book. If you did, you can prepared the spell from the borrowed spell book.
When seen in that light, its not contradictory at all.
As for the talk of no phrase the expressly prohibits you from having multiple spell books....
BOOYAH!
Pathfinder Core Rulebook Page 218 wrote:
Preparation environment: ...Wizards must also have access to their spell books to study from and sufficient light to read them. There is on major exception: a wizard can prepare read magic even without a spellbook.
What do I win?
Thanks!
You are The Man.
I don't intend to offend, but this is the lamest discussion (or close to) that I have seen this far.
I take it that game designers think people are just into the game and have been so always.
In 2e there where both 100 p. spellbooks and 50 p. traveling spellbooks for this same purpose.
Also for those familiar with Dragonlance, Raistlin had an assortment of spellbooks.
It is always good to know your rules, but please keep to common sense, and try reading the whole book before you try to rip its logic appart.
