Just starting a thread for people to offer their likes and concerns regarding Pathfinder.
LIKES:
- Not surprisingly, I loved the Rogue love you guys gave. Liked talents, would like to see more.
- Love domain and school powers . . .way to counter the thought that these guys have nothing to do when they run out of spells. One minor issue is the idea that every Evoker (for example) has fire ray to start with . . .perhaps offer element of your choice.
CONCERNS:
- Nothing yet. I am interested and optimistic to see how monsters come into play and a further refining of the XP/Encounter system . . .even if it means a whole new MM or some such business.
- When will the modules and Pathfinder switch over?
Congrats on your decision and best of luck guys! I am truly impressed with the work that went into that PDF.
|
Upon first glance, I noticed that alot of existing skills have been absorbed into one (ie: Listen, Search, Spot), now with fewer skills to choose from I would expect that you will see some very similar-looking chracters( in regards to skill choices) Maybe I'm nit-picking :P
But one thing you absolutely MUST do..... PATHFINDER CHARACTER SHEET!!!!!!!! (pretty plz)
Also, is Pathfinder RPG OGL . . .as in 3rd party people can make products for it?
Is it possible to get rid of multiple attacks per round based off a BAB, or go to one BAB with beginning modifier per Class to keep the separation between attack bonuses at high level to a minimum? Or would that kind of change be too much? I'm unsure what would take the game too far away from 3.5 but want to add my input on what I would like fixed because I would really like to play it. :)
Pretty much all OGL. See title page.
Pretty much all OGL. See title page.
Thank you sir.
|
HUZ-frikkin-ZA! I was HOPING you guys would go this route. You had me seriously worried for a while there, though, both in general and specifically today.
Okay. I've had mere minutes with this and I'm jumping all over the place, so bear with me.
Likes: Slow, medium, and fast advancement. Wizards with d6 hit dice. Rogues with d8 hit dice. Clerics being proficient with their deity's favored weapon. Skill Consolidation. Survival being on the fighter skill list. Wizard School abilities. Fighter bonus abilities. Rogue bonus abilities. Races having multiple bonuses and only one penalty to their abilities. Half-Elves not sucking. Favored classes being associated with bonuses, not penalties. Options! From starting hit points to human racial ability bonuses to advancement tables, this is a very tweakable game. In short, almost every change you made, I consider to be for the better.
Concerns: I like the new way you guys are doing domains, I really do, but this obsoletes several hundred domains I have in other books, not all of them from WotC. The WotC-only ones are a regrettable loss, but the Green Ronin, Privateer Press, FFG, and Malhavoc ones-any hope for those?
Outright Dislikes: Why isn't athletics on the fighter skill list If you're trying to set it up so it represents a wide spectrum of fighting styles? Some sort of movement skill is associated with every real-world fighting style in existence except marksmanship.
Hopes: That you get Green Ronin, Malhavoc, and Privateer PRess on board with this. I'd love to see this become the new standard.
A few comments from what I've observed at a glance, but haven't acutally playtested yet.
Fighter: I like the idea of the armour specialization, but I think I feel it leaves out the swashbuckling character who doesn't wear armour. I would make it available as a defensive bonus for a character that doesn't want armour, and I'd also consider making some feats to help such a character as well. What about a defensive parry type bonus that helps improve a fighter's defensive abilities, but doesn't focus on armour, and more assumes that the fighter has improved at dodging and parrying blows.
In my game I had also made some house rules for a parry that were as follows. A character using his full attack action may chose to delay one or more of his attacks to be used later in the round as an immediate action for parrying. When the opponents attack roll hits, the PC and opponent make opposing attack rolls and if the defender wins he parries and attack does no damage. I think this rule needs some work, but I'd like to see some options for parrying worked into the game that go beyond the defensive fighting rules.
Rogue: I like a lot of the changes to rogue. If feels like a better class now. I think the "bleeding wound" ability is too powerful for a regular talent and should be an advanced talent. I also think that "stand up" is a lame name, and should be maybe "kip up", which I think is the martial arts term for that move. The death attack the rogue gets at 20th level seems a bit useless. Anything a 20th level PC will be fighting will likely be able to make a DC 20-30 Fort save on anything but a natural 1, so this ability will be frustrating, as it will rarely work. If it was something more along the lines of- 3 times per day when a rogue makes a sneak attack the rogue can add an additional 50 damage to his attack (in addition to the 10d6) then it would be useful.
Us dms will also have to do some work on the monsters to help them keep up with these new powered up PCs.
I'm sure I'll have more comments as I explore the "new game".
On a fairly quick read through
- Like
The more standardized HD for classes.
The inclusion of more class skill choices on the fighter.
The general improvements to the fighter and half-orc.
- Concerns
Some of the skill merges, such as Perception and Acrobatics.
Skill selection. This is a point about 4e I disliked greatly and don't think it serves the game, at least on the player side. It was the more detailed skill system that encouraged me and my group to switch to 3rd edition from 2nd. Unfortunately 3e suffers a flat skill cost which wasn't present in, what I consider the parent, Alternity skill system. Alternity used different costs of different skills based on utility and relevance. I recognize the difficultly a varied cost skill system poses for quickly creating and altering monster, however a maximum rank system (UA) hurts the use of background skills such as Craft or Profession (much like Forgery and Decipher Script). Skills need work, to be both player and monster friendly, but simply going to max rank selection isn't the answer.
Director of Game Design
|
Concerns: I like the new way you guys are doing domains, I really do, but this obsoletes several hundred domains I have in other books, not all of them from WotC. The WotC-only ones are a regrettable loss, but the Green Ronin, Privateer Press, FFG, and Malhavoc ones-any hopr for those?Outright Dislikes: Why isn't athletics on the fighter skill list If you're trying to set it up so it represents a wide spectrum of fighting styles? Some sort of movement skill is associated with every real-world fighting style in existence except marksmanship.
As for the domains, I hope to post up my design philosophy behind them here in a few days. With those it hand, you will see how easy it was for me to convert the existing domains.
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Concerns: I like the new way you guys are doing domains, I really do, but this obsoletes several hundred domains I have in other books, not all of them from WotC. The WotC-only ones are a regrettable loss, but the Green Ronin, Privateer Press, FFG, and Malhavoc ones-any hopr for those?Outright Dislikes: Why isn't athletics on the fighter skill list If you're trying to set it up so it represents a wide spectrum of fighting styles? Some sort of movement skill is associated with every real-world fighting style in existence except marksmanship.
As for the domains, I hope to post up my design philosophy behind them here in a few days. With those it hand, you will see how easy it was for me to convert the existing domains.
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
I love the swashbuckling fighter, but it is hard to pull of in 3.5 . . . because Swashbuckler the class is not that great, and fighters as designed need armor.
I don't think Acrobatics as an add-on to the normal fighter works, but there must be a way to capture the essence of this type of fighter.
|
|
Concerns: I like the new way you guys are doing domains, I really do, but this obsoletes several hundred domains I have in other books, not all of them from WotC. The WotC-only ones are a regrettable loss, but the Green Ronin, Privateer Press, FFG, and Malhavoc ones-any hopr for those?Outright Dislikes: Why isn't athletics on the fighter skill list If you're trying to set it up so it represents a wide spectrum of fighting styles? Some sort of movement skill is associated with every real-world fighting style in existence except marksmanship.
As for the domains, I hope to post up my design philosophy behind them here in a few days. With those it hand, you will see how easy it was for me to convert the existing domains.
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
I was indeed talking about acrobatics. My thoughts on the matter of fighter is that it should be able to cover just about any sort of professional warrior. The guys using a bastard sword (switching grips on the fly), no shield, and a chain shirt will be more likely to use the acrobatics skill, whereas the guys who use a battleaxe, tower shield, and fullplate won't touch it with a standard-issue 10-foot pole. I'd think you'd want the fighter class to represent both of these schools of combat, wouldn't you? Now I suppose you could just play a human or half-elf and take acrobatics as your bonus skill, but what about elves? I'd expect them to have a more agile combat style for their fighters.
My thoughts on the matter of fighter is that it should be able to cover just about any sort of professional warrior. The guys using a bastard sword (switching grips on the fly), no shield, and a chain shirt will be more likely to use the acrobatics skill, whereas the guys who use a battleaxe, tower shield, and fullplate won't touch it with a standard-issue 10-foot pole.
Seconded!
Having read through the PDF, I've come across a few concerns (and many more things that made me go, "Awesome!").
The thing that jumps into my mind right away is the fact that certain skills remain just as easy and negligible as they were in 3.5. Namely, although the DC is apparently unmentioned in the Alpha 1 release, Concentration checks to avoid attacks of opportunity (a flat DC 15) are much too trivial to trouble anyone above level 5, as are the DCs to avoid attacks of opportunity through the use of the Tumble skill. As evidence, I posit the fact that a level 1 character - say an elf who placed a 16 in Dex for a total of 18 (+4) and maxed out his Tumble skill - would already be able to avoid attacks of opportunity more than 50% of the time. At 2nd level, if he has 5 ranks in Jump, then the chance of failure is reduced even more (a total possible skill bonus of 11 to 14, depending on if he took Skill Focus (Tumble)), to a chance that he would only fail the Tumble check if he rolled a 1.
It is my opinion that Concentration checks and Tumble checks to avoid attack of opportunity should not be static DCs, but rather take into account the skill of the opponent(s) who threaten the PC. Perhaps make the DC for avoiding attacks of opportunity 10 + the threatening creature's CMB or something along those lines. This would mean that it's relatively easy to avoid attacks from kobolds but much harder to stay safe around a dragon.
I also think fighter should get acrobatics, and I think there should be a feat that for the swashbuckling type fighter that would looks something like this:
Acrobatic Fighter: You are particularly good at dodging out of the way of your foe's attacks. At any point in combat, as a swift action, when wearing light armour or no armour you may roll a DC 10 acrobatics check. If you make the check you gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC for the remainder of the combat. For every 5 points by which you beat the DC, you gain an additional +1 bonus.
This would allow a fighter to use light or no armour and still have a decent AC if he sunk some ranks into his Acrobatics skill.
Concerns: I like the new way you guys are doing domains, I really do, but this obsoletes several hundred domains I have in other books, not all of them from WotC. The WotC-only ones are a regrettable loss, but the Green Ronin, Privateer Press, FFG, and Malhavoc ones-any hopr for those?Outright Dislikes: Why isn't athletics on the fighter skill list If you're trying to set it up so it represents a wide spectrum of fighting styles? Some sort of movement skill is associated with every real-world fighting style in existence except marksmanship.
As for the domains, I hope to post up my design philosophy behind them here in a few days. With those it hand, you will see how easy it was for me to convert the existing domains.
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
If you do some research, knights of mecieval europe were trained to be nearly fully functionl in their armor. It did slow them down, but they practised mobility in it from very young ages; in my opinion, fighters should get acrobatics.
|
Athletics: Consolidate Jump, Climb, Swim into one skill. Make it a class skill for Fighters.
Acrobatics: Tumble, Balance, maybe Escape Artist (or even put EA under theft)
That might help.
Overall, I like it. My players are already clamoring about the racial changes.
The skills thing does bother me because of the lack of skill slots. Maybe upping by 2 for the lower skill classes or increasing by 2 across the board.
Knowledge, Craft, Profession skills will suffer the most, I think. I have had players be Knowledge skill accumulators (Educated Feat from FR), and Craft mongers. This might hurt that type of build esp since these tend to be clerics or wizard types.
At first blush I like most of what I see. I've skimmed it, not given it an intensive read.
My hopes for the next iteration:
1. What will be done to aleviate the 15-minute-adventuring day?
2. Is there a hope we'll see some of the OGL stuff from Unearthed Arcana on the magic side; there's a lot of cool stuff in there, particularly the Spell Templates idea. They've already been presented for 3.0 in Dragon, so here's hoping we can have something like them.
|
|
I really like the new spellcasting classes. Making the 0 level spells at will is just right and the domains and schools is also perfect (as far as I can tell).
That's how 0 level spells should have always worked. Then a Wizard could fall back on Ray of Frost or Electric Jolt instead of crossbows. Certainly a house rule we've been using around here for years. :P
I love how they changed up schools. No more preventing you from using schools when specializing, just no bonuses.
Domain spells and Wizard schools based of your caster level instead of spell level, so awesome.
I just wonder how Paizo plans on dealing with the multiclassing spellcaster.
|
|
1. What will be done to aleviate the 15-minute-adventuring day?
Your 15 minute adventuring day was a result of the spellcasters needing to refresh their spells. With so many useful spells on a per day listing in schools and domains, and free cantraps, I would be surprised if it becomes a 30 minute to hour day now.
2. Is there a hope we'll see some of the OGL stuff from Unearthed Arcana on the magic side; there's a lot of cool stuff in there, particularly the Spell Templates idea. They've already been presented for 3.0 in Dragon, so here's hoping we can have something like them.
Never liked it.
|
The thing that jumps into my mind right away is the fact that certain skills remain just as easy and negligible as they were in 3.5. Namely, although the DC is apparently unmentioned in the Alpha 1 release, Concentration checks to avoid attacks of opportunity (a flat DC 15) are much too trivial to trouble anyone above level 5, as are the DCs to avoid attacks of opportunity through the use of the Tumble skill. As evidence, I posit the fact that a level 1 character - say an elf who placed a 16 in Dex for a total of 18 (+4) and maxed out his Tumble skill - would already be able to avoid attacks of opportunity more than 50% of the time. At 2nd level, if he has 5 ranks in Jump, then the chance of failure is reduced even more (a total possible skill bonus of 11 to 14, depending on if he took Skill Focus (Tumble)), to a chance that he would only fail the Tumble check if he rolled a 1.
It is my opinion that Concentration checks and Tumble checks to avoid attack of opportunity should not be static DCs, but rather take into account the skill of the opponent(s) who threaten the PC. Perhaps make the DC for avoiding attacks of opportunity 10 + the threatening creature's CMB or something along those lines. This would mean that it's relatively easy to avoid attacks from kobolds but much harder to stay safe around a dragon.
Monte Cook's house rules (Book of Experimental Might) do just this. It's pretty rad. No longer shall the level 6 monk tumble right past the great wyrm's attacks.
Anyway, Paizo to change these skills to be opposed, please.
I'll throw my first thoughts in here, but as I'm only halfway through, I reserve the right to throw my second and third thoughts in too. ;)
Races: I generally like the standardization between them, though I wonder if it'll make adding new races difficult and/or formulaic. I'm also concerned about how much niggling little stuff they all get now. I'd rather see bigger bonuses spread out over more levels.
Classes: Looks good so far. Love the advancement choices. Would like to see fixed XP bonuses for monsters (see Unearthed Arcana)
Hit points: Can hardly complain; I made exactly the same changes. You could switch barbarian to d10+2/level for the sake of completeness, though. The Iron Heros method of hit points is also good; 1d4+2/4/6/8hp (depending on class). I think I like starting hit points as max + constitution score, but I've never playtested it.
Armor Mastery: For those wanting a swashbucker, allow this ability to give a +1 per iteration dodge bonus to AC when fighting unarmored. Does not affect reflex saves, skills, etc; is lost when other dodge bonuses are lost; functionally less effective than lessening an armor check penalty.
Familiars: Lose the bonuses by species; replace with psionics "soul gem" bonuses. Familiars reflect a facet of the spellcaster's personality and give a skill bonus as appropriate. This allows the easy addition of different familiars, gives an easy roleplaying hook for familiars, and lets players choose the species without worrying about the bonus.
Skills: Love fly as a skill. Makes total sense. Not bothered about Forgery as a part of Linguistics - will probably get more use there than as a Craft (Forgery) skill.
Feats: I hate individual +2/+2 feats. Replace with "Talented" (from True20 and other places); grants +2/+2 to two skills of your choice. I also like the idea of simplifying feat level requirements from individual levels to broader level groups (ie, 4e "tiers")
Turning: Love the healing effect.
The sections detailing how orisons work doesn't mesh with the listing of 3 or 4 per day for clerics.
Are they at-will (Sp) abilities or x/day (Sp) abilities?
Athletics: Consolidate Jump, Climb, Swim into one skill. Make it a class skill for Fighters.
Yes. Do this.
2. Is there a hope we'll see some of the OGL stuff from Unearthed Arcana on the magic side; there's a lot of cool stuff in there, particularly the Spell Templates idea. They've already been presented for 3.0 in Dragon, so here's hoping we can have something like them.
Arcana Unearthed, or Arcana Evolved, you mean. Different from Unearthed Arcana. Stupid, I know, but there it is.
I really liked spell templates. Not sure if they should be Paizo-core, but...I really liked them.
I also liked Monte's Book of Experimental Might poison rules. Fits right in with Paizo's progressive/retro-compatible development.
Also, I really, really, REALLY, urge you guys (Jason, Erik, Lisa, and everyone!) to look at the existing OGL material. If it's good, use it!
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Hmm, inital impressions.
Races. Yes, playing half elves and half orcs is worthwhile. Gnomes, I hope there's a fluff reason for their hatred of two such dispariate groups (goblins and lizards) Halflings, I don't like the
+2 to intelligence. I'd prefer Charisma to represent the sense of self and community mentioned in their racial block.
Also, I think the saving throw bonus should be a luck bonus, not a racial bonus.
Classes: Since the cleric can do the 'healing burst' I'm not sure they need spontanious conversion anymore, IMNSHO. I like the fighter feat/skill layout. Though I'd include the armor catagory of 'none' in the ones that the fighter can do mastery in. The rogue gets the biggest 'upgrade' in rogue tricks, sneak attack, and better hit dice. I'd like to see the trapfinding changed to a 'spider sense' and allow anyone to actively search for traps. I love the simple wizard change of unlimited cantrips. Now even my first level wizard can not worry about crossbows and just acid splash all day. Also the bonded item allowing an extra spell a day rocks, as does the simple "Can cast w/o it" rule.
Skills. Meh. I prefer my skill points. That said, I like the acrobatics roll up, the expanded appraise, expanded diplomacy rules, use of knowlege (gods, please revisit the other knowleges this way) Linguistics I'm torn on. I do think Forgeries should be under craft, with opposed craft vs perception rolls. Also, put open lock under disable device not thievery. I'd rather see Concentration taken out of spellcraft, and put back as its own skill, tossing in some of the effects from autohypnosis.
Feats look good. I'd include allowing the acrobtics to be a class skill. I don't know if I like the change to combat expertise and power attack, though we'll see if the fighter bonuses help make up for it. Also the style feats look good.
More on magic as I read it
The sections detailing how orisons work doesn't mesh with the listing of 3 or 4 per day for clerics.
Are they at-will (Sp) abilities or x/day (Sp) abilities?
I think you can choose 3 or 4 per day. Those 3 or 4 are useable at will. So on Monday, you have Stabilize, Virtue, and Really Clean Robes; at will. Tuesday is Resistance, Purify Water, and Smite He Who Sleeps During A Sermon; at will.
Some people may hate this, but here goes . . .
I wouldn't mind seeing some Second Wind rules.
Maybe once per day or = to con mod/day. Maybe roll a dice to get back some HP, or perhaps half or something.
I just really like the idea of a hero being able to suck in all the pain, grit his teeth, and go at it again.
For this same reason, I wouldn't mind seeing a Paizo take on action points
At first I really liked the changes I saw. I thought the changes to the races, classes and skills were great. I was ecstatic when I saw the changes to the fighter and rogue, the two classes most people thought were underpowered compared to the spellcasting classes. But then I got to the feat chapter.
I think the combat feats are a horrible. They spread the functionality of some of the "old feats" out across multiple feats, basically nerfing the fact that everyone gets 3 extra feats over the course of their careers. On top of that, you can only use ONE combat feat per round. You can't rapid shot and precise shot at the same time? You can't use dodge and mobility and spring attack at the same time? I understand that they've changed the functionality of some of these, but, unfortunately they've made them more complex to use and harder to keep track of.
Actually, they've gone for the 4E "per encounter" model in a surreptitious fashion. By having to use power, I mean feat, A in the first round, feat 2 in the second, and feat 3 in the third round, they are effectively relegating certain powers to be used once or twice a combat.
Would the Pathfinder RPG break if we used the feats that we're used to using?
|
|
i'm interested in the new turning rules. Those who are wondering about the 15 minute day should look at the combat section and Turning:Healing. Basically, turning creates positive energy, which heals the living as well as hurts undead.
My chief concern is to see how this works when the party runs up against a cleric with negative energy.
|
|
Just starting a thread for people to offer their likes and concerns regarding Pathfinder.
LIKES:
Pretty much everything so far. Love the updated feat list (and progression), the updates to skill list and how they work, and increased class options. I especially love the combat maneuver setup; I think we'll see a lot more grappling, tripping, disarming, and possibly sundering once my campaign shifts to Golarion. I can't wait to play a spellcaster with class powers and an arcane bonded item :D
CONCERNS:
I wonder how many balance issues there would be for class powers in substituting a different spell of the same level and school for any of these class power options? I love the idea but wonder whether these couldn't be more customizable.
Also, although these updated rules are essentially 3.5 compatible, how well will non-core classes keep up when playing in Pathfinder? I have at least one player who always likes to play something exotic (currently a raptoran warlock) and wouldn't want him to be outmatched if he didn't feel like using one of the updated core races or classes.
ps, awesome job - this decision is the best of all possible worlds!
i'm interested in the new turning rules. Those who are wondering about the 15 minute day should look at the combat section and Turning:Healing. Basically, turning creates positive energy, which heals the living as well as hurts undead.
My chief concern is to see how this works when the party runs up against a cleric with negative energy.
The party I'm running RotRL with HAS a cleric with negative energy! She isn't too happy with the ramifications of her attempting to rebuke undead now... Anyone have any ideas on this situation?
Likes:
-Races section.
-Favored Class bonus: very nice
-Fighter Revamp: long overdue, and I like this a lot.
-How the game handles combat maneuvers.
Dislikes:
-Some specific feats:
Power Attack: I understand the change, but in some cases the feat can become worse the higher your strength is. Frankly, this doesn't make much sense.
Why not keep the bonus damage ( based on your Strength modifier ) while keeping a fixed penalty to the hit roll?
Combat Expertise: as a melee fighter I'd never take this feat.
It seems more aimed at rogues and spellcasters than smart fighters.
Why not something like "you gain +1/4 BAB when fighting defensively"?
-Combat feats:
Don't like these, at all...
First, the fact that you have to use certain feats in a given round to "unlock" the use of another feat makes high level combat feats predictable, and in some cases the progression doesn't even make sense.
Second, they're bad for backwards compatibility: feats like dodge or spring attack are quite hard coded in the rules; there are a lot of feats out there that use dodge as a gateway feat, and that rely on the use of dodge ( elusive target, for example ).
Changing how these feats work makes the transition far less smoother, IMO.
Third: Tactical feats. Tactical feats work exactly like Combat Feats: you do something in a round to gain some kind of bonus in a subsequent round. However, they're far less restrictive and each feat has at least 3 uses.
This either makes combat feats weak, or Tactical Feats overpowered.
Again, this doesn't mesh well with existing rules, and from what I've gathered, that's something you're trying to avoid.
Just my 2 cents, anyway, and keep up the good work :)
[Edit: Oh, something I'd love to see...weapon finesse that works with 1H weapons wielded with two hands.]
|
|
i'm interested in the new turning rules. Those who are wondering about the 15 minute day should look at the combat section and Turning:Healing. Basically, turning creates positive energy, which heals the living as well as hurts undead.
My chief concern is to see how this works when the party runs up against a cleric with negative energy.
While I like this idea a lot, I think it should be renamed since it's multipurpose now. Maybe Divine Radiance and Profane ... Something? Not sure. Doesn't seem like Radiance fits together well with Profane.
But yeah, that.
We really need to break these topics up into seperate threads for the sake of tracking. Otherwise they will get lost in the shuffle.
Besides, that's what the Paizo folks have asked us to do anyway. :)
One of my biggest dislikes with 3.5 is buffs. They just seem like such a mechanical add-on and as such they are a boring spell (my opinion, of course).
I wonder if I am alone on this, if Paizo feels similarly, or what?
I have not yet read the PDF through, so if it mentions this excuse the post.
Athletics is not currently a skill, so I am assuming that you are talking about Acrobatics. To be honest, since fighters typically wear heavy armor, it did not make much sense to me for them to be spinning about combat... but I could be persuaded otherwise. Any other thoughts on the matter?
I've done a lot of fighting and I have medium/heavy armour I suppose - our karate club bought it for a full contact self defense course where I was a 'mock assailant'.
We experimented with the armour quite a bit outside of the self defense class with black belts both armmed and unarmed fighting against each other one armoured and one unarmoured. Although the armour limited the damage vdone significantly, it prevented us from defending ourselves with usual agility and limited our use of learned defensive skills.
I WOULD like to see a little more in the game that allows agile unarmored fighters evade attacks as they increase in level. This is an area where the system is weak.
Pretty good. I am going to play 4e, but I may in fact play Pathfinder as well.
I do have some concerns. First the Fighter's skill list still doesn't seem to be good enough to me. In my opinion class skills for the fighter ought to include these: Acrobatics, Appraise (maybe), Climb, Craft, Deception (maybe), Diplomacy, Disable Device (maybe), Handle Animal, Heal, Intimidate, Knowledge (dungeoneering, engineering, geography, history, local, nobility, tactics [a new knowledge skill, covers military stuff, maybe could be used to figure out a plan of attack should also go to Monk, Paladin, Ranger, and maybe Cleric with War Domain] ), Linguistics (maybe), Perception, Profession, Ride, Survival, Swim, Use Magic Device (maybe). The fighter should be able to cover a great many things, including knights, mercenaries, officers, thugs, kings and nobles, just plain adventurer, even merchants, sailors, craftsmen (well many dwarves are warriors first but craftsmen anyways) and similar folk that know how to defend themselves. A warrior doesn't just necessarily excel in combat. Many fictional and historical examples of warriors are just as effective out side of combat as in. One more thing about the fighter is that maybe they could specialize in unarmored combat and therefore get the bonus from armor specialization while unarmored. Also fighters might be able to get even better at fighting in light or no armor by spending feats, though they probably shouldn't quite be able to be able to defend themselves as effectively as some one in plate, they should still be viable. Otherwise I’m extremely happy with the fighter.
Also in my opinion the skill choices at 1st level for each class should look more like this: Barbarian: 3 + Int Bonus, Bard: 5 + Int Bonus, Cleric: 2 + Int Bonus, Druid: 3 + Int Bonus, Fighter: 3 + Int Bonus, Monk: 3 + Int Bonus, Ranger 4 + Int Bonus, Rogue 5 + Int Bonus, Sorceror: 3 + Int Bonus, Wizard: 2 (maybe even as low as 1, they have a higher Int than other classes and so can afford it, also it makes sense that a practitioner of the arcane arts would focus on magic and therefore not necessarily learn other things) + Int Bonus. In my opinion only a very few classes should have only 2 + Int Bonus Skill Points, mostly spellcasting classes. I should say that I don’t like the whole “skill monkey” concept. Parties should all be able to contribute both in and out side of combat. Even if there are classes that have a wider list of things they can do out side of combat, all classes should have a least a decent amount of things they can do out of combat. And at the same time classes don’t need too many skills to start either, because of the whole getting skills every even level thing. A rogue certainly doesn’t need 10 skills to begin with when he’s going to get 10 more by 20th level. I think that more magic oriented races like the elves and gnomes could get Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft and Use Magic Device as class skills. In fact maybe each race (except humans probably) could have a (probably short) list of racial skills that works like they’re class skill list, except for race.
All classes should have choices, not only how characters of that class are built, versatility of build, but also versatility of play. The fact that combat maneuvers are simpler now should help this out. I think that a lot of the fighter’s power should come from getting access to a massive amount of combat maneuvers. There should be fighter only feats that give around three new maneuvers each and prestige class should give a ton of combat maneuvers as well. Other fighting classes should get a lot of they’re power from combat maneuvers, but the fighter should be the king of combat maneuvers.
Lastly I have a few more short and simple thoughts. The bard should be able to use bardic music abilities meant to be used in combat like inspire courage, inspire greatness and inspire heroics while fighting, but not while casting spells or anything like that. This will allow bard players to feel a little more useful in combat. Perhaps they could also get some sort of bardic music healing ability to allow them to more easily replace clerics. Rangers should get spells through prestige classes allowing for mundane scouts, while paladins should get spellcasting from 1st level. Not all clerics should get turn undead. Clerics should get ½ HD BAB (they can use spells to buff themselves up to where they’d be able to compete in melee if they want), while Rogues get full HD BAB. But maybe not all members of the same class should have the same HD, save progressions or whatever and they’re could be options to have a warrior cleric with a ¾ HD BAB progression or whatever.
A long post I know. Actually I was considering to pretty much do what you guys were doing, except free online, so I've thought about this stuff alot.
I've given it a read-through and we've spent the evening discussing Pathfinder RPG. My two copper pieces (more like two hundred):
Races
Overall, I like. Extra ability score bonuses help better define the races. I like that the half-elf can pick his ability score bonus, since he can claim it derives from the heritage either one of his parents. Giving the half-elf the extra skill point also matches a house rule I use, so naturally I approve.
I like how half-orcs are officially the byproducts of orc attack, and the racism they suffer encourages a disproportionate number of this rare race to become adventurers. At first it struck me as odd that the orcs weren't more racist toward these half-bloods, but upon further reflection I imagined that from an orcish point of view they stood as testament to the strength and ruthlessness of the orcs, with the orcs quietly proud of their half-human brethren.
Classes
I see the new XP system offers slower and faster advancement options. Won't this interfere with Pathfinder adventures, which generally assume a certain amount of levelling up throughout?
The fighter's extra fill-in abilities are a welcome improvement, if not radical. My only worry is that every munchkin will pile all their points into "heavy armour / heavy blades", at the expense of flexibility when they find mithral breastplate and a really nice hammer later on.
At-will cantrips and non-spell arcane special abilities are a Good Thing. I really like what you've done with school specialization, putting a specialist mage directly on equal footing with non-specialist. I've been saying for years that wizards needed staffs, so I'm happy with this change (I think there was a Class Acts to this effect in the final or penultimate issue of Dragon).
Skills
Folding skills is an excellent solution. I applaud for Concentration rolled into Spellcraft, Hide/Move Silently rolled into Stealth (just as in Arcana Evolved) and Spot/Listen into Perception (as Star Wars: Saga Edition). I'd rather that Craft was simplified--personally I prefer to ad-hoc the crafting times instead of breaking out the calculator--but it's not that big of a game issue.
I agree with the earlier poster regarding those "+2 to two skills" feats; I'm not a big fan. I get the feeling that a lot of them were created to pad out the 3.5 Player's Handbook, and I usually allowed my players to invent their own skill bonus feats providing they could come up with an appropriate name. There's a certain flavour to a character being "Stealthy" or "Agile", I suppose.
Feats
More feats is a welcome change. Since you can only use one combat feat per turn, more feats only adds more versatility. I think these combat feats have the ability to add a greater tactical element to combat, which the fighter sorely needs.
That said, the idea of "combos" is something Mike Mearls came up with and promptly discarded when working on Iron Heroes. I think it'll take some playtesting before we know how well these work in practice. I'm also concerned that some of these feats require full-round actions to make only single attacks. I also notice that Precise Shot prevents you from using any special abilities when allies are adjacent to your target, and it still costs you a feat to do so.
Combat
Thank you for the improved cover rules! I think it could still be simpler, but it's still more straightforward than the original rules, which were something of a show-stopper.
A unified system for special combat actions is welcome. The new Grapple is a good mid-way between old grapple and an oversimplified "just use an attack roll" system.
Spells
I like the domain abilities. Reminds me a little of the No Turning article in Dragon, so I encourage having clerics abilities better reflect their focus and domains.
If Mending is still a cantrip, Broken items can be repaired for free between combats. That's not necessarily bad, but Mending should be beefed up to first level if it's not desired. Likewise, with regards the deletion of Cure Minor, I wouldn't mind if it was allowed to stay in provided that it could only heal badly wounded creatures (less than 1HP). Perhaps Stabilize should bring you up to 0HP, allowing the downed character to quaff a potion and get himself back on his feet?
Well, I was trying to put my thoughts into discrete threads by category, as Lisa indicated elsewhere that it would be best to give feedback in chunks ... but my threads got eated. :P So I'll do a lump "initial impressions" post here.
EDIT: Well, the threads got un-eated, so I now have a couple of threads breaking some of this into smaller chunks:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/feedback/alpha1/iterativeAttacksGneechsReadthroughImpressions1
and
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/feedback/alpha1/skillCheckTotalsGneechsReadthroughImpressions2
We now return you to my regular post, already in progress...
Note that I realize that "backwards compatibility" was a big goal for you ... I think this may not be the best place to focus your efforts, however. SWSE, for instance, completely blows 3.5 out of the water both in terms of ease of GM preparation, and speed of play -- and one of the primary claims of That Other Game(tm) is that will do the same. As such, since those are the benchmarks against which the game is going to be measured, you need to find ways of providing the same benefits first, then also being backwards compatible when you can.
SHAVE CALCULATIONS WHEREVER POSSIBLE
Star Wars Saga Edition is much, much faster than 3.5, both to build stat blocks and to run, not because of any one change, but from the cumulative effects of lots and lots of extraneous calculations being trimmed. This, I think, should be your philosophy to follow, particularly when you're going to find yourself (intentionally or not) "in competition" with 4E which has made speed one of its big selling points. To that end, I suggest:
DROP ITERATIVE ATTACKS
A single attack that does a damage bonus of +1/2 level comes out to very similar results as iterative attacks, but with a tiny fraction of the calculations per round, per fight, and per game. Particularly at higher levels, this one change gives you a lot of bang for your buck. Not only does this prevent everybody sitting around while one player figures out the cumulative effect of Power Attack, Bless, Expertise, Bull's Strength, and Flanking for up to four separate dice rolls, but it also means that people are more likely to keep moving since they don't give up attacks to do it (and thus keep the fight more interesting).
ELIMINATE AS MANY BUFFS/DEBUFFS AS POSSIBLE
Related to above: Prayer, Bull's Strength, Bard's Song, Flanking ... these are all things any party with a modicum of experience is likely to have on at any given time -- and every +1 buff they add doubles the amount of time doing math at the table. I know people love their buffs -- but they really do make the game SUCK bigtime.
MAKE EVERYTHING RETROACTIVE
Int raises not boosting skill points is one of those irritating "you have to create your baddie level-by-level" things that make statting up 3.5 NPCs such a pain. Hit points don't work that way, why should skills? You should be able to say, "All right, I've got a 10th level ______ with ___ Int, he has ____ skills." And that should also apply to feats, saves, etc.
DROP SKILL SYNERGIES AND SPEED BONUSES TO SKILL CHECKS
Besides being a min-maxer's paradise, these are yet another thing that slows down character building, for very little real benefit. Lose 'em!
SKILL CALCULATIONS
Instead of...
Untrained 1d20 + Ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained Cross-Class skill 1d20 + 1/2 (character level +3) + ability modifier + racial modifier
I would recommend the following formulae or something similar to them:
Untrained: 1d20 + Ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained Class: 1d20 + 4 + level + Ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained Cross-Class: 1d20 + level + Ability modifier + racial modifier
Cross-class skills will take a hit at low levels and get a big boost at high levels, but again there's less math (especially when creating high level skill blocks, always a 3.5 bugaboo). Trained skills will still always be better than untrained, as well.
COMBAT MANEUVER MODIFIER (CMB)
Why make a new stat? Why not just say "opposed grapple checks; the defender gets +5"? If you're already taking out the attack roll to initiate a grapple, you've stripped one roll out of the equation already -- effectively forcing the defender to Take 10 every time is not necessary. For that matter, why does the defender get +5, anyway? Again, strip out calculations whenever possible.
HIT POINTS
Theoretically I like x4 at first level ... it's consistent with skill points being x4. (I know, that doesn't happen anymore. I'm just saying generally.) However, it also means everybody has a boatload of hit points, which will make combats longer. Maybe x3 is the best way to go. This will help minimize the time heroes spend sucking dirt at low levels.
TURN/HEAL, REBUKE/HARM
I love this. Nice thinking. :)
SOME OTHER GENERAL THOUGHTS
That's enough about speeding up the game. Here are some other random observations.
FAVORED CLASS HIT POINT BONUS
This is a very good start but doesn't go far enough. If the idea is to get people to stick with the favored class, I'd say make the bonus slightly larger, like +2 hp/level. If it's just intended as a one-time bonus to take at 1st level, make it a flat +3 hp for having at least one level in your favored class.
0th LEVEL SPELLS
Should have x uses/day but unlimited choice of which; basically like Sorcerer spells for all spellcasters. 0th level spells are nifty little "utility tricks," but other than "read magic" and "acid splash" they never get used (in my experience) because nobody knows what utility they'll need on any given day, except that there's a decent chance you'll find a scroll, and the wizard always needs another attack spell to feel useful when out of fireballs. That Other Game(tm)'s idea of giving wizardey types a freebie "mini magic missile" to fall back on is probably a good one, as well.
More thoughts as I have 'em. :)
-The Gneech
|
|
At first glance, I'm pretty pleased with everything. My biggest concern deals with the new rules for skills. It seems like characters may have too many skills in the end, and I'd like to know the rationale behind combining some them.
The combining of skills is my biggest concern. This was a problem I also had with 4e, and I plan to think about this further and eventually give a nice long post about it.
Brief look at concerns:
- I can probably live with Hide and Move Silently being combined. They're pretty closely related.
- I like that perception adds the other senses (taste, touch, and smell), but I don't like that by having the skill you are basically good at all of them.
- If you're going to combine skills, open lock and disable device seem like the best candidates. I know they aren't exactly the same, but neither are hide and move silently. A lock is a type of device. Yes, it's simpler than a complicated trap. But, open lock and disable device seem more closely related than open lock and sleight of hand.
- Not yet convinced about the other skill combinations
- What happened to tumble?
- How does tying people up work now?
Brief look at likes:
- Cantrips and orisons being at will
- Clerics receive proficiency with deity's favorite weapon. I love this! My clerics (or healing types) almost always go for this.
- Domain powers
- Arcane bond. I always picture a wizard with a staff, and now your staff can be your best friend.
- Fighter weapon and armor mastery
I really look forward to testing the new rules and giving feedback. Thanks, Paizo!
Wow. I am blown away by this announcement, and also by the changes. Here are my knee jerk reactions:
Likes:
Half-elves and half-orcs are playable again (esp. half-orc druids)
Many more skills as PCs advance in levels
Condensing skills to prevent rolling 5d20 when walking down a hallway
Good reasons to not prestige class right out of the 4 core base classes.
3 advancement speeds (although how this will work with future Pathfinders might give me a little pause)
Tracking rolled into survival
Ranged power attack
Capped power attack (but see below)
Improved toughness +3
Simplified turning (but see below)
Master specialist (kinda) rolled into base wizard
Cheap and easy magic identification
Domains and schools
Things I'm not so sure about:
Did defensive casting go away? Didn't see it in the Spellcraft entry.
Fly skill? How does this work with Druids?
Possible balance issues:
Infinite 0-level spells. (acid ignores hardness, thus acid splash every round would take about ten minutes to burn through a door the rogue can't pick)(mending, particularly with warforged, but also completely invalidates make whole)(light is never a problem again)
Rebuking undead. (3rd level cleric wih extra turning vs. 1st level PCs, lots of small fireballs till everyone dies)
Overly swingy power attack at high or low levels(My dragon with a million strength either completely misses, or butchers you like a hog, the 1st level half-orc barbarian hits you on a 19, even with the -5, take 1d12+17)
no more multiclass penalties. (is too much dipping a bad thing?)
Still, great product. I will be testing some of the combat maneuver stuff soon.