Who else want them to be an official rule, considering the price of firearms and the feat chain required to use them?
Not really interested. I don't like having a class of weapons that functions so much differently than standard weapons, and under the new rules they already get the touch attack at short range exception. I'm fine with the exploding dice going away.
I'd rather see an increase in damage dice over levels of the sub-class than exploding dice. That way there would be no contest of which class was "the best/ most effective" with the gun.
I do not like exploding dice. Think it was a bad concept in early edition, and hopefully i will never see it again.
Who else want them to be an official rule, considering the price of firearms and the feat chain required to use them?
i wouldnt mind that seeing as how i love the rule and i use it in my games, but if you make it an official rule (which i wouldnt mind) a lot of people are going to complain. but if i played a character that used guns, i would want to use that rule. not due to that its broken, i like it cause it does make sense, but more than that, i like it because it adds more of an aspect to the game, giving it more flavor and opportunities. 3.5 was such a linear game, and i like to see new and alternate rules in PF that get away from the normal rules, all the while staying balanced and remaining fun to play.
I do not like exploding dice. Think it was a bad concept in early edition, and hopefully i will never see it again.
all i can say is if you dont like it, dont use it. just because a lot of people may not like it doesnt mean it shouldnt exsist at all as an alternative rule.
Barring "don't like it, don't use it" arguments, I'm not a fan of exploding dice. HOWEVER, I think it makes a LOT of sense for firearms. True, a pistol shot could do a simple d8, but a really well-placed shot (or lucky shot) could easily do much more harm.
|
Barring "don't like it, don't use it" arguments, I'm not a fan of exploding dice. HOWEVER, I think it makes a LOT of sense for firearms. True, a pistol shot could do a simple d8, but a really well-placed shot (or lucky shot) could easily do much more harm.
And those are called Critical Hits... Exploding dice, no thanks.
--Vrock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels!
Barring "don't like it, don't use it" arguments, I'm not a fan of exploding dice. HOWEVER, I think it makes a LOT of sense for firearms. True, a pistol shot could do a simple d8, but a really well-placed shot (or lucky shot) could easily do much more harm.
Which is why I think the x4 critical is a much better way to go than the old exploding dice system. It falls in line much better with the existing weapons and sets firearms apart from both crossbows and bows.
All of which really doesn't matter too much -- the firearms are pointedly not a part of the playtest -- they are simply provided to allow accurate playtesting with the weapons that will be present in the final product.
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?
I'm not dead set against it -- but new, innovative and interesting it is not.
I've seen this mechanic in several systems now dating all the way back to the start of many:
Cyberpunk had it.
World of Darkness had it.
Earlier editions of D&D had it for firearms.
Shadowrun used it.
It's done -- it's been around -- it adds very little.
It is pretty and it can be fun... but I'm not married to it and don't need it. I don't hate it either though.
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?
I've not been a fan since it first appeared in 2nd edition. It just felt too much like guns were their own subsystem that didn't work like anything else. Plus, in the 3rd + era critical multipliers cover the same ground, and do so in the same way other weapons do.
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?I'm not dead set against it -- but new, innovative and interesting it is not.
I've seen this mechanic in several systems now dating all the way back to the start of many:
Cyberpunk had it.
World of Darkness had it.
Earlier editions of D&D had it for firearms.
Shadowrun used it.It's done -- it's been around -- it adds very little.
It is pretty and it can be fun... but I'm not married to it and don't need it. I don't hate it either though.
well then we will have to agree to disagree. i never played anything earlier than 3rd edition, so ive never seen it in this game system. ive seen it in World of Darkness, but then again, you reroll 10's anyways. ive also seen it in Savage Worlds, but every weapon does that. I like the alternatre rule and i will use it, but i do think it should remain an alternate rule.
Ya the x4 crit i do not mind.
I just do not like the idea that a gun that just pokes a hole throw you can way out damage a longsword; which can loop of limbs and run you throw with a bigger hole throw you.
The crit on all weapon, make since. For guns to work that much differently than other weapon would not.
.............
Anyway the guns they said were not part of the playtest... i am just saying i like the way they work in Pathfinder.
I like the alternatre rule and i will use it, but i do think it should remain an alternate rule.
Hey that's what matters -- you know another name for an alternate rule? A house rule. I'll be the first to tell you there is nothing wrong with a good house rule.
Saw 2nd ed Pistol 1d4 explode on a 4. After one player rolled 4 seven times in a row, alway thought exploding dice a bad idea, when the explode was attached to damage vs attack roll.
I like the alternatre rule and i will use it, but i do think it should remain an alternate rule.Hey that's what matters -- you know another name for an alternate rule? A house rule. I'll be the first to tell you there is nothing wrong with a good house rule.
i agree 100% with this, but as i have said, i have not thought about house ruling that because every system i have played in it was for all weapons. this is why i like it as an alternate rule, for people like me who dont think of things like this. i let Paizo do my thinking for me.
Saw 2nd ed Pistol 1d4 explode on a 4. After one player rolled 4 seven times in a row, alway thought exploding dice a bad idea, when the explode was attached to damage vs attack roll.
d4s are always broken with exploding dice. it was that way in Savage Worlds, you were better off taking d4s for everything, but just because youre better off at that doesnt mean it fits the character concept.
|
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?I'm not dead set against it -- but new, innovative and interesting it is not.
I've seen this mechanic in several systems now dating all the way back to the start of many:
Cyberpunk had it.
World of Darkness had it.
Earlier editions of D&D had it for firearms.
Shadowrun used it.It's done -- it's been around -- it adds very little.
It is pretty and it can be fun... but I'm not married to it and don't need it. I don't hate it either though.
I'm against it for simplicity reasons, though I do fully admit the time my friend one-shot'ed a rat-ogre in WHFRP 2e with ulric's fury was pretty amazing.
|
|
I think it makes a LOT of sense for firearms. True, a pistol shot could do a simple d8, but a really well-placed shot (or lucky shot) could easily do much more harm.
Ditto a well-placed (or lucky) shot with a crossbow bolt, a broadsword or a morningstar. A dagger or sling bullet can murder a strong, healthy man with a good hit. *If* exploding dice are a good way to represent that, then they should apply to all weapons, not just firearms. Since critical hits are instead used to emulate that sort of thing for daggers/greatswords/nunchaku, then critical hits should be the same mechanic used for firearms.
Head cut off by a greataxe isn't terribly different than face caved in by a bullet, after all. Dead is dead. No different metric need apply.
d4s are always broken with exploding dice. it was that way in Savage Worlds, you were better off taking d4s for everything, but just because youre better off at that doesnt mean it fits the character concept.
No, they aren't. The average damage of E1d4 is lower than E1d6. Ed1d4 is around 2.9 average, E1d6 have about 3.75 average damage.
What's the math to calculate that exactly stringburka? I thought it was the average of 1d4 (2.5) + 25% of 1d4 (2.5x.25) which comes out to 3.125 (which is slightly lower than the total because the second d4 can explode as well, but I don't think it's worth calculating lol)d4s are always broken with exploding dice. it was that way in Savage Worlds, you were better off taking d4s for everything, but just because youre better off at that doesnt mean it fits the character concept.No, they aren't. The average damage of E1d4 is lower than E1d6. Ed1d4 is around 2.9 average, E1d6 have about 3.75 average damage.
I can't calculate it exactly, this is what I did:
For one explosion I thought it should be: (1+2+3+2d4)/4That's 2.75. To somewhat accommodate further explosions, I set the average damage of the extra d4s to the average damage of a one-explosion d4 (so, 2.75). That should make the damage about equal to the average result of a E1d4 that explodes no more than two times. So (1+2+3+5.5)/4 = 2.875. Rounded up since the damage is slightly higher for more explosions.
I'm not that good with math though, so I could be wrong. Nevertheless, average of E1d6 should always be higher than E1d4.
I thought this thread was going to be about adding a Gambler archetype/class to Pathfinder... :(
Here is a good essay on the math behind exploding dice.
If you don't want to go through the proof, and want just the formula, then here it is:
The amount of damage you do more from exploding dice is a factor of N/N-1, where N is the number of sides of the die.
So an exploding d4 does 4/3, or 1.33~ higher damage than a normal d4. So 3.33~ damage.
Here's a list of damage as it increases (dN for normal, eN for exploding):
d4: 2.5
e4: 3.3
d6: 3.5
e6: 4.2
d8: 4.5
e8: 5.1
d10: 5.5
e10: 6.1
d12: 6.5
e12: 7.1
So the exploding dice damage is always just a little lower than the next die up, but with the potential for no capped damage. I'd place it at about the same as the next die damage up because of that no cap.
So an exploding d4 would probably be as "useful"/"desired"/etc as a regular d6, for weapon balancing purposes.
The potential for uncapped damage is something I'm not sure I'm prepared to deal with in a regular D&D game (possibly a grittier game, where all dice damage for all weapons would be exploding).
It does bring the idea of "a single dagger stab can kill anyone" to the table...
I'm not sure what the formula would be for that one... I guess it depends on if you reroll each die independantly, or if you only get to roll again when you roll max damage for the dice.
I wonder how the Vital Strike feats would work with exploding dice... explode each individual die?
I'm shocked that nobody has yet made a pun about the literal meaning of "exploding dice".
I tried to find a picture of C4 shaped like dice... but failed my googlefu, so I let the moment pass.
Who else want them to be an official rule, considering the price of firearms and the feat chain required to use them?
I'd rather see the prices lowered dramatically and the feat chain reduced or eliminated entirely.
d4s are always broken with exploding dice. it was that way in Savage Worlds, you were better off taking d4s for everything, but just because youre better off at that doesnt mean it fits the character concept.No, they aren't. The average damage of E1d4 is lower than E1d6. Ed1d4 is around 2.9 average, E1d6 have about 3.75 average damage.
you got me all wrong there. im not saying d4s are broken due to their average damage (which i think is a dumb way to look at a weapon.) choose a weapon for the style.
the reason the d4 is broken in exploding dice is simply because you have a 25% chance to explode.
The fact that the only benefit of exploding dice is more damage, directly ties it to the average damage you do with that die.
If exploding dice had some other effect (granted 1 Grit, gave a chance to daze the target, etc, etc) then I could see a reason for trepidation as the d4 would grant a better chance at getting one of these effects, when it should be a weaker thing overall.
I will give you that the d4 does benefit from the exploding dice slightly more than the rest. 0.2 average damage higher than the worst ones.
This is what your concerns amount to. And you didn't seem to have a problem with the d4s average damage (granting a 0.2 average damage higher than most of the others).
What does "exploding dice" mean? I am unfamiliar with the term. Thanks.
Exploding dice was an alternate rule that I first found in the original PF campaign setting book which states that if you roll the highest amount on a die for damage, you may reroll that die and add that damage to your total. And it can do this multiple times.
I guess I am the only one that likes this rule.
I guess I am the only one that likes this rule.
I don't hate it, but strictly in an optional variant capacity.
Fnipernackle wrote:
the reason the d4 is broken in exploding dice is simply because you have a 25% chance to explode.So, an 'exploding' d4 simulates the effect of eating Taco Bell?
lol
Exploding dice are not currently part of this class and are not a mechanic we are currently exploring.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I don't want to drag this thread any further off topic but the Kingmaker AP includes the "exploding dice" mechanic for kingdom events:
...
New Vassals: A small group of indigenous creatures joins your kingdom and submits to your rule. Reduce Unrest by 2 and gain 1d6 BP (each time you roll a 6, reroll that die and add the result to the total).Visiting Celebrity: A celebrity from elsewhere on Golarion visits your kingdom, causing a sudden influx of visitors and spending. Increase the Treasury by 2d6 BP (each time you roll a 6, reroll that die and add its results to the total).
Do you intend to remove the mechanic if and when the kingdom building rules get a more thorough treatment in a future setting-neutral format?
It's fairly inconsequential here, but I was just curious if your statement meant that you are intentionally avoiding the mechanic and that perhaps this one slipped through the cracks.
is there no one else that thinks that the exploding dice rule is innovative and interesting, or is everybody dead set against it?
It's hardly innovative. It's been around forever.
I'm not against it per se, but I'm against it as a special rule for some weapons. I think introducing exploding dice rules should be systemic thing, not a special rule for just one class or one kind of weapon.
I also think that it works best in systems where you only have one die type, like WoD or L5R
I thought this thread was going to be about adding a Gambler archetype/class to Pathfinder... :(
So I was not the only one who thought about Magneto getting a new female mutant called Alea using die bombs (not to be confused with dye bombs) to foil Gambit?