Tethered Champion looks good, as do some of the other options. Great stuff, thanks!
Search Posts
As title. Hoping for something fairly simple and close to a Fighter for a very new player, so an archetype might suit..? However, I would like to see a decent Will save, and something that involves Charisma mattering at all. Oh, and at least 4+Int skill points would probably help, along with appropriate class skills, I guess? A bit less Fighter-y and a bit more .. Knight-y? Focus on a mount not required, or even wanted really. Thanks in advance.
The system seriously needs some balancing and streamlining, so: "Yes." PF has a solid foundation, in some ways, but in others it is all over the damn place. And I say this as a fan of d20 in general, incidentally. It's a great base to work from. But yes, work does need to be done.
You don't have to have them play full-fledged Devils. But that is the whole idea! :D Actual full-blown Devils, with plenty of political meanderings and tangles, and maybe the occasional fistycuffs and stuff. Unusual usage of mid- to high-level SLAs and Supernatural abilities might prove interesting (and key), too. Slapping on class levels will be the... intriguing part. We'll see how the maths works then! ;)
You are more sane than I. ;) I appreciate the advice, though we're quite sold on running with fairly powerful demon-like beings to begin with. Luckily, there is a method of using "monster races", in the core books. I just... don't know if it works, in practise.
So I want to run, and some players want to play, a campaign based in Hell... with Devils (or the like) as player characters. Yes, this is insanity. But bear with me, Does it have even a snowball's chance to work, mechanically? Will the "races" (monsters) be sufficiently balanced, so's to get away with it? Once some class levels are added on top, I mean. And if not, using Pathfinder core, what might I need, third party or official, to make it happen? Or, indeed, am I looking at the wrong system altogether - and if so, what do you recommend in PF's place?
The current alignment system is fine for high melodrama, but many GMs and players don't want to play a game of high melodrama. It seems (though I can't say for sure) that the majority of GMs and players don't want to play a game of high melodrama. So, another system is needed. Rubbish. The current alignment system is fine for whatever kind of fantasy campaign you want to run, or play in. It's actually an extremely flexible system, and, like Skills of the social kind, is all about how it's used. You can for the most part ignore it, and the game continues to work perfectly. You can focus on it heavily if you prefer. Or, indeed, go for somewhere in between, as most of us probably do. Even if it's taken to be somewhat of a straitjacket (which, IMO, it shouldn't be) it's important to remember that most people are Neutral. So you can always choose that, have plenty of freedom in any "direction", and ignore the majority of mechanics that might otherwise complicate your day. Oh, and I have run many, many sessions over the years, using Alignments, that have been absolutely nothing like "high melodrama", just so you know. Therefore, even if what you said applies to everyone else in the world (yeah, right) it doesn't apply to everyone. And therefore, regardless, it's not true, as a blanket statement.
Looks like there is still some stock at that price. :)
As for if the book will be better... that's going to be a matter of personal opinion, I suppose. I think the PF RPG is gonna be better, of course! :) I think so too, by the way. The RPG system, writing and presentation all look fantastic, and the things I've tried (races, classes and CMB mostly) have worked really well. Thanks for answering - it's cleared up the uncertainty I had. Just couldn't for the life of me remember hearing one way or the other, that was all. Truth be told, I was going to buy the book anyway. But now I know exactly what I'm getting for sure, and feel more secure about it, as a bonus.
This will no doubt seem like a pretty dumb question, but does the PFRPG corebook completely replace the PHB and DMG of 3.5? As in, cover _everything_ that might be necessary fom both of those books? So all I would need after that is the Bestiary, in other words? I just haven't heard anything definite either way, so far. I hope it does, because in this country, it will cost exactly the same as those two 3.5 books, which is just fine, and it sounds likely... Also, if that is the case, in what ways will this book be better than the 3.5 DMG, as a DMG?
Your work is greatly appreciated. Just so you know. :) Um, in case you hadn't got that memo. :D
I really appreciate what you guys have done with 3rd edition, and part of that is the de-emphasising of things like prestige classes. If you keep the system fairly free of power creep and pro-munchkin architecture in general, I'll be a solid convert. That's a promise! :) Universally great classes (and not too many of them) + solid multiclassing = win. So, what do I want to see? A fantastic bestiary, but that's already a given. A kickass book of planes. Epic rules done right - and here, as elsewhere, I think a light touch is the way to go. Less is more, especially in the face of conventional 'wisdom' about this. Could be it will net you less cash... I am absolutely not convinced that's the case anyway, BUT, regardless, you'll earn more respect and trust from your customer base. Well, I think so.
I'd totally hit that. :p Thanks for the e-card, and the discount too guys. Cheers to y'all!
Fighters are getting a whole bunch more Fighter-only feats... they were announced a while back, IIRC. If you haven't seen that lot, go have a look. It's the kind of thing they need, IMO. Lots more ways to be effective on the battlefield. Like what the PHB2 did for the class, but better, again IMO.
Yep, it was 306, thanks! Must be there's the same image between the covers too, or a similar one... Aha! 'Betraying your Evil Nature' - that's the one. Thanks again for your help. I knew it was something to do with evil (duh) but, being a bit hungover, didn't know much else... :)
Huh. Knew I posted something like this a while back. Would still like to hear some opinions, if anyone's up for that. Cheers, and happy new year y'all. :)
It's in the Paizo era of Dragon, and what comes to mind is the image of a succubus(?) or similar reclining figure, in red IIRC. ANyway, there was something I was after in the article itself, but I don't even know what that's called either... Any idea?
Sorry about possibly looking like setting up 'combat' and 'RP' as opposites like that; it's just to keep things simple for the title. ;) What's the (very approximate) weighting of various aspects, in general - things like overarching plot, small-scale combat, large-scale combat, dealing with the physical environment (inc. traps), loot/items, intrigue, investigation, other PC-NPC interaction, puzzles, player-level problem-solving etc.? Also, how much do individual adventures vary? I know, it's a pretty broad querying going on here, but if you could indulge my curiosity to any extent, that would be most helpful. I would love to find some adventures that would work for my second group - a new one - and that have roughly the kind of balance I and they would prefer. So, if it's not too much trouble... Thanks. :)
Suggest a (non-broken!) race or template with a high LA. That should keep him on his toes. Or 6ft. under, more likely. ;) Or yeah, what Nero said.
However anyone might feel about 4th edition, it certainly bears little resemblance to anything called 'D&D', prior to 4e itself. AD&D was quite a change from earlier forms. 3rd edition was quite a change again from AD&D '2.5'. But 4th edition has very little in common, system-wise. That, and most of the flavour (cosmology, etc.) has been altered fairly radically as well. Unfortunately, many of the changes, system-wise and flavour-wise, seem to have been made for the sake of distancing 4e from D&D, quite deliberately, to ensure that all new material must be bought, and nothing older can be used with much ease. And, most likely if much of the fluff and crunch is anything to go by, to _attempt to_ lure the MMO crowd - as the OP surmised, actually. It's an interesting RPG. Not one I like on any level though, and certainly not D&D.
Can't wait to see that (3.P ToH). :)
Seems to me publishers only got what they deserved, in every case, no more and no less. So, you guys at Paizo are highly deserving... well, there's a surprise. ;) Congrats to you, and to the others who won Gold or Silver, and those who were nominated but didn't. Here's to the future health of roleplaying! :)
Seeing as how everyone will have to house rule at least one thing, the paladin alignment issue seems fairly negligible. My games will continue to allow CG and NG paladins to represent the other paragons of virtue in the world, regardless of the rulebook. I'd call it a win if this were the only thing I had to amend in a new RPG. Quoted for extreme truthiness. Never mind the quibble I had before, and still have, with the LG only thing. Otherwise, the class is looking very good indeed.
Every god should have access to their own holy warriors Yes. This is part of what bugs me about only having LG Paladins. CG deities should be able to have CG, or at least NG, Paladins, as well as Clerics of those alignments (or possibly CN of course, in their case.) It just doesn't make sense for say, a deity who is strongly Good and strongly Chaotic, to a) have no holy warriors, just because; or b) have LG Paladins, in direct opposition to their ethical nature.
I would like to humbly request that Paladins be allowed any Good alignment, by default. There would need to be very little change in order for this to work, overall. I don't think any class ability would need to be altered, if memory serves. It would open the class up to many more variations and interpretations of the 'paladin' or 'holy warrior' archetype, without losing any of its flavour, IMO. Pretty please? :) |