hmm strange.. my search fu seams to have been to weak...
seriously the first thing i entered was Pathfinder online.
Hmmm...who cares. THX for the correction.
I'm going outside to jump around because of joy about the game beeing real.
Greetz
Search Posts
https://goblinworks.com/ is this really real? If yes i'm wondering why there aren't any posts about it?
Any chance getting an official confirmation ? Greetz
Trailblazer is another D&D 3.75 Version. The name is a reference to Pathfinder. Looking forward to your supplement.@ James Jacobs: Whats your favourite archetype?
And Nathan for Vice-President:)
As for "the system doesn't matter": it DOES! It is of course possible to play a high fantasy campaign with Chtulhu rules and a grim and gritty horror campaign with Dnd rules (oh sorry! i meant Pathfinder of course:) but you will either have to rework half of the rules or it will be a suboptimal choice. In the Chtuhlu fantasy campaign the heroes will tend to die very often and will have very little magic support whereas in the Pathfinder horror campaign you'll have the problem that the heroes will slash through most of the monsters intended to scare them.... @Silentwolf: I don't want to be offensive, but dude thats a really sad worldview....you really have never encountered or even heard of a person you would call good? I mean i agree that even the goodie goodies have their dark side, but don't you think that beeing good or evil is a sum of all the actions (and thoughts etc.) of a person?
Well, i would wish even more historical/european influences. I kind of grew tired of all the fancy FR-style worlds without really different cultures (besides the more exotic ones like Arabia, Asia etc.)
Nice rules. Thx for uploading
Is there any chance that the book comes out in german somewhat in the future?
They did'nt understand it ? Then i guess tech isn't the right job choice for them....i mean c'mon! I'm a total losser if it comes to tech and i am not a native-english-speaker but i still somehow managed to understand the download process and what personalyzing means....
How about introducing 2npc's? If you give them remarkable and different personalities it shouldn't be too hard to roleplay them.
Ok i think i'm starting to get it :)
Yeah i'd have to agree that byzantium was a bad example. But what is then the difference between a turkish community ruled by Byzantium and a Taldan community ruled by cheliax ?
Yeah, tribalism was the word i was searching for. And you are right, the Nations of Golarion are much more modern than our nations in the medieval ages.
I wan't :)
And as for nationalism in the medieval ages i have to disagree somehow. The modern definition of Nationalism (as for the whole country) is in fact an invention of modern times.
i hope my scribbling is understandable....
I am really glad that the knight will receive new mechanics. The old one always had a strange feeling. I mean a knight as a tank and bodyguard? Nah....I want my knight as a mounted charging damage dealing machine! Mounted or unmounted Knights have always been heavy shock troops and the rules should simulate this.
spells with saves need to have a partial effect if the save succeeds Good idea. Something like: "If you succeed the save for the sleep spell you get a -2 on Attack rolls because of beeing tired.", would be really great. Multiclass save-stacking Good point. But as you said: this isn't a problem of the SoD spells per se. It is a problem of the Multiclassing rules which indeed need an overhaul.
I really like your ideas though beeing hard to play as a mage on high levels could be a problem for masscompatibility. The most complaints i've seen about mages (besides them beeing to strong of course) is that they are hard to play because all of the spells,effects,stacking...etc.
Another way could be just making the saves for SoD spells easier.
Well, for one thing, we made spells an attack roll instead of a save. It's a pretty simple conversion to make, and it adds a big element of interaction to combat. Do you just take the normal saves as DC/AC or do you add something? And what do you take as attack bonus for the wizard? His BAB or spellcraft? Sorry for threadjacking.
Well, the "Special: A character may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack." sentence is gone. Oh, right. Didn't consider this... True, but on lower levels you can take better feats and on high levels the keen enchantment or a scabbard of keen edge is easy to come by. Imho the feat needs a boost but just allowing it to stack with enchantments might lead to balance issues. Well its true that a keen enchantment is easy to come by, but on the other side you could spend the money for something else. What better feats do you have in mind? If you mean trip and co. its true, but its hard (if not using splatbooks) to find enough numerical feats for the fighter and his huge amount of feats.Imho it's only worth it if you have feats to spare(=fighter) and you aim for (Greater)Weapon Specialization.I think it depends. If you have many Attacks or if you make much damage or if you have a relatively low attack bonus it's good i think. I mean its 5% more damage. Edit: Ok i have to admit that after reading this (5%more dmg) i begin to wonder if its really so good. Imho letting two build slugging it out at close range doesn't give a good evaluation of a class. A mobile melee build will most likely loose against a heavy armored fighter. It is as you said. It's different to compare such different builds in this evaluation. But it wasn't intended to test how a skirmisher Barbarian would do against a Heavy Infantry Fighter but to find out how a Heavy Infantry Barbarian would do against a Heavy Infantry Fighter etc. But i'll thanks for the skirmishing tips. My actual char is a Ranger/Barbarian and in think i'll multiclass into wildrunner and try spring attack and co. out.
After reading it again: Yeah you're right. Must have been another houserule i forgot about :) I'll post a link around here somewhere. Once the playtest moves to feats, I'll post a summary and link in that forum. Can't wait to see them :) I'm really glad that there are other people who had the same idea. At first i expected that there would be many people who would be uncomfortable with this kind of analysis.And by the way with the now bigger amount of feats avaiable to all classes i'm kind of feeling that the fighter might lose a little of his supremacy. I mean now all the classes can take the best feats. what do you think?
@Tholas: feat at every even level? damn....i should learn to read more carefully. Oh and that with 13.000gps was my fault. i just used the wealth guide for our actual campaign (very low magic) forgetting that this was a houserule...ok seems like i have to do the calculations a second time....but thx for pointing this out. would have never noticed this myself.
@Shisumo. Well might be true i never played a monk so i do not really know all the good debuffing combos. If the fighter would lose his full attack action every round thus making only half his damage (though he probably would make more because he would loose his weaker second attack) then the monk would be on par with the fighter. With debuffing you mean the unarmed feat tree right? I'll look into them. Perhaps i can figure something out how to take them into the calculation.
a part of me says that this test is slanted to make the Fighter look better well to be honest my intention when i came up with this whole math idea was to make the fighter (especially in comparison to the Barbarian) look worse....after all the fighter is my favourite class and i wanted some numbers to undermine my wish for boosting him. But when i was done i was really suprised how strong he actually is. And with the Barbarian you are right. He is indeed stronger than the fighter. As my analysis has shown a Barbarian would defeat a fighter in a duell.The only problem is that the other warrior classes are inferior to the fighter and i see very little threads which adress this. Most of them are about giving the fighter more. I have too admit that the fighter should have some uses outside of combat, i just don't like that people still want to boost his damage etc. without considering that that would make the other warrior classes weaker. There is always this fighter vs. wizard comparison but instead it should be a Warrior Class vs. Wizard comparison. When i think about the Ranger or the Paladin i still have the 2nd ed versions in mind which were basically fighters with some extra abilities. When i play a ranger or a paladin i see them primary as frontline warriors which should contribute to the fight as strong as the fighter. Things like tracking or beeing able to heal someone are nice for fluff outside the combat but their main niche is smashing things with a piece of metal. But i know this are mainly my preferences and other people have of course other preferences and another opinion. (would be boring if not he? :)
For the record, this analysis is entirely predicated on the concept of damage/round as a means of determining combat effectiveness. The monk, for instance, is incredibly bad at this - but is currently the melee class most able to debuff the opponent, stripping actions away while dealing damage. This might well impact their utility without being apparent in this kind of test at all. This is entirely true. But it is hard to calculate feats/attacks with special effects so i stick to the attacks/feats which grant extra damage/to-hit-chances etc. For example: out of curiosity i made a fight between the fighter and the rogue and even the bleeding ability (which is numerical) gave me a major headache. And for the monk well: Fighter vs. Monk 2,11 rounds. Monk vs. Fighter 4,11 rounds.... even the best debuffing abilities cannot make up for a difference this high.
Pathfinder class? Count me in :) @snorter: lol But i think that skill focus would be not enough. After all sneak attack is a really powerfull ability. Combined with improved feint it is a real damage booster. So i would rather give someone an extra feat all 2 or 3 Levels in exchange for it.
Thanks again. Especially for the critique. Well the race was human but i thought that a lvl10 human would have 5 feats: 2 at lvl1 +3 for 3rd,6th and 9th level.
The Toughness feat can no longer be taken multiple times. It can't? Must have missed this, thx. Do you perhaps know where i can find this in the rulebook. Because i was searching for it before i made the chars and could not find anything. The whole equation might change drastically with the availability of Vital Strike and Devastating Blow at BAB 11. Very good point. I will make some level 11 chars and will post them tomorrow or the day after. Imho Improved Critical is only a so-so feat, even if there was no equivalent weapon enchantment. Well partially i agree. On low levels when the damage output is small it is a bad feat. On high levels with high damage output it is very good. Applied to a greatsword it gives you a damage boost of 10%. So if your damage is higher than 20 it is superior to weapon specialisation. Also Weapon Focus is imho not worth it if you do not take at least 4 fighter levels. Here i disagree. I mean with 4 fighter levels you basically take it twice which doesn't make the single feat better. A Barbarian with Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack and Overhand Chop could've had +2 AC more and, if he survived the first round and given enough room, probably made mincemeat out of the fighter. as for dodge this is true. As i didn't use powerattack (made the damage output smaller) i could have substituted it with dodge. But the change would be minor: the fighter would have a 95%attack and a 90%attack. For the guerilla tactic: well it is possible that that would make the barbarian even stronger but it is kind of hard to calculate (at least for me :). But i'm not really sure about this. The Barbarian would lose one attack (and his 3rd attack is the main reason why he's stronger than the Fighter. The Fighter would also loose one Attack but only if he looses initiative. If he wins then he can just ready his action and make his full attack when the Barbarian comes near.Also a ranged combat Ranger with Boots of Striding and Springing would probably have he upper hand. This is true but i intentionally made them melee warriors because ranged warriors will generally always have the upper hand when they are far away or when they are fast enough or when they can fly. I mean that was the main reason why ranged weapons were invented right? ;) How about a performance analysis against set CL monster encounters? This is definitely something i'm planing to do. The only problem is that i've got little time at the moment. Stupid exams..... But what monsters have you in mind? As i said i'm relatively new to 3.x so what are the "standard" monsters? Oh and any ideas what feat i can take instead og the fighters 2nd toughness feat? I'm kind of running low on feats which i can give to the fighter and which are numeric feats (with bonuses etc.).
Well a fighter with the right feats would indeed make a good noble. The only problem is that the only proper feat i know is leadership. We would need feats which give you more money, perhaps a manor, more followers, a better social standing and so one.
And well for the adventurer. The expert class is nice but it is basically a stripped down rogue with even less combat capability.
edit: oh i forgot the niche. Well in combat the niche would be somewhat of a little weaker fighter and outside combat he would be the skillmonkey. The guy who repairs the stuff of the group, who does all the diplomaty, who disables traps, who knows that this monster is best encountered with fire and so on, depending on what skills the player takes.
Ok here i have to admit that i regard almost every class as a combat oriented class. First i look at the combat capabilities than comes the rest. Must be the strategie games legacy :)
THX
If one of these guys could win an entire round earlier then I would say he had a significant advantage. Then wait till i post the monk vs. fighter fight. The monk is really weak...... And well my tolerance is about 0.25 rounds. Mainly because the fighter fights always at 100% combat power whereas the other classes fight only for few rounds with ther maximal efficiency (paladin,monk,barbarian) or it is luck depending (ranger,paladin).So i just feel not well when the ranger who is very luck depending needs almost half a round longer to defeat the fighter. Its also because these fights last only for 3 rounds max. So half a round is pretty much i think.
3.X pro: don`t know. almost everything? :)
4th pro: similar to Scrape. I like some aspects of the combat especially that wizards have to make attackrolls with every spell. i like tzhe idea of willpower or reflexes beeing something like AC when it comes to magic. 4th con: almost anything else. The oversimplification, the feel of playing a tabletop mmorpg for kids. @Scrape: is there a possibility of posting your changes? It would really interest me because i was intending to to something similar.
Yeah something like a warlord would be cool. But only if he is also a decent warrior. Because i like the idea of a warlord/general/whatever beeing a combat monster like in many fantasy books or wuxia movies. On the other side this could be achieved through multiclassing so...
Wow. Nice ideas (i like especially the bounty hunting style). I think i gonna use them in my campaign.
Servus Leute !
@Gorbacz: Siemasz :)
Hi to all.
1)Why balance? I know there are many people out there who say that balance isn`t that important. Dnd is a team game, good roleplayers do not need balance, good gamemasters don`t need balance etc. i heard it all. So if you have another opinion please don`t post it. Its only because almost everytime i read about balancing issues in a mesageboard they ended up in flaming wars.... Imho balance is one of the most important issues within a rules system. Perhaps it`s because i originally come from the strategy gamers faction or perhaps it is because i`ve seen to often what unbalanced rulesystems can do. Its simply no fun playing a dwarven fighter with a battlehammer when the cleric does more damage (cause he took the longsword and rolled a 18strengh) or playing a nimble light armored knive fighter when the knight next to you has a better AC and damage output . I know a „real“ roleplayer would play it anyway but i don`t think that such players should be punished by the system. 2)Why maths? Well believe me: I HATE maths! But as im relatively new to the 3.X edition it`s the only way for me too contribute. (i have never encountered CoDzilla for example). Another reason is that my group wants to finish our actuall 3.5 campaign before we begin the RotRL AP.
Ok thats beeing said, what have i done? Well basically i made for every warrior class a level 10char and then i let them fight each other. For simplicitys sake i let the fighter fight each other class. If the paladin is equal to the fighter and the ranger is equal to the fighter then the paladin should be equal to the ranger(at least thats what i think).
Ok here are the characters: Spoiler:
Fighter St 20 Con 16 Dex 14 Wi10 Int10 Cha10 Feats: Dodge, Imp. Crit (Greatsword), 2xToughness, WeaponFocus (Greatsword), Imp. WeaponFocus(Greatsword), WeaponSpezialisation (Greatsword), Improved WeaponSpecialisation (Greatsword),Overhand Chop, Backswing, PowerAttack, Gear: Greatsword +2, Full Plate +1, ring of protection +1 Barbarian stats like the fighter Feats: Imp. Crit (Greatsword), Weapon Focus (Greatsword),Overhand Chop, Backswing, PowerAttack, Gear: like fighter but instead of a fullplate he has chainmail. I know in this case he has spent 1000gp less but i dont really know what to buy with these... Ranger St 18 Con 14 Dex 15 Wi13 Int10 Cha10 Feats: Two weapon fighting, Improved Two weapon fighting, Double Slice(i used the normal st with backhand version though i dont know which one is the real one in the beta), Dodge, Imp. Critical (shortsword), Weapon Focus (shortsword), Toughness, Two Weapon defense, Gear: Chainshirt+2, ring of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +1, 2x shortsword +1
And here comes the fight. Spoiler:
Fighter vs. Barbarian Fighter Fighter Attack Bonus: 21/16
Barbarian (with rage and using the „unexpected strike“ power) Attack Bonus: 20/20/15
Fighter hits Barbarian: 1.Attack: 95%HitChance x 27 = 25,65 Dmg
That makes a total Dmg of 48,45 per round.
Barbarian hits fighter: 1.Attack: 80%HitChance x 27 = 21,6 Dmg
That makes a total Dmg of 52,38 per round.
So as we can see the barbarian is slightly stronger than the fighter but only for the 4 rounds he can maintain his rage (with the unexpected strike). Fighter vs. Ranger Fighter Fighter Attack Bonus: 21/16
Ranger Attack Bonus: 21/21/16/16 (two weapon penalty and +6 Favored enemy included)
Fighter hits Ranger: 3.Attack: 90%HitChance x 29,4 = 26,46 Dmg
That makes a total Dmg of 43,62 per round.
Ranger hits fighter: 1.Attack: 85%HitChance x 15,5 = 13,175 Dmg
That makes a total Dmg of 44,95 per round.
So we can see that the Fighter is much stronger than the Ranger. And this is with the +6 Favored Enemy Bonus!!! Oh and the animal companion wouldn`t help at all. He would be death after one single strike and would have a 5% chance of hitting....
So what did this all say to us? Well the fighter needs no more boosts ( and believe me i never thought that i would say something like this. Normally i`m one of the guys who say: give more to the fighter...). He fights as good as the Barbarian and the Paladin and a buffed up War Cleric(i`ll post this fights in a day). But the Barbarian, Paladin and Cleric can maintain their Power only a few rounds (ok the cleric can do this veeeeeery long on lvl10...). The Ranger on the other Hand needs some boosting because he seriously lacks in power. Even with a sesond toughness feat instead of the two weapon defense he would last only for 2,47 rounds (which also prooves that toughness is a little to strong but there will be another time and place to discuss this). Ok if someone wants to know what changes i`ll do with our campaign, here they are: Spoiler:
Fighter: he will have the possibility to change feats (though i didn`t figure out the exact mechanic of this) he will get a CMB (perhaps ½ or 1/3 of his level) one additional class skill an ability with which he can analyse his enemy (like in BESM D20) Barbarian
Ranger: He gets +1AC every time he chosses a favored terrain in addition to the initiative bonus
Ok this were my 2cp. Everyone who read all of this is a real hero :)
|