Been playing Pathfinder since Alpha 1 and have had a number of long 4E games giving it a try.
I am in the camp that 4E has lost the "feeling" of D&D as I knew it through the years; The things I like about 3/3.5/PFRPG include the tremendous options (supported by the core rules), particularly when designing characters, NPCs and key villians. Curse of the Crimson Throne adventure path is a perfect example of why I enjoy 3E - Not only a good story, but the authors really embrace the expanse of rules available to design the villians, helping them come alive.
All that said, as a DM, one thing that 4E has going for it is simplicity in play - particularly when running encounters; The layout, more than limited options, seems to speed up play. For the record, I am not a "delve" format proponent, I like my monsters "in-line" with the text.
The problem I have had in the past is, even after an active 30 or so years of playing, I still cannot remember every spell description, and, with the tweaks in Pathfinder, while cool, I need to double-check even more.
So - I thought, "Hey, if the major benefit of 4E is simply the layout (according to me, of course, others will quite disagree), why not take a shot at a similar layout using PFRPG rules".
Now, this is simply a first straw-dog done in about 40min or so; I chose a lower level creature (Vreeg, from Edge of Anarchy). While lower level, he had an array of powers that pushed the limit on "fitment", so, a reasonable case study says I.
Some may see this as simply verifying the issue with 3E - an unwieldy set of powers/options/etc. that may never be used and too much prep time. That said, if a PUBLISHER were to give me something similar in FORMAT, my life as a DM would be made easier and I would have an easier time continuing on with 3E/3.5/PFRPG.
As I said, this is simply food for thought.
NOTE: There are several mistakes and items left out, etc. as this was a "rush" job to provoke thought. Please don't beat me up on accuracy, that was not the intent.
Enough Rambling! To see the file ----> CLICK HERE
(if, for some reason, I have violated some sort of infringement or otherwise peeved off corp-type entities, let me know what I did and I'll fix - Thanks)
~D
|
This looks good. I like the fact that it's a Pathfinder statblock, not 3.5. [Ahem] Its' very clear, readable, and usable at the table.
I've already started using 1-1-1 diagonals and at my table. Yes, I know it gives some players a stroke, but it really makes things easier in play and it's not too abusable.
I had a house rule for using minion style opponents for years (though I've since changeed to the template offered on these boards).
|
I am pretty sure those symbols are proprietary to WotC, so you might want to change them.
As for the layout, the main problem is inevitably going to be size, along with possible OGL issues. Consider the spell list for a 10th level caster. What about a 20th level caster? Likewise you are going to need to include the same sort of write up for a bunch of feats, particularly those that enable more options, otherwise people will just have to scramble for them.
Overall though the concept is good. There are a lot of good ideas in 4E. The problem is how they are executed.
Umm... Huge monster stat blocks. I like having all the information needed to play on a statblock but this seems to go too far.
Umm... Huge monster stat blocks. I like having all the information needed to play on a statblock but this seems to go too far.
Yeah, I agree; But if you think about the core difference between the two systems, and it feels like 4E simply presents less combat options; Look at some of the highest level foes in 4E, they have all of eight abilities.
Poor Vreeg here has like 25 abilities at level five. Get him up to level 12 or 15, and the stat block - with any detail becomes huge.
So - What do we do? I say we come up with a hybrid - The options/abilities we know he will use with a list of additional (minor - probably not used) abilities in a more traditional "list" format.
Stat blocks are already getting huge in 3.5E/PFRPG - adding more detail could get ludicrous; HOWEVER - What does it take to streamline play?
Once we are all running around with iPhone v12 or electronic paper, we can quickly click to reference details and publishers will take this into account in online supplements; But while we are stuck with paper, more and more gamers will get sick of 2-3hr combats because of non-omniscient DMs needing to look things up. Before 4E, no-biggie, everyone did it; But now, it will become the rallying cry.
More, consistent, stat detail is easy to develop if someone takes the time to establish standards. Paizo led the charge here before with the development of the existing 3.5 stat block;
I'm just saying, when I see "telekinesis" or "blasphemy" in a monster stat block, if I have not done alot of homework, I'm going to stop the game and look the thing up - character lives are at stake and I can't rely on memory alone. However, if I had a few lines of (approved/certified by Paizo) content, I would likely not even reach for the book.
This is not an easy problem to crack but, I think, important to keep our focus on 3.5/PFRPG rules over time.
What is a happy medium in terms of keeping play going but not creating a massive publishing issue in terms of number of pages?
How do we get an understanding of key monster/npc abilities at a glance without the "everyone stop the game and everyone races to find the same darn thing in the same darn book" non-value-add activity?
~D
|
|
.... Or, you could just at a page, paragraph style referential note after each ability....
E.g. Feats: Power Attack (p63,3) Overhand Chop (p63,2), Gorilla Grip (p 62,7)
Special Attacks: Pounce (p210,2), Rage of the Tiger (below)
Rage of the Tiger (EX): When this creature is struck for more than 10 points of damage by a melee attack, it may make a natural weapon attack against the opponent that did the damage as an immediate action.
etc, etc.
Especially since all of the Abilities being referenced could be in the Core PF RPG book. Then we would only need non-core abilities spelled out (like the completely made up Rage of the Tiger SA in the example.)
|
This gets my endorsement. I support layout of game data for ease of reading, learning and using it in game. You should send this directly to Erik and James, asking them to spend time seriously considering this ease-of-use factor for PRPG layout.
It need not look like fourth edition stuff, as your example shows. What matters is its functionality.
I have always been baffled that "testing" seemed to be historically limited to what is know as "play testing." There are plenty of other things about our game that could have used testing, not the least of which is usability of stat blocks, flavor text, module layout, etc.
OP: Nice job on this.
It need not look like fourth edition stuff, as your example shows. What matters is its functionality.
I'll take a shot at a "PFRPG" version this weekend; Been thinking about ways to make things simpler;
I like the idea of "pre-existing conditions" (e.g. pre-cast spells/abilities/items) worked into the stat block (Pathfinder generally does this already) - Really driving consistency is important though, so what is added may be easily "backed out" - without resorting to "rage-like" redundant stat blocks.
Will keep thinking about how to achieve this.
You'll notice that much of the text space is taken by "common conditions" caused by the spell - I'm sure that an easy to reference cheat sheet could remedy; I don't know why though, but I really like some of that text in there (maybe it helps with the "cackle-factor" thinking of how the baddie will lay the smack down during the encounter);
Look for an update Sat or Sun (if not before). I'll try to take a shot at a few different samples (mundane to complex/high-ish level).
~D
You're right on point with the "common conditions". But I'd say instead of a refernce sheet make some cards and give these to the player whose chracter is suffering the condition. Works fine.
Same for spells and Abilities. I've been meaning to do this for a long time, and now adpoting pathfinder I should do it. Each player can go through his/her options that way without the book. Also from playing various card games I remember how handling the cards eventually made you remember in dtail what each crad/spell did, while still serving as a good reminder just in case.
However, your short hand notations of the spell are a fine idea, they will help to keep card text short and sweet.
Maybe its influence from being a OO programmer, but I'd advocate cards because they are reusable, too.
...
All that said, as a DM, one thing that 4E has going for it is simplicity in play - particularly when running encounters; The layout, more than limited options, seems to speed up play. For the record, I am not a "delve" format proponent, I like my monsters "in-line" with the text.
...So - I thought, "Hey, if the major benefit of 4E is simply the layout (according to me, of course, others will quite disagree), why not take a shot at a similar layout using PFRPG rules".
[snip]
That's fabulous - and very similar to what I've started doing when prepping for Skinsaw Murders. I think that there's huge mileage in statting out monsters with the abilities that they will use, ensuring that the referee doesn't need to look things up.
If you have a word template or somesuch that you used for this - I'd be hugely appreciative of a copy - my email is simon(at)english(dot)net. Hope you don't mind the request.
|
|
So - I thought, "Hey, if the major benefit of 4E is simply the layout (according to me, of course, others will quite disagree), why not take a shot at a similar layout using PFRPG rules".
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_O
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_O
I'll give him a try... perhaps this weekend - the key is to include detail to get you around 10 rounds of combat or so. I'm thinking that if I categorize the abilities, e.g. major/minor or primary/secondary and detail only his "favored" capabilities, it might work. We'll see.
~D
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_OI'll give him a try... perhaps this weekend - the key is to include detail to get you around 10 rounds of combat or so. I'm thinking that if I categorize the abilities, e.g. major/minor or primary/secondary and detail only his "favored" capabilities, it might work. We'll see.
I would like to see custom stat blocks for individual encounters and those blocks could have complete capabilities for X rounds of combat.
|
|
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_OI'll give him a try... perhaps this weekend - the key is to include detail to get you around 10 rounds of combat or so. I'm thinking that if I categorize the abilities, e.g. major/minor or primary/secondary and detail only his "favored" capabilities, it might work. We'll see.
~D
Can't wait to see it. If 4E stat blocks can be pathfindered (is it a verb? Doesn't matter, it is NOW!), all the better. ;-)
This is a great idea but nothing I think Paizo (or other publishers) need to take up space doing it for us. I’m rules stupid and if I didn’t make a cheat sheet for each critter before I ran an adventure, I’d be spending all night flipping through the rule books.
So, part of my adventure prep is creating monster cards for all the encounters and listing the effects of all their spells and feats. A couple times I’ve even created multiple cards for a particular fella so I can effortlessly switch over when a barbarian rage wears off or somesuch.
I guess, in effect, I’m making my own Delve format.
This is a great idea but nothing I think Paizo (or other publishers) need to take up space doing it for us. I’m rules stupid and if I didn’t make a cheat sheet for each critter before I ran an adventure, I’d be spending all night flipping through the rule books.
So, part of my adventure prep is creating monster cards for all the encounters and listing the effects of all their spells and feats. A couple times I’ve even created multiple cards for a particular fella so I can effortlessly switch over when a barbarian rage wears off or somesuch.
I guess, in effect, I’m making my own Delve format.
This has nothing to do with being rules stupid, it's just good prep :).
I do the same thing, that way I have everything handy I need for the encounter. I tend to write small so I can fit a lot on 1 or 2 index cards. As far as creating your own delve format, I guess that I kinda do that too. I'll setup my monster cards, then item / treasure cards that are associated with the encounter and rubber band them together and stick either a Postit or a colored index card on the top of it with the room number/letter on it. I ran Three Faces of Evil like this and it pretty much helped the game run smoothly.
Umm... Huge monster stat blocks. I like having all the information needed to play on a statblock but this seems to go too far.
I love the quote from the latest WoTC article on monster design where it says:
"Readability is second only to usability. If a stat block is taking up an entire column of text, it had better be for a good reason. And it usually isn't."
This is so true looking at the Pathfinder mods, so much uneeded fluff.
I like some of the ideas of 4e. If it's smart and usefull why not make use it?
I fully support this line of thinking - the one major attraction to 4 e for me was the "all info provided stat blocks" for monsters.
I reccomended Paizo do soemthing similar in an earlier post when Pathfinder first came out.
I like what was done here, but would welcome any attempt to move in that direction.
|
|
I do agree that it is so much nicer to have a monsters abilities spelled out in the stat block, flipping through a seperate book usually winds up with me accidentally closing the monster book then I have to re-open it. And I do a lot of work with my prep time, but I've had weeks where I litterally have enough time when I get home from work to eat and crash so that I can get up in the morning. So saying it can be solved with a litle prep work is another way of saying hey everyone in the world should have as much free time as me, which is just being obtuse.
So saying it can be solved with a litle prep work is another way of saying hey everyone in the world should have as much free time as me, which is just being obtuse.
Would you like me to roll your dice for you too?
KIDDING!!
Honestly, what's kept the work fairly minimal to me is Paizo's policy of printing in full everything that doesn't come in the core books. Now that they're limited to the SRD for even that, it's even easier to copy and paste from an online version.
What's Paizo's policy on sharing files like this? I'm assuming we can't just up and publish full game stats on a wiki for something they've created, right? Can we share them individually where we can share stat cards amongst ourselves?
considering that the biggest complaints on these boards involve;
A.) The sheer amount of time suckage involved in creating NPC's and custom critters, coupled with -
B.) Book flipping in the middle of combat
with the average number of rounds in my 4E games easily exceeding the average for my 3.5 games, it seems IMO that it is the lags in combat that are pissing people off, not the length of combat itself per se.
This approach would ameliorate that immensely. I always wondered why more books like Enemies and Allies from sword and sorcery didn't make the mainstream. I would give my extra testicle for a 250 pg hardcover with, say, 10 NPC's per 5 level range flushed out with exhaustive stat blocks. Draconomicon did it for dragons, and it was decent (at least the stat blocks anyway).
A.) The sheer amount of time suckage involved in creating NPC's and custom critters, coupled with -
B.) Book flipping in the middle of combat
I enjoy creating custom NPCs and critters, if you don't then there are tons of resources... or you can easily just use published modules.
Book flipping in combat is a big issue until the DM gets enough experience. I'm still climbing that hump. Stupid things like "Elemental Traits" well c'mon why not say it in the stat block:
"Immune: poison, sleep effects, paralysis, stunning,critical hits, flanking."
Grr.. Oh well it's better than "Kobold Zombie, MM Page XXX"
Perhaps one of the best adventure supplements ever was the web enhancement for Red hand of Doom where they gave you stat blocks by encounter so the DM could have them in hand and separate from the book unfortunately they didn't include monsters with MMI statblocks which was frustrating. I would love to see a PDF included with the Adventure Paths like this.
To be honest, most of the issue with stat-blocks is in the adventure, not in the core game. I suppose Paizo could make a new standard stat-block.
This approach would ameliorate that immensely. I always wondered why more books like Enemies and Allies from sword and sorcery didn't make the mainstream. I would give my extra testicle for a 250 pg hardcover with, say, 10 NPC's per 5 level range flushed out with exhaustive stat blocks. Draconomicon did it for dragons, and it was decent (at least the stat blocks anyway).
You have an extra? You might want to talk to a surgeon about that, I've seen cats with 6 claws but I've never seen one with 3...
I usually do the pre-work myself esp. with critical encounters which helps me "read" the encounter better and create a better experience for the players. It's an 80/20 thing these days though and only 20% of the encounters get any attention - which means "book flipping" for the 80% - which are the least value-add most of the time.
Additionally, easier-to-run-out-of-the-box adventures will attract less experienced players (allowing them to DM), which will be the key to the longevity of Pathfinder RPG.
I'll shoot for one treatment tomorrow and another on sunday; Been playing with format in the meantime, to match the current pathfinder "look" in-line with text; Against the swirled background of Curse, it loses some pop against the other text, but I'm sure that was the intent - story over "rules". We'll see where I end up.
~D
As promised, here is a treatment using a new format - Nihil the Ashbringer from Skeletons of Scarwall (a very nice adventure BTW);
You'll notice a few things: I only detailed the primary attacks and defenses I thought would be in use. I used the devil as written in The Book of Fiends (I thought it only appropriate given the title of the thread); I made an attempt to convert to PFRPG; Where something was already written, I did not create redundant text even for the sake of completeness (e.g. feats); Given the powers in effect, I did not add them automatically to the stat block but detailed their effect (for example, my assumption is that at this level, many of the characters would be able to see invisible); This was another rush job regarding rules stuff so be warned there may be errors;
Here is the file -> CLICK HERE
Enjoy!
~D
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_O
Well, here is a shot at "His Badness" - first page only but I estimate he is complete in another half page; This is about 1 half page more than "as written".
NOTE: This is an EXTREME example - Karzoug has a range of abilities and, not using the optional rule limiting enhancements makes things, well, complicated. You get the idea.
This brought up a couple of issues but solvable ones I think; Certainly there is the issue of printing; Without going totally "delve" maybe sheets like these could be released online for key encounters. Obviously, once the "short descriptions" are written once, reusing them is a simple matter of cut and paste.
Were I running the encounter Eye of Avarice, this would be quite helpful in terms of not needing to spend hours doing this myself or spending hours flipping books while "in game".
Anyway, enough jawing -> CLICK HERE
Enjoy.
~D
|
|
Well, it looks great, and it IS more handy... But as you pointed out yourself, at higher levels, we'd have three-pages stats. Think about statting Karzoug like this! o_OWell, here is a shot at "His Badness" - first page only but I estimate he is complete in another half page; This is about 1 half page more than "as written".
NOTE: This is an EXTREME example - Karzoug has a range of abilities and, not using the optional rule limiting enhancements makes things, well, complicated. You get the idea.
This brought up a couple of issues but solvable ones I think; Certainly there is the issue of printing; Without going totally "delve" maybe sheets like these could be released online for key encounters. Obviously, once the "short descriptions" are written once, reusing them is a simple matter of cut and paste.
Were I running the encounter Eye of Avarice, this would be quite helpful in terms of not needing to spend hours doing this myself or spending hours flipping books while "in game".
Anyway, enough jawing -> CLICK HERE
Enjoy.
~D
Those stat blocks are great but I can't help but notice that you rebuilt them using 3.0 DR, we don't have magic+1 or +4 anymore only magic.
Those stat blocks are great but I can't help but notice that you rebuilt them using 3.0 DR, we don't have magic+1 or +4 anymore only magic.
Actually that was my mistaken (?) attempt at conversion to Pathfinder rules. Let me know your recommendations on how I should handle. Thanks ~D
|
well, first I absolutely love the layout and look you made. Very professional looking.
For a printed book, stat blocks are always a problem. I hate the delve style, as it just messes with me.
For a printed book I think I'd like the stat block as is, but in the section about what the critter is going to do, should include how it will use its powers and when. That section alone is worth more than all the other text.
However, I would very much like to see a web enhancement that features all of the critters in an adventure in a stat block like the one shown here. I would be far more likely to use that than anything else.
But in a printed book it just won't work due to space limitations and costs.
I approve of this idea, even if it does use a little extra space. And I bet you could do some snipping and shrink it down. Even giving just a page number for an ability would roxxor my boxxors. Anything to make my life easier (without eliminating the fun of effort)!
I've tried the page number shortcut - While it is somewhat helpful; I still end up "flipping"; I've also tried the "spell sheets" with short cut info compiled - This is more useful, but not easy to find for newbies, and takes effort (most stats are not consistent and cannot fall back on a repeatable "model");
Most importantly, if you are playing Pathfinder rules - How will you know what changed and what did not?
If we could make PFRPG into a set of consistent, simplified rules (do-able, I hope using the OGL), we could not only make them usable in terms of print and online reference; But we could also get them to the point of "online rule interpretation" which would allow a computer to manage much of the work over time. This without leaving the system - Still OGL; Still D&D; Just a consistent data model;
Then, whether it is character sheets, stat blocks, or computer games, we would be able to manage a consistent set of rules electronically. This should be easily piloted in Excel with a minimum of work - Assuming the rules are documented and consistent.
Do you understand what I'm looking for? Breakdown the SRD to it's fundamentals and make it consistent with a conversion methodology and port everything to a set of repeatable business rules that may be interpreted by a computer whether a "video game", "table-top controller" or "stat generator program"; I don't see a need to go to a proprietary rules system (4E) to acheive this goal;
Just needs a bit of focused work. "Open" gaming is akin to "open source" code which evolves because the users also become the developers.
~D
|
|
Actually that was my mistaken (?) attempt at conversion to Pathfinder rules. Let me know your recommendations on how I should handle. Thanks ~D
Those stat blocks are great but I can't help but notice that you rebuilt them using 3.0 DR, we don't have magic+1 or +4 anymore only magic.
It's easy, just go back and change DR/+4 to DR/magic, fixed. People talk about pathfinder going back to the 3.0 rules for DR but it didn't, it actually went a third direction where +# penetrates different DR, so you still don't need a +4 weapon to penetrate DR, but if you have one, you are able to avoid having one made of silver or cold iron, etc.
It's easy, just go back and change DR/+4 to DR/magic, fixed. People talk about pathfinder going back to the 3.0 rules for DR but it didn't, it actually went a third direction where +# penetrates different DR, so you still don't need a +4 weapon to penetrate DR, but if you have one, you are able to avoid having one made of silver or cold iron, etc.Actually that was my mistaken (?) attempt at conversion to Pathfinder rules. Let me know your recommendations on how I should handle. Thanks ~D
Those stat blocks are great but I can't help but notice that you rebuilt them using 3.0 DR, we don't have magic+1 or +4 anymore only magic.
Hmmm. OK - I wanted to make sure I spelled it out for any potential DMs; eg. that a magic weapon with a particular bonus could bypass DR10/adamantine. The stat I had (see above) said:
DR 10 vs. Adamantine or Magic/+3
I suppose I could make it:
DR 10 vs. Adamantine or +3 weapon enhancement bonus or higher;
Does that cover it? The point of the thread is to dispel confusion on not only 3.5 but also changes between 3.5 and 3.PFRPG
~D