|
I would like to see the Universalist Wizards abilities bumped back to closer to what they were in Alpha 1. Specifically, the Metamagic Mastery ability essentially allowed 1 use per level in the Alpha 1 and is 1 use per 2 levels in the Alpha 3. In my own playtests of the wizard, the universalist abilities have been the funnest change as they have made a straight class Wizard worth playing again. In that same vein, I would like to see a Universalist ability at first level like all the specialist wizards have. It seems the Universalist was scaled back in Alphas 2 and 3 because there were complaints that their class features were too good, which I just don't agree with. The generalist wizard already suffers compared to specialist casters and now I would argue also to Sorcerers and their bloodline class feature. I don't want the Universalist Wizard castrated to the point it isn't as good an option as the other casting classes in the beta and final product.
Cleric channelling I'd like to change. In fact remove it, I would. I'd rather see something more akin to the paladin's lay on hands ability for the cleric myself, maybe even the same or more powerful version for the cleric.
Honestly, at the moment the main thing I would change about Pathfinder is:
Concentration and Spellcraft. Bring back Concentration as a skill, keyed to Constitution. It's integral to Psionics and Tome of Battle, and making it a skill keyed to CON makes it a skill that no one caster type has an advantage in. As a result, get rid of Spellcraft. Roll the abilities of Spellcraft (and Psicraft) into the associated knowledges: Identifying an arcane spell requires Knowledge (Arcana). Divine spell? Knowledge (Religion). Psionic power? Knowledge (Psionics). Maneuver? Knowledge (Tactics) or (Local) or something. It's still keyed off of the same attribute (INT) and it means that priest classes are more likely to identify the magic of the gods, arcanists are more likely to identify wizard magic, and psions are more likely to identify psionics. It makes a whole lot more sense.I know that's how I'll be houseruling it, even if the Beta doesn't fix it.
(Bear in mind, I haven't had a lot of playtesting to speak of, so there may be something else that I hate more, but this is the main thing that bugs me as of right now.)
I agree with this completely. Also, from memory, the Concentration skill was the skill that Rogues could take advantage of when working on opening locks or disabling traps while battle raged around them. It wasn't just for spellcasters.
The 2 things I would change currently:
1. The Arcane bloodline for the Sorcerer should, in my opinion, have all Knowledge skills as class skills, and more Wizardly bonus feats. As the description of the bloodline indicates Arcane Sorcerers come from Wizardly families.
2. Give the Paladin and the Ranger 0 level spells and remove the different spell lists. They are essentially minor clerics and druids of their deities in my opinion, with essentially the same training in spellcasting, just not as skilled or as powerful as actual clerics and druids. [As a side note, Rangers should be able to learn Druidic as a bonus language in my opinion, for the same reason.]
Cover in combat.
Get back to the 3.0 standard. The grid/lines simplification is good for a sidenote for speeding up complex combat situations, but - as some users are already complaining - not everyone uses minis and a battlemat, and a more descriptive, narrative mechanic based on exposed ratio would be better.
I agree strongly with this one. Even though we heavily use grids/minis in our games, sometimes it's nice to just be able to come up with a quick answer about cover without having to lay down minis and draw out a map and start tracing lines. I suggest having the grid/lines as the default rule, but an optional rule/inclusion along the lines of the 3.0 cover definitions for those who want a quick answer without having to lay down minis or who are playing a more narrative sans miniatures game.
I agree with this completely. Also, from memory, the Concentration skill was the skill that Rogues could take advantage of when working on opening locks or disabling traps while battle raged around them. It wasn't just for spellcasters.
Concentration was used when a rogue was hit when using one of those skills in a battle.
I never saw it used for non-spellcasting (or psionic) area actually with the exception for a warblade who had a couple powers that used it.
I agree with this completely. Also, from memory, the Concentration skill was the skill that Rogues could take advantage of when working on opening locks or disabling traps while battle raged around them. It wasn't just for spellcasters.
Concentration was used when a rogue was hit when using one of those skills in a battle.
I never saw it used for non-spellcasting (or psionic) area actually with the exception for a warblade who had a couple powers that used it.
I play Rogues from time to time and I clearly remember that I got hit while trying to disable a trap once and the GM got me to roll Concentration to avoid having to start again. The 3.5 rules clearly state that this is a valid use of the skill, which surprised me, and I then put skill points into it. :)
So, yes, Concentration is not just for spellcasters.
|
Change all specialist powers, domain powers, or special abilities that can be cast a number times a day, or have a duration related to caster level, change to 3+a where a is the modifier of the characters prime attribute.
Effects that do damage related to caster level remain unchanged.eg. Corrupting Touch (Su) ... this effect persists for 3 + (character's Charisma modifier) rounds ...
eg. Change Shape (Su) You can change your shape for 3 + (character's Intelligence modifier) rounds ...This should relate the number of uses or duration of the power to the character's prime attribute but the effect to a character's caster level.
I wouldn't have thought of this, but it makes sense. It standardizes the mechanic for class abilities(i.e. Smite can be used 1 + Cha modifier times per day), making it easier to remember for DMs and Players alike. A similar change to supportng feats for class abilities (i.e. "extra X" feat provides an additional 3 times per day of X ability) would also make things simpler.
So, yes, Concentration is not just for spellcasters.
Of course, I just meant that 99% of the time it is for spellcasters and that you are unlikely to see them used for anyone else, but it is not impossible.
However, rogues do not even get Concentration as a class skill, and again the situation is very unlikely to come up naturally in a game. Just because other classes have uses for it doesn't mean that it is useful for those classes to spend ranks in it for the normal campaign.
I would like to see the fighter abilities at every odd level be changed into a sort of like the rogue’s talent or rage power (The abilities that would be replaced would be the first level bonus feat, the armor training, the weapon training, the armor mastery, and the weapon mastery too even though it is not an odd level ability). You would pick one item from a list at every odd level. Every item would be selectable only once, most would have require you to have other items from the list as well as level requirements. Possibly even feat or skill requirements.
A few examples would be:
Extra Training: Grants: Gain another fighter bonus feat.
Armor Training I: Prerequisites: Fighter level 3 Grants: Gain the armor training ability (+1 bonus)
Armor Training II: Prerequisites: Fighter level 7, Armor Training I Grants: The armor training bonus increases to 2.
Weapon Training I: Prerequisites: Fighter level 5 Grants: Gain the weapon training ability (+1 bonus)
Armor Mastery: Prerequisites: Fighter level 19 Grants: The armor mastery ability
Add so on for the similar abilities replicating the odd level fighter abilities (and weapon mastery). This just so the fighter has a built in way to let people easily create new abilities for fighters without making them fighter specific feats or substitution levels, the exact nature of the abilities is not as important to me as the ability to choose between multiple abilities is.
Cultured Training: Grants: Gain Bluff, Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility), and Sense Motive as class skills. Also gain four skill points.
Blind Warrior: Prerequisites: Fighter level 5 Grants: Blindsense 5 feet/two fighter levels and Perception as a class skill Special: If you have Blind-Flight, it’s benefits are now applied to ranged attacks within your blindsense range.
Unarmored Training: Grants: Monk’s AC Bonus except you may choose between Intelligence, Charisma, or Wisdom to add to your AC. This does not stack with the monk’s and other AC Bonus abilities.
I would downgrade Sneak Attack. A lot.
I would like to see the Universalist Wizards abilities bumped back to closer to what they were in Alpha 1. Specifically, the Metamagic Mastery ability essentially allowed 1 use per level in the Alpha 1 and is 1 use per 2 levels in the Alpha 3. In my own playtests of the wizard, the universalist abilities have been the funnest change as they have made a straight class Wizard worth playing again. In that same vein, I would like to see a Universalist ability at first level like all the specialist wizards have. It seems the Universalist was scaled back in Alphas 2 and 3 because there were complaints that their class features were too good, which I just don't agree with. The generalist wizard already suffers compared to specialist casters and now I would argue also to Sorcerers and their bloodline class feature. I don't want the Universalist Wizard castrated to the point it isn't as good an option as the other casting classes in the beta and final product.
I strongly agree with this.
I would also give Wizards Spell Focus (for their chosen school) as a bonus feat at first or third level. I would like it at first level, but it would equally be acceptable if they had to advance a couple levels before receiving this kind of "mastery". If it is at third level and they already have Spell Focus, they instead receive Greater Spell Focus (again, for their chosen school).
Drop favored class. It bugs the holy living crap out of me.
Remove Save of Die completely. SoD have always been bad for the game. One shotting the BBEG or a PC is not fun at all. But changing them with the 10 per caster level doesn't seem like a SoD spell, it seems like "Save or Hurt A Lot," so why bother with them at all?
When wielding a shield you receive a bonus to your reflex save equal to the shied AC. It would make Sword and Board PCs viable, and it seems cool to block a Dragons breath weapon with your shield rather than dodging it.
I'd vote to change the halflings bonus stat from Cha to Int, or at least Wis.
Smite.
Please set Smite up to be the same for all classes the grant the ability. I don't see a need for all the different variations that have been listed for this. If a paladin uses Smite on a non-evil creature, then there should be consequences for him, but there is no reason to say that it just fails. Hit bonus could be set to equal the character's CHA bonus (minimum +1) and damage bonus could be determined by adding all levels the grant the Smite ability.
Likewise, I'd allow the paladin to Smite much more often. Paladin levels per day would work, or maybe allow a channel energy to be used for an additional Smite. This should be a signature ability for a paladin, and it's just not usable often enough to warrant its very limited uses.
Domains, Bloodlines, and Arcane Schools should behave similarly to eachother, but the current implementation creates what is essentially a second spell list for the three classes that need one the least.
Make it so clerics default to domain spell lists, and then bring Bloodlines and Arcane Schools in line with this. We did okay with Clerics having to prepare healing unless they had the domain... and this maybe could be offset by (further) merging Channeling, Lay on Hands, and Smite attempts.
Only one thing? Right now?
Fix the Multiclassing Rules!
Make Multiclassing more effectiv (see Kae's Thread here).
In line with this: Rework Prestige Classes to what they should have been!
DO LESS.
After all the changes are listed and layed out on a table in front of Jason, Monte, & whomever. Pick about 1/3 of them and find a way to lessen the size of the tweak to the 3.5 rules. Find ways to make changes simpler and less, as a final pass through the proposed changes. I think sometimes there are simpler, but overlooked solutions that are in size: small.
I'm surprised I haven't seen more of this. It's nice to make some changes after all this time, but if compatibility is paramount, maybe it should be scaled back a bit.
Hello, first post for me I think.
I want new multiclassing rules. It might be far from perfect, but I miss the way 2e did it. With multiple xp charts already made for the game just have multiclass characters use a different xp table, restrict to one presige class ( or if you prefer to call it kit ). Maybe just take the gestalt rules and give gestalt a different xp table
love
* New channeling rules
* Wizard school abilities
* sorcerous bloodlines
* New fighter abilities ( much easier fix than the fun but messy tome of nine swords)
* 4+int skill minimum
* condencing skills ( I say sailor and fly get a new skill to do with movement...work ride into it too )
* Sneak attack ( way better ability now that it works on most baddies )
* DR 5 pts per +1 I like
dislike
* rage points
* new cleric domains ( if it ain't broke )
* favored classes ( just dump them, easier that way )
* polymorph, way too complicated...just make some sort of rule tie in with cr. Either that or make it not change ability scores ( I think thats the way it was in 2E ) that said I never had a problem with it
* they don't seem to be doing this...but balance isn't the answer...don;t nerf anything...give things weaker cool and fun reasons to play their class.
Sorry I went long
I'd like an Option for Non-Vancian magic.
The open content from Unearthed Arcana would be welcome, although I think that Jason et al could come up with something better.
Just an option, not a replacement.
Haven't read this thread so I might be repeating something here, but I don't like the new spell slot rules, never agreed with the X-mas tree effect and I like haveing the freedom to deal with slots as DM. When I go Pathfinder that will be one thing I'm keeping with 3.5. Its not a deal breaker but I think as the new core with older 3.5 players it will cause some confusion with new players. Though any good DM and clear it up fairly quickly.
* favored classes ( just dump them, easier that way )
I agree, this has always been, as a GM, somewhat superfluous to me. Yes, I understand that certain races excel at certain classes but I am smart enough to discern that on my own. If you, as the player, have any Ranks in min-maxing then you do not need to be told what a race's favored class might be. Furthermore it tends to keep some players from mixing and matching their classes and races and therein as a GM you find yourself, yet again with Ye Olde Elven Wizard...and so on.
Instead it my be useful to have a table that displays the best matches of Races to Classes...and then upon selection by the player the Chosen Class is set and then all Favored Class-like restrictions apply. How this would play out for Humans and Half-Elves? Maybe give them bonuses to multi-class instead.
Half-Orcs with Druid, rather than Cleric, as a Favored Class option.
I meant to reply to this post a short time ago and accidentally replied to the one below it...OOPS.
This was my reply: This seems to be the natural progression of things in the play tests, with the half-orc's Wis bonus. Good call, I second it.
Furthermore, I have recently posted my disinterest in the Favored Class idea altogether...but if it must persist, because the designers are attempting this PFRPG to look very similar to 3.5, then please apply the Druid/Half Orc comment above.
Fixing The Sorcerer:
3.5's Sorcerer became a joke after the introduction of the Warmage...or so I am of the opinion. Looking forward, I still see the Alpha 3 version as the weaker of the 2 arcane mages (particularly at higher levels). I know there are 101 suggestions scattered across 1001 boards about how to make the Sorcerer a better, stand alone class but I don't see the longevity of this class should PF introduce a Warmage-like class down the road.
What the Sorcerer needs:
If I could change one thing it would be their armor limitations. The icon of Sorcerer is different than the icon of Wizard, and in that image I see them with some proficiency with armor. Perhaps some 3rd level Bonus Feat for armor use would be nice. Also/or, one could have their armor selection be Bloodline based as either a Offensive or Defensive choice (since not all player care to have an armored mage), this would allow the player to move their caster into more of a frontlines style player that the Wizard just cannot compete with (at early levels). If attached to the Bloodline it would play nicely into the Sorcerer's gradual evolution into something uniquely non-base Race. Say at 3rd level, a Gnome Sorc with the Aberrant Bloodline choses to be a bit less Long in the Limb and more defensive with something like "Slippery Skin" a viscous acidic ooze that provides a +2 to AC and maybe even causes a bit of damage...just an idea. This would require an Offensive and Defensive Bloodline progression selection...sorry authors.
And I know it is just a "change 1 thing" thread but since I am suggesting a slight Sorcerer overhaul, I would like to add that I think it would play nicely in their favor if their Bloodline could manipulate their Known Spells. Like the 3.5 Warlock being able to blast away with Eldritch power, I think the Sorc should be able to tap into their inherent unusual powers within and augment their known spells in a unique fashion as dictated by their Bloodline (Like the Druid's Spontaneous Casting). Again with the above Gnome Sorc, perhaps his/her Aberrant Bloodline would allow some sort of summoning selection or acidic spell substitute?
Just some thoughts.
|
|
Now that the Beta has gone to the presses for a good week or two, it's probably time for me to chime in.
If there was one thing I would *add* to the Alpha 3 rules, it would be the background traits (and the additional traits feat) that were mentioned in the #pathfinder chat around the middle of June. That concept really reinforces some of the work I've done as a novice gm by trying to offer players a carrot to create characters with background. It's also a great way to mix fluff and crunch. While I understand that a lot of the really flavorful Golarion fluff would not be a good fit, the general ones would be a great addition. (I know it would be possible to add Golarion© flavor with the OGL by identifying it as product identity, but extra Paizo-specific traits could just as easily be omitted.)
|
As my amigo above wrote (The Fidgeter is in my RL game group), I second views on the Sorc needing a rework. I agree with the min of 4+Int for all classes (I always thought it ridiculous that a fighter doesn't know as much about Know-Tactics, Riding,whatever, or a Wizard Know-Arcane, Spellcraft etc... as a Rogue does about climbing a wall).
What I would like to see, however, is the implementation of Fighting Styles. Not just 'Rangers use 2 weapons', or Monks punch people', but actual maneuvers.
Hero System seems to be the only company to have ever done this right, though others have dabbled. I had turned my homebrew system/setting into D20 for 3.0/5, and I turned the styles into 3 or 5 level Prestige classes instead. Monks should have a variety of strikes and grapple options )As should fighters), fighter schools of swordsmanship, even Rogues different dirty fighting styles.
-Uriel
As my amigo above wrote (The Fidgeter is in my RL game group), I second views on the Sorc needing a rework. I agree with the min of 4+Int for all classes (I always thought it ridiculous that a fighter doesn't know as much about Know-Tactics, Riding,whatever, or a Wizard Know-Arcane, Spellcraft etc... as a Rogue does about climbing a wall).
What I would like to see, however, is the implementation of Fighting Styles. Not just 'Rangers use 2 weapons', or Monks punch people', but actual maneuvers.
Hero System seems to be the only company to have ever done this right, though others have dabbled. I had turned my homebrew system/setting into D20 for 3.0/5, and I turned the styles into 3 or 5 level Prestige classes instead. Monks should have a variety of strikes and grapple options )As should fighters), fighter schools of swordsmanship, even Rogues different dirty fighting styles.-Uriel
I concur, though I might add, I believe that WoTC was heading in that direction w/ Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords [ToB]. Perhaps, like the classes of ToB and the earlier Psionic classes, there should be a number of power points that every class has to invest into their unique fighting style.
Upside: This would solve some of the complaints about the re-tooled Rage with its rage points. It would also, potentially, allow "melee-ists" and skill-based classes to stand toe-to-toe with magic-casters at high levels, a problem that the original 3.5 PHB never really solved w/o magic items.
Downside: This would deviate away from the original 3.5 PHB and end up creating a Spell Point like system which Uriel and I have had some complications with in or time. I liked the ToB but it made the PHB classes obsolete to a degree.
Perhaps the PFRPG core Player's Guide should pick up where the ToB left off...I kinda thought that is what 4E was going to look like anyway (boy was I unpleasantly surprised).
The F
Honestly, at the moment the main thing I would change about Pathfinder is:
Concentration and Spellcraft. Bring back Concentration as a skill, keyed to Constitution. It's integral to Psionics and Tome of Battle, and making it a skill keyed to CON makes it a skill that no one caster type has an advantage in. As a result, get rid of Spellcraft. Roll the abilities of Spellcraft (and Psicraft) into the associated knowledges: Identifying an arcane spell requires Knowledge (Arcana). Divine spell? Knowledge (Religion). Psionic power? Knowledge (Psionics). Maneuver? Knowledge (Tactics) or (Local) or something. It's still keyed off of the same attribute (INT) and it means that priest classes are more likely to identify the magic of the gods, arcanists are more likely to identify wizard magic, and psions are more likely to identify psionics. It makes a whole lot more sense.I know that's how I'll be houseruling it, even if the Beta doesn't fix it.
(Bear in mind, I haven't had a lot of playtesting to speak of, so there may be something else that I hate more, but this is the main thing that bugs me as of right now.)
I am with you on this one, good call.
|
|
Okay, before I give my suggestion, a little background.
I LOVE magic-users. LOVE them. Given the chance, I always play one in any campaign, whether they be wizard or sorcerer. I have, in almost all my current 3.x and Pathfinder RPGs, either started with or currently play wizards. (I play a cleric in my current 4E because the wizard was already taken by another player. Hmmm. Wonder how easy it would be to "off" that wizard without the player noticing.)
Thus my suggestion to actually reduce the number of spell slots wizards receive per level borders on heresy. But I feel that, given the at-will 0-level levels, specialty powers, extra feats, arcane bond, AND extra hit points, Pathfinder wizards receive more than make up for, hmmm, the loss of one spell slot per level.
Hmmmm. I'll discuss the idea with my DM who's currently running a Pathfinder game where I play, you guessed it, a wizard.
|
The lack of what is it? You know how Druids are peddled as exclusively these Nature lovers from the local "native" population while Paladins are the elite shocktroops of a few select churches...its that kind of thing. You need that generic character class. That way the Paladin can be the elite shocktroop of a primitive tribe's religious caste and the Druid can be the King's Warden with steam pistols.
Please, for the love of all that is holy/unholy/sacred in any way, fix the poor sorcerer's casting progression! Ever since day one of 3.0, the poor sorcerer has been a level behind at all magic, for no good reason, and it hurts the entire group, not just the sorcerer. I have yet to play a single game where the rest of the group didn't take on a look of horror at having a sorcerer instead of a wizard, and try their best to get me to play a wizard (which I hate because of prepared casting).
Now, with the wizard able to craft items without XP costs (which is good, mind you), that delay hurts the sorcerer even more - the wizard can have almost as much flexibility for a little gold, but the poor sorcerer is stuck a level back on everything...and has fewer skill points...and less class skills...and a casting stat that applies to less (no extra skill points, for example)...and they can't even make those same magic items because they don't know the spells to do it.
So please, PLEASE show the sorcerer some love and at least let them have their spells at the same time...please? After all, magic comes naturally to them...they shouldn't have a harder time learning something that comes naturally...
One thing?
Well, it's an editorial thing, not a rules thing.
Use standardized terminology and language, to make reading the rules a lot easier. "Enchant," "enhance," "augment" should not be interchangeable; each should have a specific definition in-game.
Likewise for "caster level" and "class level;" don't just say "level."
If a SLA allows a save, always say so. If it doesn't, always say so.
I wish I found this thread earlier. Might be too late but here goes.
If I could change one thing I'd..
Give monks a proper, unique niche in the adventuring party.
I can only support this. It doesn't say 'give monks a higher BAB' it says something that I honestly think fits.
Also, I'm seconding these suggestions:* Half-Orcs with Druid, rather than Cleric, as a Favored Class option.
* Minimum of 4+int skill points
I 3rd these suggestions :-P
*I was a touch irked when the half orc was released as having a +2 to Wis and a -2 to Int, I always thought their negative should be charisma but that didn't matter to me, what irked me was the cleric being a favored class. Druid just seems to make so much more sense to me.
*I never thought that people who swung swords or practiced spells had so little time that they couldn't have two more wittle skill points.
I really don't care much for these suggestions:* Psionics as a core anything
* Paladins as anything but LG
* Getting rid of alignments
*I agree whole heartedly. Pathfinder has provided a place for psionics to exist should GM's wish to introduce it to their game world. I don't think it should be more widespread than that however to me psionics have always been a staple of science fiction, not fantasy, and I discourage it in all of my games. But that's just me.
*Paladins have always been LG champions, leave them that way in the Core, I'm not saying there shouldn't be different versions of the paladin that cater to other alignments, but not in the Core. Leave that to a supplement or houserule. (Don't they have something like that in the SRD.*Alignments should stick around, maybe go the Eberron route and make them a little more ambiguous but to me D&D has always been about Law and Chaos, Good and Evil, let people houserule alignment out if they want. That and getting rid of alignments would ruin backwards compatibility.
Half-Orcs with Druid, rather than Cleric, as a Favored Class option.
I mentioned this because Remmington was the first one I've seen to bring this up.
Oh, and someone mentioned giving the ranger more combat options. Thumbs up to that.
So many things, sorry I ramble, here's my own change:
Revert the feats that didn't need to be fixed back to normal, or at least simplify the fix. Power Attack, Combat Expertise, Spring Attack and more, I honestly don't think any of them needed changing. If they seemed too powerful then simply put a cap on them like in 3.0 Perhaps Power Attack could be as it was but with a 6 point max. Then an improved that would come at higher levels that made it 12 point max.
Give the Paladin and the Ranger 0 level spells
YES, PLEASE! Especially now that 0-level spells are "at will." For the ranger, the ability to create water at will would be a life-saver in the desert, for example. Detect poison? No brainer. Know direction? Of course a ranger would want that. Etc.