|
Sunday I ran my first full Beta game for Curse of the Crimson Throne.
Cleric, Warlock, Monk, Noble.
Warlock from WotC, Noble from Black Company campaign setting. Both ported really easy to PF's skills and HP system, no trouble at all. This was important to us and showed PF did it's job so far with backwards compatability in mind. Eventually the Noble will multiclass into Rogue. So far everyone else intends to go career in their classes, this is partially from PF's upping the core classes with interesting features.
Cleric. First, to truly test the way we intend to game, I opened up the ol' WotC and Paizo 3.5 library for PC creation (with my approval). This caused no problems of compatability whatsoever and created a lot of smiles around the table. Her positive energy blasts were just what the group needed. Last campaign I gave everyone a "Second Wind" quick partial heal ala Star Wars sage edition for heroics. This took the place of that.
Monk. No trouble. Took the old Vow of Poverty from Book of Exalted Deeds (this is a player I can easily trust with this) and he's quite happy with his effectiveness so far.
To be perfectly honest, there really wasn't too much difference in play at all. The PF rules were basically invisible for the most part except when we used skills (Perception vs. Stealth is smoother and requires less thought) and CMB was a big hit.
CMB helped us through two grapple atttempts, a bull rush and a sunder, and they all went smooth as pie. The players all thought the DC's were fair.
As for me as DM, easy stuff. I already take the stats from my PF PDF's and print them out to mark up during play. I just ran through and updated the Grapple's to PF's CMB, and combined listen, spot, search and move silent and hide into Stealth and Perception. I did no other conversion and just winged the rest. Easy.
Two things. Two of the players were not overly fond of the new skill point allotment at 1st level. They both were dissapointed they got so few points at first level, points under then old system they'd put into a rolepalying skill like craft, profession or knowledge. I relented by allowing everyone to have one "roleplaying skill point" to put into one of those skills, and all were happy.
Second, we didn't use ANY of the optional "extra hit points" rules presented, because our whole group is old school, and we enjoy starting off as normal berks and working up to heroism. That worked fine too.
Overall, you don't get a lot from just one game, but so far the group is very positive about it and look forward to trying out more as we go.
Thanks for listening!
-DM Jeff
|
|
How did the Warlock do?
Worked very well. Savess were already PF correct, hit dice went up to a d8. Otherwise he worked perfectly fine. Took a feat from Tyrants of the 9 Hells to do an extra 2d6 to his eldritch blast against "mortals" three times a day. And he has an invocation allowing him to utter a word and do shatter on other's weapons and objects. It's making for a very good game (and operates seamlessly with PF Beta so far).
-DM Jeff
|
|
OK, just played our THIRD session last night. The story is flawless, it's going great and the players are having a good time.
* We're very glad the final book is going to have an index, because a book this size without one is....difficult!
* The skills are a little bum-clutch. We apparently really got used to the ones we had over the past 8 years or so and the differences are somewhat odd. My wife's PC went to tie a prisoner up last night and much mirth ensued (not to my amusement). As mentioned earlier, the players are giving me the impression they liked the old system better. Time will tell. I've posted the sidebar of skill changes inside my DM screen, but it's going to take a while to adjust.
And personally I'm tired of the jokes of "I acrobat out of the way", "I acrobat over the fence", "I stealth up to the guards".
-DM Jeff
|
|
Two things. Two of the players were not overly fond of the new skill point allotment at 1st level. They both were dissapointed they got so few points at...
To be honest, I'm always a little skeptical when I read things like this. (It's not a matter of doubting players' honesty, but rather a matter of doubting their understanding of the math behind the 3.5 and PFRPG systems.)
If, under 3.5, a character would have put 4 ranks into a "background skill," it works out the same as Pathfinder, right? (I.e., 4 ranks into a 3.5 skill is the same as 1 rank plus the trained bonus in Pathfinder.) And worrying about a skill with fewer ranks in it seems a little silly, especially compared to the increase in ease of skill allocation in PFRPG.
Personally, I sorta worry the other way, that PFRPG's "+3 trained class skill" bonus is a little too good. If I'm 9th level, I can have Skill X at +12, or I can have Skill A, Skill B, and Skill C all at +6. When you combine that with the fact that in a lot of cases Skill D and Skill E have been consolidated into Skill C, that +3 bonus goes a long, long way.
(And in the interest of full disclosure, I've made it even more of a boon in my PFRPG game, because I've made additional skill consolidations.)
--Jeff
|
|
I understand, and tried to explain. Where they are coming from is spreading them around. When they get the 'big kicker' under 3.5 they are more comfortable putting ranks into character building skills like local knowledge, crafts, professions, and that kind of stuff. Here, they opted not too for few points.
Honestly, I like the Pathfinder way, I was just reporting the player's observations!
-DM Jeff