Walt Ciechanowski's page

I am a huge fan of Fallout-style post-apoc, but I was lovingly raised on Thundarr. I'm eager to see where this goes.

If you're interested in an affordable illustrator or cartographer, please contact me. I'd love to help this project along.

Edit: You can see a few samples of my work here and here

Thanks for your interest!

I encourage you to visit Adamant Entertainment's submission page.

If this book does well, will there be a supported line? Or is this a single book? While I know this is fantastic apocalypse, if the line does well, might we a Mad Max expansion? ;)

Currently it's planned as a single book, with more support forthcoming if sales warrant. I'd certainly love to do more WotA products!

Sounds cool. I always love a good post-apocalyptic story. Have you looked at the alpha release of psionics rules over at Dreamscarred Press? Any effort to make yours compatitible?

We're actually adapting the OGC from Green Ronin's psychic rules.

Also have you thought about presenting a portion of the book to address post apoc fantasy? By that I mean how to present a fantasy world that has suffered some cataclysmic event, such as was done with the game Desolation, thereby including the traditional fantasy races.

We'll have an appendix for mix-and-matching fantasy with WotA. There will be a section on blowing up fantasy worlds.

Walt Ciechanowski wrote:

Six is the magic number, although the APG is making me rethink one or three.

why is that?

dm4hire hit the nail on the head.

Walt - Will there be a pure strain human race?

That's "human" by default. Is there something in particular that you're looking for in non-mutated humans?

A few questions if you don't mind ...

Not at all!

1) Any idea on how many new classes we might see? Any spoilers as to which ones?

Six is the magic number, although the APG is making me rethink one or three. There will definitely be a psychic class.

2) Will there be a Bestiary? Is it in the main book or a separate book?

There will be a bestiary included in the main book.

I'm a big fan of Gamma World from way back and very much like Gamma World's "take" on mutations. GW has historically had many random tables of mutations to roll against, even allowing for some defects to occur. I was just curious how this book will handle mutations since they seem to be a big part of the book.

I seem to be having an awful time with Paizo's site today.

There will be both good and bad mutations. The default method of gaining mutations is to randomly roll for them.

Walt will mutations be handled like in earlier editions of Gamma World?

In what way do you mean?

Thanks for chiming in!

You're welcome!

So will this allow me to run a Thundarr type campaign using the Pathfinder system?

The basic concept of WotA is "Pathfinder as science fantasy," so the goal is to have compatibility across the board and allow you to mix-and-match as you wish.

So to take Thundarr as an example (as well as an obvious influence), if you don't think the psychic class covers Ariel well enough, then you should be able to port in PF sorcerors, witches, or wizards without difficulty.

Regarding races I'd definately want to see a big hairy muscle type race, if not exactly a "Mok" (which I know you can't do for copyright reasons) at least a good stand in.

Any other tidbits you can provide are appreciated.
Thanks

Your vote is noted :-)

Hey all,

I'm the Lead Designer for WotA, so I'll try to answer questions as best I can. Understand that we're still pulling this together, so any answers I give are subject to change as we tighten things up.

Ookla rocks! Will we possibly see a "Mok" equivalent race??

We're still discussing what we want to include as "standard" races. We'll probably end up with 3-5 races, not including human (which is detailed in PF). All races can also be used with mutations.

Have you looked at the Zen Archer Monk variant in the Advanced Players Guide? When i saw it i immediately thought "if this used revolvers instead of a bow, it would be a gunslinger".

We're presently going through the APG for usable content. I'll have to look at Zen Archer more closely. Thanks for the tip!

Walt

Salintar wrote:

I'm pretty sure that when they where actually answering questions, they stated that the warlock was limited to the number of times he could use the school powers just like a wizard, but for the life of me I can't find that thread now.

The arcane blast though doesn't state a number of uses, so I'm thinking that it's unlimited like the official warlock.

Cool. That makes the arcane bolt/burst a really powerful ability. Now if I could just figure out how the burst effect works. The center of a burst is normally chosen by the caster, but if its tied to a ranged touch attack.... maybe its resolved differently?

It's unlimited. My reasoning was cut for space, but I intentionally made the arcane blast a bit more powerful than the others.

It wasn't my intent to change size, otherwise that discription would have been a lot simpler. "Short: You are one size category smaller than a typical member of your race."

Also, as has been said, going that route would have provided beneficial trade-offs, making this not much of a drawback at all.

Walt Ciechanowski wrote:

Random Starting Age

Half-Ogre (15 years) BRS +1d4 BFPR +1d6 CDMW +2d6
Ratkin (12 years) BRS +1d3 BFPR +1d4 CDMW +2d4
Saurian (30 years) BRS +3d6 BFPR +5d6 CDMW +6d6

Okay, that covers the PF core classes...how about the ToS classes? (We have someone starting a Spellblade.)

Also, which "B" above is Bard and which is Barbarian? I can see an argument for it either way.

They're the same categories as PF core, so the first B is barbarian.

BR(ogue)S includes shaman, warlock
BFPR(anger) includes knight, swashbuckler, warlord
CDMW includes artificer, priest, spellblade

Hope that helps!

Okay, let's see how many I can hit with one reply!

Here's the Age, Height, Weight, and Starting Money tables (I'll try to get these in a better form soon):

Random Starting Age

Half-Ogre (15 years) BRS +1d4 BFPR +1d6 CDMW +2d6
Ratkin (12 years) BRS +1d3 BFPR +1d4 CDMW +2d4
Saurian (30 years) BRS +3d6 BFPR +5d6 CDMW +6d6

Aging Effects

Half-Ogre MA 32 O 49 V 65 Max 65+1d20
Ratkin MA 25 O 40 V 55 Max 55+2d6
Saurian MA 75 O 125 V 175 Max 175+2d20

Height and Weight

Half-Ogre Male H 7’6 W 250 Mod 2d6 WM x7
Half-Ogre Female H 6’10 W 180 Mod 2d6 WM x7
Ratkin Male H 4’4 W 90 Mod 2d8 WM x4
Ratkin Female H 4’0 W 85 Mod 2d8 WM x4
Saurian Male H 5’0 W 140 Mod 2d10 WM x6
Saurian Female H 4’8 W 100 Mod 2d10 WM x6

Starting Money (Optional Occupations version in parentheses)

Artificer 3d6x10 (1d4x10) gp
Knight 5d6x10 (3d4x10) gp
Priest 3d6x10 (1d4x10) gp
Shaman 2d6x10 (None) gp
Spellblade 4d6x10 (2d4x10) gp
Swashbuckler 4d6x10 (2d4x10) gp
Warlock 2d6x10 (None) gp
Warlord 5d6x10 (3d4x10) gp

@Sean FitzSimon - I didn't design the Artificer, but I did alert the author to your questions.

@Nepenthe - Yes, I did look at that possibility, but I had a lot of balance issues and not enough time to iron them out. As it stands, I still think the Warlock would be overpowered if we tacked those on (as well as adding bookkeeping to a class designed without it), but a similar class based on the sorceror bloodlines might be fun...I'll have to muse on that. :)

Is there a built-in method for assigning drawbacks randomly? That's probably the tack I'd take if my players appeared to be trying to "work the system."

No, there isn't. We did do random charts for occupations.

The reason this originally came up was because I was telling my players about the new Tome of Secrets and showed them my PDF. I hadn't even read the Drawbacks section yet when one of my players started bringing these issues up, claiming he could choose 8 different "Drawbacks" that would have no tangible impact on his character for 16 bonus skill points.

Of course, he was testing the system, and didn't think for a moment that he could get away with it, but it does give some insight into the way that some players think when they see options like these.

I did mention that GMs should probably limit PCs to two or three drawbacks... :-)

Hey all!

I originally wrote the drawbacks section for 3.5. As a GM, I find it hardly game-breaking if the PCs have a few extra skill points (assuming max ranks stay the same) as opposed to granting extra feats.

One thing I should have had added is that all drawbacks are subject to GM approval, and that the GM should feel free to adjust skill ranks gained.

In fact, one of the ideas I was toying with was granting an extra class skill (with a single rank) per drawback, rather than 4 skill ranks.

Walt

Hey Gareth/Walt can you clear up the question from above about Shaman. The '0' spells is on the Spells known not the spells per day table. There is no current 3E mechanic that adds to spells known for high ability scores. How would you suggest we correct this for our games? Swap the tables, just make it 1 spell known or give Shamans a bonus spell per and AND a bonus spell known using the ability score table?

It's for both.

Generally, divine casters can prepare any spells from their lists, but none of them can cast spontaneously. The shaman would be too powerful compared to his cleric, druid, or priest brethren if we let him have unfettered access to the druid list all day. Still, just as a cleric generally knows more spells than a wizard of equal level, we wanted to set the shaman a bit above the sorceror in terms of spells known (and kept it variable to represent his relationship to his spirit guide).

That said originally we were going to use the Wisdom bonus for spells per day and the Charisma bonus for spells known. This makes logical sense (bargain for more spells and have the displine to cast more) if you consider the spirit guide as a separate being rather than the shaman's "spiritual self", so you may want to consider that "Designer Notes" option if you want the spirit guide to be a distinct entity.

(This is also why the section is missing; the earlier Wis and Cha stuff was deleted and we forgot to replace it with straight Wis).

Also this is under the Shaman table "1

In addition to the stated number of spells per day for 1st- through 9th-level spells, a priest gets a domain spell for each spell level, starting at 1st.
The “+2” in the entries on this table represents that spell. Domain spells are in addition to any bonus spells the priest may receive for having a high Wisdom score." which is obviously for the Priest :-)

A gremlin placed it there during editing. Ignore the whole blurb beneath the shaman level advancement table.

Walt

The primitive should get 4 class skills ("permanent" was removed in the errata).

@Sean,

A line was omitted that said that Shamans get extra spells per day for high Wisdom scores.

In the omitted designer notes, I mentioned that I debated giving them extra spells for high Charisma (reflecting their ability to negotiate with spirits) because that would make them the only spell-casting class that had a different score for casting as for spells per day.

Walt

@flash_cxxi - Yes. The swashbuckler's Evade would count as the Dodge feat for purposes of selecting a prestige class.

@Matthew Morris - Yep, that should be "every four levels thereafter."

A spellblade can never add more infusions/special abilities to his weapon than (1/2 spellblade level, round down). This maxixum also includes adding infusions/special abilities to magic weapons. So even though a 9th level spellblade knows 3 special abilities and has a +2 infuse weapon bonus, he could only make a +2 weapon with 2 special abilities or a +1 weapon with all three.

@neceros - Nothing is stopping you from using the original as printed :)

In order:

1. I can't speak for the Artificer (or the Warlord, for that matter). However, Gareth explained the reasoning in the preview thread.

2. I dabbled with the idea of incorporating sorceror bloodlines into the warlock, but ultimately we decided to stick with schools, as the warlock is more in tune with pure magical energy. Hmmm...maybe Tome of Secrets II...

3. The shaman does not have a static spell list. Each day, the shaman communes with his spirit guide and selects a cleric domain and spells from the Druid list. He casts them like a sorceror.

Hey everybody!

As a co-author of the Tome I want to thank everyone for their thoughts and criticisms! I had a lot of fun working on the project and I was thrilled that we could have it ready for GenCon.

I designed most of the classes; each initially had a sidebar that explained my reasons for why I designed it the way I did (I love to read Designer Notes sections). Unfortunately, those notes were cut for space and to allow the class section to more accurately model the PF core book.

Yes, the d12 hit die for the knight was sort of a legacy thing. He's a protector and it made sense to give him the hp bump.

No, the BAB for the spellblade is not correct. Initially, I was going to make him more like a paladin or ranger (primarily a front-liner, but with a few arcane spells). As I came to see him as more of an "arcane cleric" role-wise, I'd intended to set the BAB and hit dice accordingly. Unfortunately, only the hit die was corrected. This should be fixed for the full print run.

Sorry for the confusion.

Walt

Once chosen, can it change? If so, what does that require? And is there a particular reason that sonic isn't one of the possible energy types?

Yes. You are allowed to swap powers at certain levels, so you could swap an arcane blast of one type for another at those times.

Interesting... so instead of the 3.5 Warlock's Eldritch Blast, the ToS version can select Arcane Blast as one of his abilities.

Dose this mean that you can have a Warlock with no Blast abilitiy at all and instead have a host of other abilites?
I like it. I am getting happier and happier that I pre-ordered this book (Swashbuckler and Warlock have been 2 of my favourite classes and I am very happy with their new versions).

Yes, Arcane Blast is optional. You don't have to select it.

Additionally, you might choose to wait a few levels before taking it (since damage is based on Warlock level, not when you selected it) in order to "front load" with other abilities.

I appreciate the answers, however I am interested in whether there is anything else in the mechanics of the thrust ability that isn't mentioned in the preview rather than calling out things which are already self-apparent. If there isn't anything else that's cool, just wondering.

Sorry if that sounds snarky - I don't mean it that way, I am just hungry for more info :)

Not a problem. Thrust is essentially the same ability as sneak attack, but it is limited to melee weapons that can be used with weapon finesse. It will stack with sneak attack when appropriate.

Ranged attacks within 30' feet against flat-footed opponents also qualify for SA. This seems to be restricted to melee attacks, which makes sense for a duelist. I would actually go so far in designing the class as to restrict weapon proficiency to melee weapons only, given the flavor of the class, but that's another topic.

You won't need to house-rule that.

I wouldn't beef anything up. If you beef up Burnt Offerings, you'll get stuck beefing up the rest of the path.

What I would do is have a discussion with my players and tell them that the adventure path is more fun if we start at the beginning, but I understand that they want to keep their old characters. With that in mind, I'm freezing XP until they "catch up" in the adventure.

e.g. If they're frozen at 6500 xp, then they don't start progressing until they've earned 6500 xp in Burnt Offerings.

The trade-off is that the early encounters will be less of a challenge, but I don't really see that as too much of a problem. If your players want something in return (and they usually do), you can make up for it with extra money or magic items.

Walt

Thanks for the replies!

I should have mentioned that I'm running this with 6 PCs, using the Beta (and only the Beta) rules. We have a cleric, 2 fighters, a monk, a rogue, and a sorceror.

Currently, they leveled to two just after

Do you think 7th level is necessary for the final fight, given that the Beta classes are a touch more powerful than vanilla 3.5?

Assuming that the PCs are 4th level at the end of Burnt Offerings, does anyone have an idea of where to set the "leveling milestones" at in the Skinsaw Murders?

Thanks!

Thanks!

Quick question. Should I allow CotCT characters take the bonus feats offered in RotR, given that this is still Varisia?

I actually just asked this in the wrong spot.

It would be extremely helpful to know when the authors of the adventures expect your PCs to level up during the adventure.

Thanks,
Walt

Hello,

I was just reading through Burnt Offerings and a question occurred to me. The module assumes that the PCs will go to Thistletop by foot, even though Sandpoint and Thistletop are on the coast.

What's a good way to modify the adventure if the PCs decide to approach by sea?

Thanks,
Walt

Hello,

I apologize if I'm treading old ground, but I'm about to start running a Rise of the Runelords campaign. I'm considering abandoning XP and just allowing the characters to level when appropriate.

While each RotR module assumes a 3 level gain (oddly, RotR5 assumes you'll get to 15th level, while RotR6 assumes you'd start at 14th level), I'm not sure how to break it down within the modules.

Has anyone outlined appropriate points to level up?

Thanks,

Walt

Like I said, in 3e, HP loss represents physical damage. Shifting to the 4e mindset is a surefire way to lose my business.

Even in 3e, hit points don't completely represent physical damage. See p.145 of the PHB.

Hi,

This is my first post (and my first time checking out this forum), so if this has been asked elsewhere I apologize.

While I realize that Pathfinder is a replacement for 3.5 and thus uses the same core classes, I think another core class should be considered.

Over the years, I've seen many attempts to do an "arcane warrior" type class. WOTCs "complete" series includes at least a couple examples (Duskblade and Hexblade), and various third party publishers have their own versions. It's a class idea that has wide appeal.

I think Pathfinder would benefit by including such a class in the main rulebook.

But that's just my two coppers...

Walt