|
I got the PDF. Studied it. I must say I like it, and I like it very much. This said, there are some things that can make this system even better. Here's what I like, what I don't like, and my suggestions to change it.
What I Like:
Illustrations and Design: These kick ass! Everyone knows Paizo Illustrators and Designers are the top!
Arcane Bond: This is a big one. I've been looking for something like this in D&D for a long time.
Domain/School Powers: These are great, they make the spellcasting characters interesting at every level.
CMB: Simplifies things? Sign me up!
Core class abilities at higher levels: Makes interesting playing whatever core class to its end.
Classes: I like the Fighter now. I love the Rogue even more. These classes make sense.
Feats: The combat feats are cool.
Grouping skills: So obvious! I thought they would do this back in 3.5 but they didn't.
What Could Be Better:
Favored Class: I know many people share my opinion. This should be merely a fluffy suggestion, not a mechanical thing, especially having anything to do with HP.
Races perception bonuses: Again, many people think the same. These should be flat bonuses. Environment-dependent at the most.
Hatred and conditional bonuses: Unnecessary. Racial feats with way cooler abilities and bonuses can be made instead, if anything. Turn into fluff.
Sneak Attack: OK, so sneaks can be used against undead. Critical hits too? Makes sense. Nothing really against this one. But we should include critical hits in the list of things that affect "weak spots" and not vital organs.
Starting HP: I would go for the flat +6 HP at first level.
Bookkeeping: A lot of abilities means a lot of bookkeeping at high levels. No really good suggestion for this one. If anyone can come with a solution that'd be awesome.
Turn Undead: It should NOT heal! Otherwise it has a wrong name. I would strongly suggest to remove the healing propriety of turning undead. It might not be used in every adventure, but a cleric has a lot other resources as well (Domain Powers, Spells, Melee, etc). I liked the simplification for it though, so I'd say leave it as in the book but remove the healing effect.
Too high AC /Attacks vs Monsters: I don't have a solution for this one either. As D&D is today, characters of high levels especially have a lot higher AC and Attack bonus than most monsters. The Weapon and Armor Training given to the fighter class worries me. This would have to be playtested to be sure, but my guess is unhittable fighters.
Knowledge (arcana): It should not encompass all monsters. I like the way monster lore is handled in 3.5. It should stay that way.
Flying Skill: Erase this. I know this was a "natural 1" on the book but you can always do a Psychic Reformation.
Skill Checks
This requires more elaboration. You either are a master in a skill or you can't do it altogether. I don't like the concept. I propose a more flexible yet simpler than 3.5 version of the skills system.
Each skill has three 3 ranks. The first rank costs 1 skill point, the second rank costs 2 skill points and the third rank costs 3 skill points.
A skill with 1 rank has a skill modifier of 2 + your ability modifier.
A skill with 2 ranks has a skill modifier of (3 + your level)/2 + your ability modifier.
A skill with 3 ranks has a skill modifier of 3 + your level + your ability modifier.
The maximum number of ranks for a cross-class skill is 2.
At first level, characters earn the number of skill points according to their class plus Int x 3. Thus a barbarian would start with (4 + Int) x 3 skill points.
Additionally, a character gains the number of skill points given by its class every 4 levels . Thus a barbarian would earn 4 + Int skill points every 4 levels.
Comparing this system to the standard 3.5 one, characters will have less maxed skills at lower levels (but consider that many skills are now grouped, and that evens it out somehow) and there is more flexibility at higher levels (you can have a larger number of skills with less ranks)
Linguistics would grant 1 additional language in the first rank, 2 additional languages in the second rank and 3 additional languages in the third rank (for a total of 6 languages granted by the skill in addition to its other uses.)
Flexibility is a good thing to have in the skills section. The more different a character can be from another, the better.
|
Alright, since I've been rambling on these boards all morning I may as well toss in my responses to you as well. You make some good points while I disagree with others, so I'm probably going to play devils advocate a bit and try and point out a different perspective on some of them.
Favored Class- Favored class was something from 3.x too, though it was barely ever used because it was much more bookkeeping, lowering xp when you multiclassed. However this seems a neat system, if you play to your races strengths then you end up a bit more durable for it(whether that means you are a fighter who can take a hit, or a rogue who can roll with a blow a bit better) however the bonus isn't so big that someone who wants to make a character against the mold is noticeably hurting from it.
Starting HP- I'm putting this in now because it somewhat combines with my thoughts above. I find myself favoring the variant HP based on your race. It seems to make sense that half-orcs are a bit hardier and halflings are more fragile, they are just built that way. But this seems to encourage playing against the standard build some too, want to make a half-orc wizard? He may not have as much intelligence but he'll be a bit tougher. Seems a good balance. However all the options are designed to make characters a bit more survivable at low levels and start to blend together at higher ones(a difference between starting with +6 or +8 hp isn't going to matter much when you get hit by disintegration).
Racial bonuses(perception or hatred)- I agree that these should be more flat bonuses, even if just to make it so that more conditional modifiers aren't needed to be remembered. But I don't think we should drop them all together. I have a player who often runs dwarves and you should see the look he gets when he finds himself up against a giant. There is something to be said about having something beyond just feats or class determine your skill against a foe. I know the bonuses as they are now is more based on D&D tradition, but I would like to see these adjusted a bit to fit natural racial tendencies rather then upbringing. A dwarf raised in an urban town by humans isn't likely to be holding the hatred of giants or the knowledge of stone. Maybe a list of starting traits, something like background feats(urban born, country born, loner, ect) that can be chosen by any race?
Turn Undead- As you may have noticed elsewhere on the boards, this is one of the changes that I really love. As you pointed out, the underlying mechanic seems sound and much smoother then the current system. The healing aspect of it is great for extending a parties adventuring day, and can be a combat turner in a pinch(though it seems it can heal the enemy too so it could be a careful thing to use). Plus with its rate of progression it is still going to be more effective to use other heals that you have more often for general healing. However this also means a cleric can use his other spells on things besides cures without worrying about not being able to help the party if it gets hurt. As a side note, sure 'Positive Energy Blast' might be more accurate for a name for it, but if its just the name then there seems no reason to change that and add confusion to those who come new to the game and try and look back at older source books. Plus undead are still turned. Maybe its more like Turn Undead+.
I don't think I've ever encountered the same problems you have with high AC parties, they definitely get up there, but in my experience monsters that are considered challenging for the party far outstrips their AC with attack rating. When you are up in the higher levels either you tend to be fighting things that have way more HD then you do to make a balanced CR(like undead) thus their attack rating gets high quickly just because there are so many HDs adding to it, or you are fighting things like outsiders which are 1/1 anyway plus often have high strengths and other abilities. If you aren't then the creature probably focuses on special abilities or makes touch attacks that deprive the characters of a lot of that armor bonus. If anything I've noticed that when putting a party above 15 or so against an encounter that is 1 or 2 ECLs above them they have a much harder time hitting the enemy(or if they don't then its meant to be easy to hit and has scary HP) then it does them. This seems to help balance that.
I don't have a rebuttal for your knowledge arcana argument on hand, I hadn't noticed that change, I'll have to look in at the PRPG when I get home. On face value though I agree with you, I like making characters have diverse knowledges to know their threats.
For fly... I like the system they have better now, having checks much like ride or swim for maneuvers makes it much more fluid of a system then the old style of memorizing a chart for poor-perfect. However I lean towards squeezing fly into a different skill as it seems unneeded to be on its own, a good take for monsters, not so much for players unless some sort of naturally flying race is introduced.
Finally, skills. This is an area I had been really touchy about at first myself, not here but when I first saw a system that was very much like it in star wars saga. With some playing of that system I found that I really liked it though. It makes play far easier and there is very little paper shuffle trying to remember how many ranks you have it in. You learn quick whether a skill is trained or not, cross class or not and your players aren't flipping pages when you call for a check. The one gripe I had with that system is it was very hard to gain more skills because you either had to take a feat for it or gain more intelligence. In this system you gain them with levels which is a neat mechanic. Every other level may actually be a bit too fast though, that I'm not sure. However the skill system itself is very sound. Give it a shot and see what you think, it might surprise you like it did me.
Phew. Another very long winded rambling retort.
-Tarlane
|
|
You're right. I might as well give the skills system a try, see if my players like it.
The rate for gaining new skills, though, is very high. Take, for example, a barbarian in 3.5 at 20th level can have a total of 4+Int maxed skills, while that same character with Pathfinder would have 14+Int maxed skills. Effectively having 230 extra skill points. Which is a lot considering the fact that many skills are now grouped.
I would probably go for a skill every 4 levels the most. Or maybe every 5 levels to continue with the chain (every 3-a feat, every 4-an ability, every 5-a skill).