Finally/Thank gyad.
Edit: Interesting new stuff on skills. And fighters getting armor mastery! Can't wait to see the Bard (that is MrsCharlie's favorite class)
This makes me want to chuck-all for our current campaign and bust out Pathfinder and run it through about a dozen or so scenarios/modules. Maybe some DCCs or something as well (Castle Whiterock, maybe)
Liked the tweaks to the classes. Finally a reason not to PRC (Extra +1 HP and class specials) or limit it to a single PRC or two like Archmage and Loremaster for a few level dips. DR for fighters based on armor.
Liked the basic concept of a +2 to the primary ability ability score when all was said and done in the end usually belonging to the favored class regardless of how the PC was generated by point buy or rolling (Less reason to chase after a strange template or higher ECL race).
Liked the concept of picking the favored class of the PC.
Liked the Sneak Attack fix.
Liked the bogus feats that were rarely used in game and dropped.
Generally liked how the skills worked, definitely an improvement IMO.
Would like to have seen Sorcerers get 4 or 6 skill points since there primary attribute is Charisma.
In a leveling up game I favor a second full hit die based on size and race with minimal skill points (No +3 skill points which would be due to having a class). It would be be a nice way to denote sub adults in game without class levels or many skills.
Got confused by one thing the fast and slow advancement. It seemed like it was campaign dependent for each game in the beginning of the Alpha but class based in the back of the PF Alpha.
My wife is loving the fact that wizards are getting a D6 hit die. She has been calling for that sense she heard about 4e.
I really like what they did to the fighter!
I just wonder what they are going to do with the sorcerer. That class has needed a bit of a pick-me-up.
I also wonder if they are going to downgrade the druid a little.
P.S. I think they made the half orc a bit too powerful. I would have given them a bonus to charisma, and a +1 bonus to spot and listen instead. A bonus to wisdom for a barbarian race just doesn't seem to work for me.
My first impression? Not overly impressed with many of the changes. Too many of them smell of power creep. Also, the change in grapple doesn't strike me as any more elegant or simple to use than the current 3.5 rules. I also dislike the unopposed rolls for the special manuevers, instead giving the defender a set special attack "AC" (DC), it is always more fun to roll than to use a set value, even if the set value is often times better.
I think they made the half orc a bit too powerful. I would have given them a bonus to charisma, and a +1 bonus to spot and listen instead. A bonus to wisdom for a barbarian race just doesn't seem to work for me.
The barbaric races are often considered most "wise" in the present day. Think about the myths regardsing native americans; also, wisdom does not imply wisdom as it is commonly defined, instead it is also a measure of a character's perceptivness to the world around him or her. This is something that would be vitally important to such a "barbaric" race.
I think they made the half orc a bit too powerful. I would have given them a bonus to charisma, and a +1 bonus to spot and listen instead. A bonus to wisdom for a barbarian race just doesn't seem to work for me.The barbaric races are often considered most "wise" in the present day. Think about the myths regardsing native americans; also, wisdom does not imply wisdom as it is commonly defined, instead it is also a measure of a character's perceptivness to the world around him or her. This is something that would be vitally important to such a "barbaric" race.
I didn't say "barbaric", is said "barbarian". There is a differance. If you had their favorite class ranger or druid, that would be different.
We are talking a more Viking like sociaty when the races favored class is barbarian. You can't be very wise to go ape-shite raging into a battle with less than the best armor out there.
My first impression? Not overly impressed with many of the changes. Too many of them smell of power creep. Also, the change in grapple doesn't strike me as any more elegant or simple to use than the current 3.5 rules. I also dislike the unopposed rolls for the special manuevers, instead giving the defender a set special attack "AC" (DC), it is always more fun to roll than to use a set value, even if the set value is often times better.
You should look at the key feats like power attack. They like nerfed it, but maybe not to a useless point.
|
I reckon there are going to be a lot of half orc clerics of strength gods now..
I do wonder about the way that rebuking undead works. I cannot see the party wanting a cleric of Wee Jas anymore when they take damage whenever he pours out negative energy. It's a shame because that is a cleric archetype I enjoy playing.
Back to the half-orc, I wonder what they are going to do to the standard orc. I mean if humans (don't have to) and orcs don't get a wisdom bonus, where is the half-orc getting it?
Thanks for pointing out power attack, I also looked at combat expertise. Yuck!
The is fairly long, so I apologize in advance, BUT I really wanted to give the folks at Paizo some feedback on Pathfinder Alpha (because I want it to ROCK as much as it possibly can). Here goes:
RACES – simplify bonuses/penalties to ability scores
Dwarves: +2 CON, -2 DEX (Stout, not too nimble). All good otherwise.
Elves: +2 DEX, -2 CON (Graceful but delicate). All good otherwise.
Gnomes: +2 WIS, -2 STR (Intuitive but small stature limits strength).
Half-elves: No ability score adjustments
Half-orcs: +2 STR, -2 CHR (Powerfully built but boorish by nature). Orc ferocity: 3+CON bonus rounds.
Halflings: +2 DEX, -2 STR (Deceptively nimble but small stature limits strength)
Humans: No ability score adjustments
HIT POINTS
Starting Hit Points: Double MAX HP + double CON bonus at first level. After that I’d go with normal HP progression (with the option for set Hit Points after that). The bumped up hit points for rogues and wizards goes against my grognard nature… but I think I can get over it (and grow to like it).
FEATS
I like the fact that feats are gained more frequently.
CLASSES
Cleric: Perfect… especially the 0-level spells as Orisons.
Fighter: Armor Mastery should start as DR 5/ - at level 10. Otherwise perfect. A character with Weapon Mastery should be able to be disarmed by another character with that ability.
Rogue: I love every change.
Wizard: I’d fold the “Fly” skill into Acrobatics or get rid of it. Otherwise I dig it… especially the 0-level spells as Cantrips.
SKILLS
I like the streamlined Skilled, Unskilled and Cross-Class skill mechanic. Fold “Fly” into Acrobatics or ditch it. It’s too specialized a skill. Fold “Disguise” into Deception and Perform (actor) skills.
I like the Perception skill and the other folded together skills.
COMBAT
I need to really mull this over BUT so far, so good! The new feats all look like they could spice up the game.
Turn/Rebuke Undead: I think this is a good fix but I can see Rebuking Undead being used to dish out a lot of pain.
Schools of Magic & Domains: AWESOME! This is a great solution for casters that prevents them from becoming useless after shooting off a few spells each day.
Most cool so far!
I am sad to see that Paizo is doing exactly what I and others warned against with "sticking with 3.5", that being not sticking with 3.5. Instead of making very limit changes, there are drastic changes going on in the new game system as it looks right now. For some 3.5 groups it is too much, my own included. Just as I have no interest in switching to True20 or whatever, I have no interest in switching to Paizo's RPG that it looks like they will have. Frankly it is sad that people too often don't understand in some cases "Less is more". Everyone has to make their mark on the RPG market. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any changes, but each changes deviates farther from the base 3.5 rules, it makes all the more unlikely for some to use.
When I first saw that they were staying with 3.5, I thought, "Great! This means a new player could have the Pathfinder book and be able to play in my game where everyone else is using the 3.5 PHB." Unfortunately, once I actually got a chance to look at the rules, that does not look possible. I was hoping to see maybe some new stuff, including maybe variant rules for grappling and such, but not a whole destruction of many of the basic rules.
We'll see how it plays out. Maybe the modules and such will be easy enough to run using the 3.5 rules. But at the moment, it looks like Paizo may lose several 3.5 customers once they switch (which thankfully won't be for another year and some months).
|
First Impressions:
This is awesome! Thanks for starting the ball rolling by sticking it out there. What better way to create the 3.x that everyone wants (while keeping 3.5 completely viable) than having an open playtest? And what better way to get input than not being afraid to come up with some ideas and see what the community likes/dislikes.
Bravo Paizo!
I am sad to see that Paizo is doing exactly what I and others warned against with "sticking with 3.5", that being not sticking with 3.5. Instead of making very limit changes, there are drastic changes going on in the new game system as it looks right now. For some 3.5 groups it is too much, my own included. Just as I have no interest in switching to True20 or whatever, I have no interest in switching to Paizo's RPG that it looks like they will have. Frankly it is sad that people too often don't understand in some cases "Less is more". Everyone has to make their mark on the RPG market. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any changes, but each changes deviates farther from the base 3.5 rules, it makes all the more unlikely for some to use.
When I first saw that they were staying with 3.5, I thought, "Great! This means a new player could have the Pathfinder book and be able to play in my game where everyone else is using the 3.5 PHB." Unfortunately, once I actually got a chance to look at the rules, that does not look possible. I was hoping to see maybe some new stuff, including maybe variant rules for grappling and such, but not a whole destruction of many of the basic rules.
We'll see how it plays out. Maybe the modules and such will be easy enough to run using the 3.5 rules. But at the moment, it looks like Paizo may lose several 3.5 customers once they switch (which thankfully won't be for another year and some months).
Sorry to hear that. Maybe after hearing about the play testing of 4e, I think of this as a far less drastic change. I see a lot of problems being fixed with this system. Maybe we can help them fix some of the mistakes they make before beta comes out, I plane on doing my best to get this stat restriction on power attack, and similar restrictions changed and lessoned.
|
When I first saw that they were staying with 3.5, I thought, "Great! This means a new player could have the Pathfinder book and be able to play in my game where everyone else is using the 3.5 PHB." Unfortunately, once I actually got a chance to look at the rules, that does not look possible. I was hoping to see maybe some new stuff, including maybe variant rules for grappling and such, but not a whole destruction of many of the basic rules.
Bear in mind too that we've only seen the first of several (many?) Alpha releases. Not only are there still many rules yet to come, what we do have so far is already being discussed and dissected but not yet really playtested. Refinements will happen!
I like the updates to the core classes, so long as the final result is a good balance between them. I like the increased feat progression (my group was just discussing a similar change) as well as most of the skill list and mechanics changes (ditto). I'm also interested in trying out the updates to the races, and hope to see something along the lines of racial feats or other by-level perks.
I love the idea behind the Combat Maneuver Bonus setup, as it simplifies a lot of special combat actions that most of my group (mainly new players) haven't yet touched. The class and domain powers idea is interesting, and I absolutely cannot wait to play a caster with an arcane bonded item.
( muaa haa )
I could go on and on, but I won't ;)
The point, really, is that this is literally just the tip of the iceberg, and there is almost a year and a half left before we see the final result. Between now and then, everything will be playtested within an inch of its life by a veritable army of gamers, and these boards will be crowded with feedback and discussions down to the nth detail of pretty much everything that ends up between those two hardback covers.
Given the quality of material and service we've seen from Paizo over the last several years, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. If you're looking for an alternative to 4e I wouldn't use this first round of new rules (barely 24 hours old) as any kind of test for whether to buy in to Pathfinder well over a year from now :)
|
The point, really, is that this is literally just the tip of the iceberg, and there is almost a year and a half left before we see the final result. Between now and then, everything will be playtested within an inch of its life by a veritable army of gamers, and these boards will be crowded with feedback and discussions down to the nth detail of pretty much everything that ends up between those two hardback covers.
Given the quality of material and service we've seen from Paizo over the last several years, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the...
Well said.
I feel that the opportunity given to the community by Paizo is outstanding. At least 15 (or more!) months of public brainstorming, variants discussion, critical analysis, rebalance, tinkering, fine tuning, proposal and eventual discarding of those rules that just don't fit, is something too good to be dismissed so early.
Also, the backwards compatibility core concept assures that even with the final product, that couple of features that are not of someone's personal taste can be easily swapped with the standard version or another version that hasn't been adopted, and that may fit better in your style of play.
I like to imagine this think tank as a UA super-project on steroids.
I really like the Schools although I would like to see a little tweaking for commonly usable abilites (Perhaps a choice between one or two PHB spells of the school at that level or something from the Universal school at a lower level).
I'd consider changing the Spell-like abilities to Supernatural abilites (For example there are feats in 3.5 that enhance the use of single use daily spell-like abilities to 3/Day (Magic in the Blood feat PGtF). Using that single feat would bump up the power of a school quite a bit particularly the Universal school as is.
The Universal school is very abusable for a wizard with Wish 1/Day as a spell like ability unless the Wish spell is changed.
Wish has no experience point cost as a spell like ability. No need to take crafting feats in game for magic items below 25,000 gp (As a spell-like ability the PC does not pay the extra Wish crafting experience points for the item). Plus many magical items like weapon or charged magic items can be built in steps or pro rated: Day 1 25,000 gp Day 2 50,000 gp Day 3 75,000 gp ..........
IMO it should be qualified similar to the Miracle spell as being primarily for the duplication of a spell effect (Material component under 1,500 GP (Limited Wish is 300 exp) with the PC needing to fuel a greater Wish that has expensive material components. Wish parameter limitation should be better identified.
Does the Contact other Plane work exactly as the spell for a Diviner? IMO a daily ability should be "safe" for the PC to use normally.
For the Conjuration School:
What about a choice of Faithful Hound or Teleport instead of Major Creation? (The PC normally rests every night so that is when he would be most defenseless in game Faithful Hound would address that concern to a degree. In other games travelling might be more of a priority so Teleport would be a better choice).
IMO Planeshift should be changed to PC choice of Teleport Greater or Magnificent Mansion or Spell Turning or Summon Monster 8 except in a heavy planar style campaign.
For the Divination School perhaps the L20 Near Omniscience could be changed to an Extended Foresight with the never surprised switched to L18 or exchanged for an arcane variant of the psionic hypercognition power?
For the Necromancy school that 8HD of undead per level is a game breaker as written IMO it can get pretty ugly when they are powerful undead like vampires or liches and not mook undead like skeletons and zombies. I can see the Necromancer -2 with a single vampire.
At this point I'm curious will the sorcerer class get the Universal school by default or have the choice of picking up another school?
Bear in mind too that we've only seen the first of several (many?) Alpha releases. Not only are there still many rules yet to come, what we do have so far is already being discussed and dissected but not yet really playtested. Refinements will happen!
Oh, I have no doubt about that. Yet given how drastic of a change they are already contemplating, I seriously doubt the end product is going to look like the 3.5 I know. It will be similiar on a basic level, and maybe that will be close enough for purchasing modules and such.
If you're looking for an alternative to 4e I wouldn't use this first round of new rules (barely 24 hours old) as any kind of test for whether to buy in to Pathfinder well over a year from now :)
And that maybe is the problem. I am not looking for an alternative to 4e, I already have one, 3.5. I am not interested in a system that is "3.5ish", the Pathfinder system just looks like they are going too far from 3.5. The farther they move from the basis system, the harder it will be to use different products together, the strength of the 3.5, and the current Pathfinder products. I was hoping to see additions to the current rules, not replacements of them.
I'm really looking forward to a Sorcerer fix. 4-6 skill points. No ASF in light armor or a scaling negative special for ASF around -1% a level.
Hopefully modeled off the Variant Spellcaster class mechanically before adding things like a Sorcerer school or the Universal school and any other bells and whistles like extra known spells at each level.
Something as simple as starting off with 3 known spells at each level like a FS and capping known spells at 7 vice the present.
Knowing a few spells with freebie +1 meta as unique spells.
Giving all sorcerers the "option" of taking a feat or ritual to drop spellcasting to coincide with other full casters (Cleric, Druid, Wizard).
Letting sorcerers take the Spell Mastery feat to increase their known spells.
Liked how the familiars advance in ability with every casting level.
I have glaced over the alpha rules, and like most of it so far, but, I personaly prefer the older skill point systems. I liked being able to be focused in a small group of skills, or be more of a jack of all trades and spread the points out if I wanted to.
Starting hit die has been percolating in my brain and I really think the extra hit die should be racial mainly because of things like a Halfling dipping into Barbarian - 1 for the maximum double hit points (12 + con + 12 + con) along with the double skill points (Barbarian gets 4 compare to a Fighter, Sorcerer or Wizard with 2), fast movement, rage and taking another class like Fighter or Sorcerer (Battle Sorcerer variant) or Wizard as a favorite class afterwards.
This should probably be moved to the PRPG forum in part so that ideas related to improving the PRPG are seen by those whose job it is to evaluate ideas for inclusion in the PRPG and in part to avoid cluttering up this forum.