|
First of all, this is a long post, as I've tried to write down pretty much everything that popped into my mind as I was reading the book. Hopefully at least some people read it through and comment on it. :)
Some quick thoughts: I liked the fact that despite being the Pathfinder RPG, the rules contain no “fluff� hardwired directly into game mechanics. I could use these rules to update a homebrew campaign without any sweat, and that’s a big relief for me.
So here's my thoughts, feedback and suggestion on the races and classes (pages 4-19):
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RACES (Pages 4-7)
General: it was a relief that there were no Dragon-whatevers included despite their apparent (?) popularity among gamers –- just your “traditional� 3.5 races. Art is otherwise great in this book, as it always is in Paizo’s products, but the picture of the races is a bit too “anime-like� or “WoW-like� to my taste (those elves ears look ridiculous).
I liked the racial abilities were described with “traits� (‘Hearty’, ‘Greed’) -– good names that make sense and add personality and flavour to these races. I also liked that you now get +2 total bonus on your ability scores instead of a somewhat boring +0 (and I like it that all the races except humans and half-elves still have a negative modifier to a single ability score).
* * * * * * *
Dwarf
Stonecunning: is all well and good, but I’d have liked the benefit (Craft and Profession as class skills) to apply to metal items as well. And the same with ‘Greed’, too.
Defensive Training: This is one of the abilities I’d personally get rid of, or perhaps modified into a “general� bonus that applies against all opponents, such as a flat +2 Dodge bonus to AC? Or, perhaps it could be replaced with something like ‘Orc Ferocity’ (‘Dwarven Resiliency/Endurance’)?
Hatred: Some people have mentioned on other boards that this ability is weird and “unnecessary�. It might be better if it worked a bit like Ranger’s ‘Favoured Enemy’ – you get to pick freely one type of enemy this bonus applies against. That way you could have dwarven clans in the game who hated and had battled, for example, Aberrations.
* * * * * * *
Elf
General: I’d have liked to have the Moon (Grey), Sun (High) Elves and Wood (Green) Elves as separate subraces, but that’s not a major issue for me. However, if I had created them, I’d have probably ruled that Moon Elves would get +2 DEX and +2 INT, Wood Elves +2 DEX and +2 STR and Sun Elves +2 INT and +2 CHA.
Elven Immunities: Personally, I’d get rid of the immunity to sleep effects and replace it with another type of immunity or ability (can’t think of any “replacement�, though). This is a minor detail, though.
Keen Senses: The ability to spot concealed or secret doors seems a bit “outdated�to me, and I’d like to see it modified or eliminated altogether. Why are Elves good at spotting secret doors but not other hidden things? They already get a Perception bonus, which should cover that.
Unnatural Beauty: This is a brilliant idea – finally the game mechanics cover an aspect of the elves that I always felt was missing from the game. I have more than once considered a houserule which would have given all elves a racial bonus to all CHA-based checks, so I really, really like this ability.
* * * * * * *
Gnome
General: In light of Gnomes being tinkerers, inventors and craftsmen, it’d have made more sense to me to give them +2 INT instead of +2 CHA. I can understand that their Favoured Class (Bard) requires this, but I’d have also loved to see that changed (see below).
Hatred: As with dwarves, this is one of the “flavour� abilities I’d like to see changed to something else or completely eliminated.
Defensive Training: As with dwarves, I’d like to see it modified or eliminated, because it implies that all Gnomes train to battle giants.
Favoured Class: I’d have preferred Wizard or Sorcerer to Bards, since gnomes before 3.5 were commonly depicted to favour Illusions and often specialized as Illusionists. This is no major issue for me, however.
* * * * * * *
Half-Orc
General: I’m glad that Half-orcs are included as a race, because I have personally grown rather fond of them. However, their +2 WIS bonus seems really odd (it would make sense to Wild/Wood/Green Elves), and with their +2 STR bonus makes them THE “race of choice� for more “martially oriented� (i.e. melee-optimized) clerics. It’d be more consistent with the other races to simply give them a racial bonus to Perception for being “constantly on the lookout for danger�. Unless Barbarian abilities are derived from WIS, I’d personally prefer giving them +2 to CON instead of WIS.
Orc Ferocity: This is a flavourful and innovative ability and I like it a lot.
* * * * * * *
Halfling
General: In light of the flavour text, I’d have preferred Halflings to get +2 to CHA instead of INT. Again, this is probably in balance with the rest of the mechanics (i.e. that different races get bonuses to different ability scores) but I’ve always felt Halflings were likable scroundels instead of “clever� rogues.
Halfling Luck: Instead of a bonus to all saving throws, how about giving Halflings the ability to re-roll one attack or saving throw per day?
* * * * * * *
Half-Elf
General: I like that Half-Elves can select which ability score they’ll put that +2 bonus into.
Adaptability: This is a great idea, and combined with their +2 bonus to any ability score will probably increase their popularity as a race.
Elven Immunities: As with Elves, I’d like to see the immunity to sleep effects get eliminated or modified into another type of immunity/bonus.
Keen Senses: As with Elves, that ability to spot concealed or secret doors seems a bit “outdated� to me.
* * * * * * *
Human
General: As with Half-Elves, it’s a good idea that you can put that +2 bonus into any ability score. I really like humans “as is�, and would not change a thing. :)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CLASSES (Pages 8-19)
General: I think *all* classes should have a powerful 20th level ability to reward single-classing. However, this is compensated somewhat by the “Favoured Class HP bonus� (which is another idea that I really like) but still it’d be great to see.
I also hope that the ‘NPC Classes’ will still be part of the Pathfinder RPG (at least Expert and Commoner), since I’d really, really hate to stat ‘non-heroic’ NPCs either as “monsters� or Fighters or Rogues.
In my opinion Barbarians could be merged with Fighter, since to me it feels a cultural thing instead of being a core class (Barbarian abilities could be made into Feats). Having said that, I think the game could also include ‘Cultural’ or ‘Social Status’ skill modifiers/bonuses or additional class skills, so that PCs or NPCs with ‘Aristocrat’ background would have, for example, either a +2 to Knowledge (Nobility) or have it added to their list of class skills. Maybe some of these backgrounds (e.g. ‘Aristocrat’) could only be taken with a ‘Background Feat’? Perhaps it would work or perhaps not, but it might really make ‘Savage’ fighters stand out from ‘Civilized’ fighters and vice versa (i.e. you could only take those “barbarian� feats if you’re a ‘Savage’). On the other hand, this might add an unnecessarily complex layer into the game? Just some thoughts.
* * * * * * *
Cleric
General: If rogues and wizards get a boost to their Hit Die, shouldn’t clerics also get that? I wouldn’t mind using D10 for clerics (and rangers) while fighters could be boosted to D12. I’d also want them to have a 20th level ability that fighters and rogues have.
After pondering about it for a while, I think clerics (along with other spellcasting classes) could employ “Mana� or “Divine Energy� in the way 3E Psionic Points work. I know that the Vancian Spellcasting is one of the ‘Sacred Cows’ in the system, but I really thought the PsP system made Psionics interesting and easy to use. In any case this ‘Sacred Cow’ may be too important or central in D&D to slaughter, but it’s an idea.
Orisons: I did not actually get this ability. The designer notes seem to imply that you can cast them “at will� (i.e. any number freely per day) but the cleric class description notes that “you can prepare a number of orisons per day� (Table 4-2). So can you cast them freely at will or are you limited to the number listed on the table? Or, do you get, for example, three orisons per day that you need not prepare beforehand?
Domain Powers: I liked them –- in my opinion they seem more “natural� and fitting than in 3E (I especially like those 1st level powers). Good work!
Turn Undead: Love it! A great idea to reinvent one of the “traditional� cleric abilities in a way that increases its usefulness in the game dramatically. Now *this* feels like a “natural� and more believable way to increase the party’s healing potential (especially when compared to ‘Second Wind’ and ‘Healing Surge’). Also, the cleric gets to save his spells for other purposes instead of always having to spend them on healing. One minor suggestion, though: this ability is already quite powerful (heals allies while dealing damage to all Undead), so I’d prefer it not to make Undead flee –- couldn’t it just cause them to become ‘Shaken’ or “stun� them for a round or two?
* * * * * * *
Fighter
General: As noted above, I wouldn’t mind if the Hit Die was bumped up to D12. Also, in my opinion something like the ‘Resiliency’ Rogue Talent would also fit the fighter class perfectly.
Weapon and Armor Training: I think this is a great idea! I like that you don’t specialize in a single weapon, but instead the bonus applies to the whole group. And the Armor Training is also brilliant, since it allows for variety in concepts -- you can create a “Dex-based� fighter who only wears a Light Armor and he isn’t “penalized� for that choice (or dependant solely on magic items to boost his AC).
Armor Mastery: While I like this ability in theory, it seems a bit too “sudden� to get that DR 10/-, so I’d like to have a some sort of ‘Lesser Armor Mastery’ (DR 5/- or something like that) on 10th or 15th level.
Weapon Mastery: I like this, since it encourages single-classing. In my opinion this is a good example of what 20th level abilities should be –- I especially love that you can’t be disarmed and that you confirm crits automatically.
* * * * * * *
Rogue
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: I like the weapon list, but would personally add Buckler to the Armor Proficiency.
Rogue Talent: I have one major issue with the list –- namely, I’d not give rogues any Spell-like or Supernatural abilities (e.g. ‘Minor Magic’ or ‘Dispelling Attack’), because I feel that as a “martial� class rogue should not have magical abilities. Otherwise these abilities seem *great* (and I like that they’re divided into two categories) and I can’t wait to use them in action!
* * * * * * *
Wizard
General: I wouldn’t mind seeing a “Mana� system replace the Vancian Spellcasting. My group has tested the magic system from Green Ronin’s “Thieves’ World� books, and it works surprisingly well without adding any complexity into the game. In this type of system sorcerers could get more “Mana Points� per day than wizards, and/or perhaps they could boost their spells with their “vitality� (by taking damage)? Again, these are just some quick ideas that might not even work or feel like belonging in D&D.
Also, as I’ve mentioned above, it wouldn’t hurt to give the wizards a 20th level power, or several “lesser� powers (in addition to those School Powers) at different levels.
Arcane Bond: Finally a simple system that gives you the chance to use *weapons* as your wizard’s “talisman�! As this issue was recently discussed in my group (we ended up with a houseruled version of the rules presented in UA) I’m glad to see it become a class feature. This may be similar to those ‘implements’ in 4E, but I think it’s simpler and better.
Familiar: I’d change the bonus for all familiars to +5 (except for the bonus granted by Weasel).
School Powers and the Specialist Bonus: Brilliant! Now it truly feels different to play a Necromancer than a Diviner. Still, maybe I’d have liked more school-related abilities (improved Specialist Bonuses) to simple Spell-Like Abilities.
Skills: Why do wizards and sorcerers get only 2 skills? This seems rather odd, since these classes should be (at least wizards) “academic� and studious in nature.
I'd disagree with you on the orc's ability scores. A race of savage warriors being perceptive and intuitive? Makes sense to me.
Well thought-out and presented.
Two quick notes:
Orisons: These can be cast at-will, but you do not have access to all 0-level spells everyday. Instead you must choose the orisons you have prepared each day (3 at 1st level) and can cast those 3 spells at will until you prepare spells the following day, when you might decide to pick 3 different ones. I gather that this is the same system for wizards and 0-level spells.
Wizards and skills: While it is true that wizards have a relatively small number of skills, their generally higher Intelligence bonus should result in a reasonably large number of skills to start. That said, I agree that 2 + Int is quite small and think that ALL classes should start with 4 + Int.
O
|
|
I'd disagree with you on the orc's ability scores. A race of savage warriors being perceptive and intuitive? Makes sense to me.
I personally never really saw orcs being especially perceptive or intuitive, and I seem to recall that they even get a penalty to WIS score (or +0 at maximum). That's why I don't see them granting their offspring any positive bonus to WIS. In my opinion STR and CON make far more sense, and would result in Half-Orcs being more "effective" barbarians (unless barbarian abilities are derived from WIS).
I understand that Half-Orcs, as "outcasts", would be contantly on the lookout for danger, but it would be more consistent (with the other races) to simply give them a racial bonus to Perception.
|
|
Well thought-out and presented.
Two quick notes:
Orisons: These can be cast at-will, but you do not have access to all 0-level spells everyday. Instead you must choose the orisons you have prepared each day (3 at 1st level) and can cast those 3 spells at will until you prepare spells the following day, when you might decide to pick 3 different ones. I gather that this is the same system for wizards and 0-level spells.
Wizards and skills: While it is true that wizards have a relatively small number of skills, their generally higher Intelligence bonus should result in a reasonably large number of skills to start. That said, I agree that 2 + Int is quite small and think that ALL classes should start with 4 + Int.
O
Thanks, now I finally get it! :) I hope that Jason, Erik, Lisa and others read these threads -- like you, I'd surely like to see all classes get at least 4 skills at 1st level, but I think Bard and Ranger should still get 6 skills and Rogue 8 skills.
Thanks, now I finally get it! :) I hope that Jason, Erik, Lisa and others read these threads -- like you, I'd surely like to see all classes get at least 4 skills at 1st level, but I think Bard and Ranger should still get 6 skills and Rogue 8 skills.
The problem with that is you'd have folks dropping into bard or rogue for one level just to get the extra skills, and then using the rest of their advancement as normal.
Personally, I like the idea of all classes getting 4+Int, or if nothing else, not having any class get more than 6+Int.
|
|
Thanks, now I finally get it! :) I hope that Jason, Erik, Lisa and others read these threads -- like you, I'd surely like to see all classes get at least 4 skills at 1st level, but I think Bard and Ranger should still get 6 skills and Rogue 8 skills.The problem with that is you'd have folks dropping into bard or rogue for one level just to get the extra skills, and then using the rest of their advancement as normal.
Personally, I like the idea of all classes getting 4+Int, or if nothing else, not having any class get more than 6+Int.
I think your point has merit. After thinking about it for a while, many of my PCs have indeed multi-classed into Rogue to get some extra skill points , often just to qualify for a PrC. In terms of game balance, 4 + INT skills at 1st level for all classes would most likely be the ideal option.
Just my individual opinion, but I think gnomes should move away from the tinker gnome concept all together.
Instead I like the idea of gnomes with a fey-like attitude, whimsical & social beings who enjoy song and dance.
Overall I like the way Pathfinder is moving.
|
Just my individual opinion, but I think gnomes should move away from the tinker gnome concept all together.
Instead I like the idea of gnomes with a fey-like attitude, whimsical & social beings who enjoy song and dance.
Overall I like the way Pathfinder is moving.
I agree, I'm not a fan of Tinker gnomes. In fact I'm working on a dungeon for an adventure design class (taught by Steven Schend) that was built by a gnome. My concept is what if a gnome made Undermountain ...
|
|
Just my individual opinion, but I think gnomes should move away from the tinker gnome concept all together.
Instead I like the idea of gnomes with a fey-like attitude, whimsical & social beings who enjoy song and dance.
Overall I like the way Pathfinder is moving.
I wouldn'te mind that either, really, although I also like gnomes as tinkerers and inventors. It's just that the racial description of gnomes in Alpha 1 seems to imply that they're still tinkerers and should get a bonus on INT, too. I wouldn't mind if they got a bonus to INT and CHA, but I'm not sure how that would affect game balance (in terms of the racial ability score modifiers). Now they get a bonus on CHA, because the favored class is bard, and if they get an INT bonus as well, it might make them the "only" race you choose for your bard.