|
Okay, I've made a <dedicated thread> for discussion/FAQ flagging of the Pummeling style question.
Have at it!
:-)
|
True enough, but you can clearly see the things which are going to be very good and the ones which are very much not so good by reading once through the class. I think that the slower spellcasting progression of the Arcanist is the only thing which would prevent the Wizard from becoming second place in the power curve.OMG, the Arcanist is crazy powerful. Move over, Wizard. :-/Wait a few months for us to see the true power level of it.
Well, that and the Exploiter Wizard Archetype. Which gets Arcane Exploits, only on a Wizard. It replaces School and Bond...bu there are Exploits to mostly get those back.
Now, Wizard didn't really need a boost, so this is a bit excessive when compared to everyone else, but it does mean Arcanist won't blow Wizards out of the water to the extent hypothesized by some.
So far, I'm totally underwhelmed by the feats section of the book. I'm creating a Swashbuckler character, and there isn't a single feat in this book I find useful.
Steadfast Personality will be helpful. I won't be able to take it for my level 14 guy, because I already pre-planned all the other feats (Critical Focus, Staggering Critical, Stunning Critical), but if you start up a new character, you almost can't go wrong with this one feat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now, Wizard didn't really need a boost, so this is a bit excessive when compared to everyone else, but it does mean Arcanist won't blow Wizards out of the water to the extent hypothesized by some.
Aw, hell, I didn't even get to that. And so far as I have seen, the Sorcerer doesn't even get in on the fun the Arcanist and Wizard are having.
Why do you hate Sorcerers, Paizo devs?!? :p
Man I don't know whether to be excited at how awesome the Arcanist is sounding and how I'll be able to kiss the Wizard goodbye forever, or disappointed that the Sorcerer seems to be getting curbstomped in the process.
|
To be honest the feedback I'm getting is that the book is not particularly good.
Between slashing grace, slayer feint and canny tumble I'm seeing a bad patron for martial feats. While other stuff like deivine grace as afeat and arcanist are directly to the list of banned stuff.
Ive only gotten it and flipped through. So far its much better than "meh" but not in the great category Id hoped for from the start. Not digging the Warpriest which was the one I was most interested in, and kind of seeing two of its archtypes as the default class, with the actual default Warpriest sort of just there. Disappointed that there are no Aasimar/Tiefling Favored Class options, as well as some of the more common played races.
Part of me wishes that they had done two books. 1 focusing exclusively on the 10 new classes and another focusing on options to bring the other Core (or even Base) classes new options. Id have to agree, it does sort of seem like there was a lack of communication between the different options in the book.
A lot of the options seem all over the place, too. Going back to the Warpriest, we have a single Cleric Archtype, but rather than being about making the Cleric more Warpriesty, we get a White Mage type, (which I get, there are those that have been begging for it), but why is it in this book? There seems to be little consistency as to what is too strong/good between the various new classes, leading me to continue to believe that some writers just liked some concepts more than others rather than and sort of real balance concerns or playtest feedback. Might not be true, and like I said, still digging in at this point, just my impression.
Too early to make a judgment over all just yet, but so far Id say somewhere between 3-4 stars (out of 5).
Mongrel Mage is pretty awesome for Sorcerers. It adds a lot of versatility to a sorcerer in spells known and in bloodline arcana.
Yay!
So looking forward to reading this when I get home.
Man I don't know whether to be excited at how awesome the Arcanist is sounding and how I'll be able to kiss the Wizard goodbye forever, or disappointed that the Sorcerer seems to be getting curbstomped in the process.
Well, he still is an arcane full spellcaster and remains my favorite of the now three available ones. Even if he now clearly is worse than the Wizard and Arcanist. Still better than all the rest, nyah-nyah. :p
Mongrel Mage is pretty awesome for Sorcerers. It adds a lot of versatility to a sorcerer in spells known and in bloodline arcana.
I don't know, I thought it read a bit weak. I may have simply not really understood it, though, at the point I got to Sorcerer archetypes I was firmly in "information overload" territory. ^^
|
Mongrel Mage is pretty awesome for Sorcerers. It adds a lot of versatility to a sorcerer in spells known and in bloodline arcana.I don't know, I thought it read a bit weak. I may have simply not really understood it, though, at the point I got to Sorcerer archetypes I was firmly in "information overload" territory. ^^
Basically, it's main draw is to change your bloodline each day (including bonus spells known at 7th level). It only applies to base bloodlines, not wild-blooded, and you need to spend pool points to activate the bloodline powers, but it gives you back a lot of flexibility that you lost by being a spontaneous caster.
Hmm, would the Sacred Fist Warpriest archetype flurry of blows and increased unarmed damage stack with levels of monk I wonder...?
prototype00
Now, Wizard didn't really need a boost, so this is a bit excessive when compared to everyone else, but it does mean Arcanist won't blow Wizards out of the water to the extent hypothesized by some.
There is a feat that would be really good for wizards, building off of the Spell Mastery feat. Can't recall the name offhand, though. Starts with an 'E'.
A lot a cool stuff, but some major weirdness. It feels like the people who wrote the classes, the people who wrote feats, and the people who wrote archetypes had minimal communications. Also feels like the people who wrote feats and archetypes weren't around in the respective feedback threads for the playtest. Too many oddities and unwritten things in this book makes me feel a little disappointed as I read. I'm used to missing and the occasional oddity within Paizo books, but this book has too many.
Maybe SKR was right about the production schedule being too crunched and how trying to get this out by Gen-con constrained them a lot. I would have preferred this stayed another month in development and editing.
You have no idea how many moving parts there are to a book like this. With so many new classes and things that rely on them, simple changes to a class feature can ripple throughout the book. I'm not saying its perfect (it isn't), but I don't think it is in any way more or less flawed than previous years' Gen Con releases, including the Core Rulebook. I dare you to do better.
I also doubt that another month would have brought it to your level of satisfaction. Please, do not misconstrue that as saying you're impossible to please. What I mean is that everyone has a pet issue with a book like this where they disagree with decisions that were made. Something left out they wanted, something included they didn't, or just something they wanted not done to their own personal taste. It's easy to say that if the book had more time, or more developers, or a different developer, that it would match the mental ideal the person built during the run up to release. It's sort of a way of saying "I'm right, and if Paizo had just tried harder, they would have realized that." Even though that if the book was different it would be some other person making a slightly different complaint about the thing that was different.
I dare you to do better.
sheesh...thats a lil raw
i'm not complaining about pet ideas, but stuff like class abilities, archetypes, and feats should all jive before print...
i don't have the book, but it is something that burns me with all the splat lately
The Shaman doesn't have either summon natures's ally/monster spell. I was playing this class during the playtest in PFS and I'm left a moot feat in augment summons. I'm not seeing any literature in the new guide for season six about dealing with this conflict from the playtest. Do I have to suck it up and spend the prestige and gold for a retrain or do I get the benefit of the doubt and get to pick a new feat?Huh you're right there isn't anything official though I think it would/should follow under the
If a class or prestige class changes in such a way that you no longer have proficiency with a given weapon or armor type: You may sell back the affected equipment and only the affected equipment at full market value.
They should add changes to spell lists and allow changes to feats instead of just equipment I mean you'd have a wasted feat if you had Weapon Focus in a weapon that the class changed that you could no longer use; or say for the playtest of the Magus they had a whole bunch of Necromancy spells and you bought items to buff up their power but we the Magus actually came out and they had no Necromancy spells you'd have a completely wasted item that under the rules you can do nothing about and have wasted money.
As much as I hate it, I can see why PFS banned Spirit Summoners. A Spirit Summoner with the Battle or Life spirits can be pretty crazy. One can give bard-like boosts to the party, while the other gets *channel energy*. Crazy, though they do lose their summon SLA's as a cost.
I dare you to do better.sheesh...thats a lil raw
I'm not trying to be harsh. But the Open Game License means you really can make your own book, the way you want, and put it on sale. It's harder than it looks.
i'm not complaining about pet ideas, but stuff like class abilities, archetypes, and feats should all jive before print...
They should. I'm not excusing that. But it could definitely be worse, and it isn't something that I've noticed getting worse, in particular.
Anyway, where Insain Dragoon says it sounds like there was no communication between people working on different sections of the book, it isn't a matter of communication. It's a matter of bandwidth and working in parallel. There wouldn't be time to write all the spells, feats, and archetypes after the playtest finishes. That work has to be done at least partially in advance. Which means it gets revised, more than once, when playtest feedback is incorporated and designs evolve. It's kind of like trying to change the tire on a car that's still in motion.
It's a hard job, and I guess what I'm saying is I'm consistently amazed that things come out as well as they do.
Spirit Summoner looks like it was banned from PFS due to theme argument reasons, not power ones. The Eidolon cannot take powers or abilities that are not appropriate to the chosen spirit. This can cause all kinds of angst at the table and is a pain to enforce.
That's a very good point. I was kind of wondering how that would be enforced in PFS, and now I know XD
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i'm not complaining about pet ideas, but stuff like class abilities, archetypes, and feats should all jive before print...
Have you ever put on a stage production? If not, consider it like so.
Except you can't physically hold the props to make sure they look good in the lights. And each actor is prepping his lines alone, so revisions in one scene might not match revisions in another. And instead of physically building the set, you have to crunch numbers to make sure the pieces fit together.
Perfection is unfeasible. It certainly is possible, but the likelihood of a 256 page book being completely free of conflicts in a reasonable timeframe is so miniscule that, as the editors have said, sometimes you just have to accept that 'one more pass' isn't going to be worth delaying the release.
This might a bit embarrassing to Paizo, but it needs to be said; Your South Koreans (Republic of Korea) customers won't be able to purchase your products, while North Koreans (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) customers will be able to. Please, fix this silly mistake and make your products available for S. Koreans.
I'm confused. What is stopping South Koreans from buying this book?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Class building guidelines feels tacked-on. Very lack luster. Most (if not all) of the info are very broad and very generic design goals that have been openly stated in other places. This section REALLY needed crunch in the form of examples. This is HOW to compare this class ability to that class ability. This is HOW to go about designing a new class feature. This is HOW to combine them in a reasonable progression of power.
Also this section of the book was begging for skeleton classes of each BAB progression and a variety of "archetype by numbers" examples of how to put together custom classes. I understand they didn't want to make a point-buy system (most likely to avoid the back lash for proposed "values" and/or having to admit that the existing base classes aren't going to come out even,) but seriously this whole section is really a series of blog posts.
Point buy does not work except for very simple systems.
Also, the spell design section in Ultimate Magic, or the entirety of the GameMastery Guide could have been blog posts. What is your point?
My point is that it isn't helpful. My point is that the space is wasted in the book. My point is that the writing wasn't particularly good.
A couple of questions regarding the Eldritch Scion archetype:
1) Do you have to spend a point from the Eldritch Pool to enter a mystic state, and then another point per use of bloodrage ability? Or do you spend a point, enter the mystic state, and for the duration of the state have free access to bloodrage abilities?
2) How does "Abyssal Bloodrage" (Abyssal bloodline, level 12 ability) work, since you don't gain the benefits of bloodrage? Does it not function at all because you're not bloodraging, or do you gain only the modifying benefits of the ability (+2 Str, -4 AC)?
Just purchased / read through this book today and I have to say the new options do look great! My personal favorites are the Bloodrager (that Destined bloodline gets better the more I look at it), Hunter, Investigator, Slayer, and Swashbuckler (the flying blade is awesome). Some of my favorite classes, like the magus, got really cool new archetypes and features, and the new Style and Unarmed Strike feats are making the monk look waaaay more appealing than before.
As for the Class Building chapter, while I agree that there's not much info I think it's still good. I've tried "point-based class design" before and it tends to produce characters that are overpowered when compared to existing classes. My recent attempts to build a Trickster base class are proof enough for me.
Just purchased / read through this book today and I have to say the new options do look great! My personal favorites are the Bloodrager (that Destined bloodline gets better the more I look at it), Hunter, Investigator, Slayer, and Swashbuckler (the flying blade is awesome). Some of my favorite classes, like the magus, got really cool new archetypes and features, and the new Style and Unarmed Strike feats are making the monk look waaaay more appealing than before.
As for the Class Building chapter, while I agree that there's not much info I think it's still good. I've tried "point-based class design" before and it tends to produce characters that are overpowered when compared to existing classes. My recent attempts to build a Trickster base class are proof enough for me.
I'm not saying that there should have been a point-buy system. Indeed, I understand why one was not included. I would have like to see some crunchy stuff though. And I really think the section leaves a hole where some kind of basic custom class guidelines should have gone.
Rules about making rules suffer from the inner platform effect, at a minimum. I'd much rather get an essay of advice from an expert than an inaccurate set of mechanics. What were you expecting to see in those pages?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it's been mentioned that arcanists can't qualify for arcane discoveries, so we're not quite in wizard replacement territory yet. As for sorcerers, actually look at what the eldritch scrapper does and what it's capable of doing before throwing in the towel.
My point is that it isn't helpful. My point is that the space is wasted in the book. My point is that the writing wasn't particularly good.
I agree that it was really sparse, but I think that pretty much the entire *rest* of the book (with the exception of the Magic, Magic Items, and possibly Feats) serves as a really excellent practical example of how to take the information in this chapter and put it into use.
My point is that it isn't helpful. My point is that the space is wasted in the book. My point is that the writing wasn't particularly good.I agree that it was really sparse, but I think that pretty much the entire *rest* of the book (with the exception of the Magic, Magic Items, and possibly Feats) serves as a really excellent practical example of how to take the information in this chapter and put it into use.
I hope so, I haven't made it through the rest of the book yet.
Rules about making rules suffer from the inner platform effect, at a minimum. I'd much rather get an essay of advice from an expert than an inaccurate set of mechanics. What were you expecting to see in those pages?
I would have liked to see something akin to the basic classes in unearthed arcana with some sort of base system for how to arrange abilities. There was really good info in the chapter of UA. Something I remember now even off the top of my head is that in order to give a class evasion they should have a +3 reflex at the point they get it. That's an example of the kind of info I would have liked.
I think it would have been nice to discuss general comparisons. IE, if you were going to take the bard and give him 4 spell level progression instead of 6, what would that look like? What would he get in exchange? What would it look like if you gave the sorcerer 3/4 BAB, what would he give up in exchange.
If you wanted to take an archetype for one class and make it available to another class how would you go about it? If you wanted to combine two base classes how would you go about it (ie, the design process/theory behind much of this book.)
Basically, how to make my own classes. That's what I wanted. Instead they gave me design goals. I wanted that section of the book to explain the "how" not just tell me the "what."
A couple of questions regarding the Eldritch Scion archetype:
1) Do you have to spend a point from the Eldritch Pool to enter a mystic state, and then another point per use of bloodrage ability? Or do you spend a point, enter the mystic state, and for the duration of the state have free access to bloodrage abilities?
2) How does "Abyssal Bloodrage" (Abyssal bloodline, level 12 ability) work, since you don't gain the benefits of bloodrage? Does it not function at all because you're not bloodraging, or do you gain only the modifying benefits of the ability (+2 Str, -4 AC)?
1 - Correct, one to enter mystical focus and one to activate an ability. I'm an idiot, it's one point to enter a two-round focus and activate an ability.
2 - You'd only gain the minimum bonus/AC penalty since the mystical focus is considered being in bloodrage without actually bloodraging.
A couple of questions regarding the Eldritch Scion archetype:
1) Do you have to spend a point from the Eldritch Pool to enter a mystic state, and then another point per use of bloodrage ability? Or do you spend a point, enter the mystic state, and for the duration of the state have free access to bloodrage abilities?
2) How does "Abyssal Bloodrage" (Abyssal bloodline, level 12 ability) work, since you don't gain the benefits of bloodrage? Does it not function at all because you're not bloodraging, or do you gain only the modifying benefits of the ability (+2 Str, -4 AC)?
1 - Correct, one to enter mystical focus and one to activate an ability.
2 - You'd only gain the minimum bonus/AC penalty since the mystical focus is considered being in bloodrage without actually bloodraging.
Hrm, if that's the case, that seems awfully expensive, point-wise. I'm not sure it's worth it. I interpreted the text as restating the mechanic; that is, I took "see below" to mean a more in-depth explanation rather than a listing of related rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot a cool stuff, but some major weirdness. It feels like the people who wrote the classes, the people who wrote feats, and the people who wrote archetypes had minimal communications. Also feels like the people who wrote feats and archetypes weren't around in the respective feedback threads for the playtest. Too many oddities and unwritten things in this book makes me feel a little disappointed as I read. I'm used to missing and the occasional oddity within Paizo books, but this book has too many.
Maybe SKR was right about the production schedule being too crunched and how trying to get this out by Gen-con constrained them a lot. I would have preferred this stayed another month in development and editing.
You have no idea how many moving parts there are to a book like this. With so many new classes and things that rely on them, simple changes to a class feature can ripple throughout the book. I'm not saying its perfect (it isn't), but I don't think it is in any way more or less flawed than previous years' Gen Con releases, including the Core Rulebook. I dare you to do better.
I also doubt that another month would have brought it to your level of satisfaction. Please, do not misconstrue that as saying you're impossible to please. What I mean is that everyone has a pet issue with a book like this where they disagree with decisions that were made. Something left out they wanted, something included they didn't, or just something they wanted not done to their own personal taste. It's easy to say that if the book had more time, or more developers, or a different developer, that it would match the mental ideal the person built during the run up to release. It's sort of a way of saying "I'm right, and if Paizo had just tried harder, they would have realized that." Even though that if the book was different it would be some other person making a slightly different complaint about the thing that was different.
I don't see how any of that matters when the result is a sub par book by Paizo's own standards. Any person can put out an incomplete product and try to sell it as the best thing since sliced bread, but Paizo isn't any person. They are Paizo Publishing and the current leader in the market for TRPGs and every major hardcover they release should at least be internally consistent and not feel like 4-5 books smooshed together with gum and duct tape.
I couldn't do better, but then again I am not the leading RPG book publisher am I?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Basically, how to make my own classes. That's what I wanted. Instead they gave me design goals. I wanted that section of the book to explain the "how" not just tell me the "what."
I agree that making a 'case study' out of some of the other classes/archetypes in the book could have been educational without ending up introducing an 11th class as the example in that chapter.
Hrm, if that's the case, that seems awfully expensive, point-wise. I'm not sure it's worth it. I interpreted the text as restating the mechanic; that is, I took "see below" to mean a more in-depth explanation rather than a listing of related rules.A couple of questions regarding the Eldritch Scion archetype:
1) Do you have to spend a point from the Eldritch Pool to enter a mystic state, and then another point per use of bloodrage ability? Or do you spend a point, enter the mystic state, and for the duration of the state have free access to bloodrage abilities?
2) How does "Abyssal Bloodrage" (Abyssal bloodline, level 12 ability) work, since you don't gain the benefits of bloodrage? Does it not function at all because you're not bloodraging, or do you gain only the modifying benefits of the ability (+2 Str, -4 AC)?
1 - Correct, one to enter mystical focus and one to activate an ability.
2 - You'd only gain the minimum bonus/AC penalty since the mystical focus is considered being in bloodrage without actually bloodraging.
Hang on, I was recalling from memory.
Actually, you're right, there's no mention of points per ability. I'll correct my last post.
Rules about making rules suffer from the inner platform effect, at a minimum. I'd much rather get an essay of advice from an expert than an inaccurate set of mechanics. What were you expecting to see in those pages?I would have liked to see something akin to the basic classes in unearthed arcana with some sort of base system for how to arrange abilities. There was really good info in the chapter of UA. Something I remember now even off the top of my head is that in order to give a class evasion they should have a +3 reflex at the point they get it. That's an example of the kind of info I would have liked.
I think it would have been nice to discuss general comparisons. IE, if you were going to take the bard and give him 4 spell level progression instead of 6, what would that look like? What would he get in exchange? What would it look like if you gave the sorcerer 3/4 BAB, what would he give up in exchange.
If you wanted to take an archetype for one class and make it available to another class how would you go about it? If you wanted to combine two base classes how would you go about it (ie, the design process/theory behind much of this book.)
Basically, how to make my own classes. That's what I wanted. Instead they gave me design goals. I wanted that section of the book to explain the "how" not just tell me the "what."
I think the way they explained everything in the chapter is how they went about it. When combining classes to form a hybrid, you take the flavor of the two and mix it up a bit, then use what you came up with as the basis for designing your class. I see what you mean about the "crunch" stuff, though.
Ahhhhh, I was waiting for this comment from you. But I got the wording wrong, so I guess I do in fact owe up on that bet :(Effectively, yes. They will negate the dodge bonus received from Dodge and the AC bonus from Mobility.Anticipate Dodge and Counter reflexes?
Please don't tell me those feats negate dodge and mobility.
Those are probably the saddest feats I ever heard of....
Seriously? This in the same book as Divine Grace for Oracles and Cha Clerics?
I probably almost said what you wanted, but edited my post just in case of a great thread purging. If you don't mind my asking can you either post or PM the contents of the bet?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see how any of that matters when the result is a sub par book by Paizo's own standards. Any person can put out an incomplete product and try to sell it as the best thing since sliced bread, but Paizo isn't any person. They are Paizo Publishing and the current leader in the market for TRPGs and every major hardcover they release should at least be internally consistent and not feel like 4-5 books smooshed together with gum and duct tape.
I couldn't do better, but then again I am not the leading RPG book publisher am I?
My assertion is that it isn't a 'sub par book'. Every hardcover, back to the Core Rulebook has editing mistakes, development missteps, outright errors, and seams where the writing of multiple authors came together.
It's amazing that it comes out as well as it does, and that is why Paizo is the market leader.