While I don't mind Rage Points and I think they are far superior to the old system I do understand the concerns some people have brought up.
It seems to me that some of the compromise solutions will have many of the advantages of the rage points while alleviating many of the legitimate concerns expressed about rage points.
I agree with the points you make, Freesword.
Rage Powers being relatively expensive (equal to an entire encounter, on average) means they're not likely to be used every Rage, but when they are it's more memorable/dramatic.
Making them free during Rage/ per Encounter would necessitate weakening them considerably, and making them something you would use EVERY Rage, instead of when you REALLY need to go all out. Less interesting, IMHO.
I like you idea making some powers like Low-Light Vision last the duration of Rage once you activate them (I don't think Darkvision is overpowered, personally). I've seen complaints that these are under-powered as Rage Powers, but if after using them (as a Swift Action) their effect continued as long as you Rage, they become a decent choice. (I would even think something like Tremor-sense could exist as a higher level of Darkvision.)
All the complaints about "Rage Points are hard to track" seem to miss one point: You don't actually need to know the exact number of Points remaining. If you're using 'chips', you just take a chip out at the start of each Round, and whenever you use a Power, and put it in your Fatigue cup. Players who are opposed to the thought of their Barbarian being so "intellectual" as to manage abstract numbers, equally should be opposed to their Barbarian meta-gaming several rounds ahead to figure the optimal usage of their points.
Just love the rage points, and while I thought that they would be complicated for novice dms, and even posted my concerns on other topic, some people showed some ideas that simplify them (like "just think of them as rounds!" -this one really clarifies things. "Rounds per day" seems so much easier than "points per day" -that's the way of the human mind).
And the idea os the chips is great! I just bought some red glass beads used in some card games to give to a barbarian's plaers! It seems so cool!
You don't have a variable amount of hit points lost every round based off which class abilities you used.
Personally, I'd be pleased as punch if they just renamed the things. "Rage Points" just sounds silly, not at all like what a barbarian would have.
Well, Blaine, what would you suggest?
Well, Blaine, what would you suggest?
Even "Rage rounds" would be better, though I'd be all for "pay for it once and it lasts the whole rage" powers.
@Freesword: That's not really it. It's "He hits you. Take 10 damage." In other words, the DM tells you to subtract a number, and you do it. Rage points, on the other hand, are "Well, it's Mighty Rage, so that's 4, then I boosted my speed, so that's another 4, then I took a natural attack, so that's another 4. Oh, plus I used Low Light Vision this round. So that's... 16? Yeah, 16. Ok, subtracting 16 from my pool." In other words, you have to calculate the whole thing, making sure to remember everything you did that round, and then subtract after adding, all while trying to decide what your character does. If you take damage, it's reactive, so you didn't have to decide how to do it and how much it costs, it's generally no on your turn, so you don't really have much else to do then anyway, and the DM does the math that involves multiple numbers, whereas you just do one simple subtraction. I'm not saying it's impossible hard, just that it's actually rather complicated, moreso than hit points, though since it's in addition to hit points, the comparison is less cutting anyway. Point is, simpler is better.
...Except you can only use one Rage Power per round, in general... SO it's pretty much like:
Take 1 off per Round. Take off the cost of the Power you use (if you do). (one subtraction of (X+1))
Some Rage Powers can activate outside your initiative (AoO style),
but since you're actively choosing to use them, that's equally simple.
Some Powers (like Swift Foot) DO have variable cost (for variable effect), and if those were to be made non-variable in the name of simplicity, I'd be fine with that (although as-is they're pretty obvious). The main thing is that the Barbarian gains these powers slowly enough that you would never be overwhelmed by choices or baffled about their costs. You only gain one power every 2 levels, and I would say it takes about 2 "games" to gain 1 level, on average... So you have 4 games to get accustomed to using one Rage Power, it's cost & intricacies of use, before learning ONE more.
If you're not worried about running out of points in a battle, you can resolve your Rage Points after the battle, if you prefer...
Though flipping chips is so simple (as long as you can count... no math needed), there shouldn't be a problem in any case.
Actually, about the 1 Rage Power/round thing:
This seems to be the intent, for all except the reactive/ "instantaneous" Rage Powers, since you're only supposed to get one Swift Action/ Round. But aren't Swift Actions also subsitutable for Move Actions? So if you don't need to move, you might be able to use 2 or 3 Rage Powers?
I'm not sure about this...Clarification???
Well, Blaine, what would you suggest?Even "Rage rounds" would be better, though I'd be all for "pay for it once and it lasts the whole rage" powers.
@Freesword: That's not really it. It's "He hits you. Take 10 damage." In other words, the DM tells you to subtract a number, and you do it. Rage points, on the other hand, are "Well, it's Mighty Rage, so that's 4, then I boosted my speed, so that's another 4, then I took a natural attack, so that's another 4. Oh, plus I used Low Light Vision this round. So that's... 16? Yeah, 16. Ok, subtracting 16 from my pool." In other words, you have to calculate the whole thing, making sure to remember everything you did that round, and then subtract after adding, all while trying to decide what your character does. If you take damage, it's reactive, so you didn't have to decide how to do it and how much it costs, it's generally no on your turn, so you don't really have much else to do then anyway, and the DM does the math that involves multiple numbers, whereas you just do one simple subtraction. I'm not saying it's impossible hard, just that it's actually rather complicated, moreso than hit points, though since it's in addition to hit points, the comparison is less cutting anyway. Point is, simpler is better.
From my understanding, most rage powers are considered swift actions... you may only do one swift action per round (pgs. 133-34). Others are immediate actions (assumed to be similar to swift actions), or standard actions.
As far as renaming rage points, how about calling it "Stamina Pool?"
Although personally, I must admit I like the old rages per day mechanic with a few tweaks.
I beleive immediate actions (which can occur out of your initiative, like AoOs) count towards the NEXT rounds' Swift Actions.
I think it's important for the final printed book,
to either have a mini-table listing the crucial stats of the Powers (name, cost, action trigger), or to format the full descriptions in a way that highlights this information more clearly, like giving the Title block for each power (that contain this info) a differently colored background, to distinguish it from the description text when quickly scanning.
I think the system is really onto something with the rage points. I think it could really be expanded. Druids could have Shape Change points. It could really provide a nice alternative to # of times per day powers which always seemed a bit silly to me.
I think the system is really onto something with the rage points. I think it could really be expanded. Druids could have Shape Change points. It could really provide a nice alternative to # of times per day powers which always seemed a bit silly to me.
I think most classes could benefit from "something" points. Druids, Bards, Clerics, Paladins, Monks and Barbarians all have abilities outside spellcasting, and many prestige classes give similar restricted abilities to rogues, wizards and ranger alike.
This is why I think it is crucial to set a somewhat standard pattern for these classes subsystems, whether it is based on a X/day or a pool of points. If all classes were based on the same sub-class system, many design opportunities could be opened up (especially between classes).
Even if X/day is adopted for all subsystem, it would be important to decide whether a power could require more than 1 use/day to initiate, or if all powers use a fixed 1/day use of the ability.
my though anyway...
'findel
It is, undoubtebly, a slight pain to keep track of. However, it's basic math here. I don't really think many folks who play are incapable of it. What it comes down to are the folks who don't Want to keep track of all the numbers. For those guys- they don't have to. They can just rage and ignore the rest. (not optimal obviously, but it is an option they have).
The versatility the rage points and powers give far outweigh the relatively minor (imo) burden of having to keep track of the points.
I absolutely love it now that a barbarian can be a barbarian 100% of the combat encounters of the game. That just makes sense. He can be a barbarian and knock a chest in or a door down, or to thoroughly intimidate someone. He doesn't have to sit there thinkin "gee only 2 rage today, guess I'll leave that door to the fighter". He's a barbarian 100% of the time, not only for 3 encounters. That is just awesome.
And I'll gladly keep track of rage points in order to achieve that goal, whether it's with kidney beans, poker chips, a small calculator with a built in memory, and/or index cards to help with it.
-S
(...) The points mechanic has existed in the d20 system in the form of hit points (...)
I've hear a lot of reference in similitude between the rage points mechanic and hit points, but I don't feel that this is true.
Hit points are not subtracted by choice, and I don't recall any ability that allowed sacrificing hp for something else in exchange.
In that sense, hp are not a resource available to the player. Rage points on the other hand, are. Lost of hp always been undesirable, as opposed to available. Loss of hp always been a consequence, not a choice.
As you mentioned, rage points are much closer to power points (from psionics) as these are an expandable, renewable resource for both character and player.
Yet, even the psionics rules were relatively close to the rest of the magic rules. Powers have set levels that are comparable to wizard spells. The fact that they are a pool of points only circumspect the Vancian magic system. Powers are in par with the number of known spells for the sorcerer. Parallels are easy to draw.
For the moment, the parallel between rage powers and bardic music abilities, or paladin's auras, or druid wild shape is unclear. That is too bad, I would love to see barbarian-bard crossover/synergy in their respectful abilities. Barbarian-druid could also offer interesting design abilities if the two where somewhat compatible. For the moment, only the barbarian's power point and monk's ki-pool seem connected. Too bad, the present rules do not allow this build.
As you said, one mold does not have to fit all, but I disagree with you with the fact that 2 subsystems makes the system stronger. For me, its a lost of design opportunities.
|
Seriously, do any of you who are saying stuff like "it's so simple, just use poker chips and a cup" act as DM?
It's not simple. The DM isn't usually running one character, but rather (usually) several. And when three of those characters are barbarians, tracking rage points isn't just "problematic," it's obnoxious.
When someone says, "Well, if you don't like the rage points, you could just ignore them and do nothing but rage," that's a clear indication that something needs to be retooled. Jason recognized that, and now he's presented a far superior system.
--Jeff
...Sure, but Jason already indicated that he doesn't expect "mass NPCs" to be run by tracking their points. Mass NPCs can still use Rage Powers, but what purpose would point tracking serve? If the Barbarian NPCs have already Raged in a Battle, either with the PCs or other NPCs, just decide that they're Fatigued, or have them "run out" a couple rounds in, and have to drop Rage. I mean, do you really decide every "Mook" NPC's eye color?
|
|
...Sure, but Jason already indicated that he doesn't expect "mass NPCs" to be run by tracking their points.
And as I said before, if Pathfinder is changing so that NPCs don't use the same rules as PCs, that needs to be made very explicit, because that is a major paradigm shift from 3.5. Where, exactly, did Jason say this, BTW, and if he did, why is he changing the system? (Oh, and "eye color" isn't a game rule ... raging is. Comparing the two, as far as importance of application to NPCs, is nonsensical.)
--Jeff
He said it in a post on the boards, it's not in the Beta.
It's not so much "NPCs don't use the same rules as the PCs", as "if paying attention to every minutae of the rules for every NPC makes NO DISCERNABLE DIFFERENCE, gloss over them".
Like other posters have mentioned they don't bother figuring every 1st level spell slot for Caster NPCs: Since the DM is 100% aware of the world and the PCs, you only need to plan what spells the NPC would likely use when interacting with the PC group and other relavent NPCs in the area. Like if they are just Mass NPC Mooks that will die in combat, you don't need to decide their exact ranks of Perform and Know(Geography). Like if you are travelling by horse-back between towns, you don't force the PCs to roll Ride checks and Balance checks for their Horses for every single Round it takes to travel. Those rules all APPLY to the NPCs/PCs, but aren't always a relevant piece of information, thus can be glossed over. If you make a bad assumption, then you IMPROVISE.
It's easy to figure NPC Barbarians' total Max Rage Points, how many Rage Powers they might have, and from there you can decide what/how many times they might use a Power, and how that fits into the encounter you're planning. If you don't NEED anything else, you're just GIVING YOURSELF a headache if you pretend more is demanded. The game rules are a structure for story-telling, not a simulationist computer game with no directorial agency. If you're so shocked at treating NPCs different from PCs, how come you don't roll all NPCs stats, and instead use standard, identical ones? Being a DM means you need to DECIDE how the story evolves, not just be a human computer applying rules.
Look, even in the "hypothetical change to Rage Powers" Jason posted, some Rage Powers have 1 minute (or multi-minute) cool-downs, right? Are you obligated to track the exact # of Rounds after they drop Rage to know the EXACT Round they are able to use that Power again? NO. That's f%&&ing stupid.
|
|
Look, even in the "hypothetical change to Rage Powers" Jason posted, some Rage Powers have 1 minute (or multi-minute) cool-downs, right? Are you obligated to track the exact # of Rounds after they drop Rage to know the EXACT Round they are able to use that Power again? NO. That's f~**ing stupid.
I disagree. Pretty strongly, actually.
If a fight goes 8 rounds and I, as a DM, allow an NPC to use a power again, I am cheating, at least to the extent that it is possible for DM to cheat. (And I believe it is.)
My players and I have a social contract: I play by the same rules they do, and do my very best to make combats and other encounters challenging (but not overwhelming), and they accept that when bad things happen to their characters, it's just part of the game.
If I allow an NPC barbarian to break the rules for barbarians, and the NPC kills a PC because of it, that PC's player has every right to be pissed. And even if I don't kill a PC, if the players find out they have every right to feel that they can no longer trust me to adhere to our social contract.
All of this aside, tracking rage points differs from tracking wizard spells.
Spells are chosen ahead of time. As I use them, I simply cross them off. Spells are chosen (by good designers and DMs) with non-combat applications in mind. While of course it's possible to design a wizard that has nothing but combat spells, and nova that wizard in his combat encounter with your players, it generally doesn't happen in practice, because the wizard usually picks some non-combat spells. On the other hand, NPC barbarians have absolutely no reason not to use their most powerful powers over and over. Why not? They won't be raging again today (or ever), and it's an option (unlike with a well-designed wizard).
Encouraging these kinds of differences between NPCs and PCs is bad design. It's the same design philosophy that individual DMs use when they create NPCs specifically tailored -- without in-game rationale -- to mop the floor with their PCs. It's bad design to encourage it, and it's poor DMing to use it.
And finally, even if it weren't significantly different, it's in addition to. I do not want, and will not accept, some fiddly little additional points pool to track for every NPC I run in combat. Pathfinder is supposed to be making 3.5 run more smoothly, not less.
--Jeff
...Whatever.
You might also want to complain about Jason's new "Experimental Rage Power Changes" as well, since all the good powers have 1 minute count-downs, which would involve you counting down 10 rounds for all your Barbarian NPCs that won't last 5 rounds anyways.
|
|
So you are saying the wizards should be set up pre-limited and easy to run but you shouldn't have to do that with the barbarian because you didn't have to before.
What I've said is that wizards are easy to run after set-up. Barbarians (with rage points) aren't.
Nothing prevents you from pre picking what rage powers you think the barbarian will use and just crossing them off as he uses them and using that their point cost to figure how many rounds of rage the barbarian will have available.
No, nothing prevents me tracking rage points. It's just additional hassle in a game with the stated purpose of smoothing out hassle.
Going nova is an option for a barbarian but not a wizard? Care to explain the double standard?
I already did.
The only argument you've clearly stated for your position is that you do not want any changes that require any effort on your part.
That's correct, I guess; I do not want any changes that require significant additional effort on my part to DM. Rage points were that. If you do want significant additional effort required when you DM -- you do DM, right? -- you're always welcome to add it.
I presume that all your NPC wizards start from a stock spell list with very few minor modifications (unless of course you run them straight from modules).
You can presume whatever you like. You've simply illustrated my point for me. If I run a prepared wizard, it's easy. If I run a prepared barbarian, rage points make it more difficult. You're attempting to conflate my objections to complexity in running the game to objections to complexity in preparing NPCs. They are different things, both logically and practically, and I'm willing to accept slightly more complexity (in some cases) in the latter, but pretty much none in the former.
--Jeff
Sure thing Ruemere,
it's just that Jeff is particularly insistent on tracking every detail of NPCs, even when they will die before being able to make use of their other abilities, or it's superfluous to the encounter, so I was pointing out how those 1 minute count-downs might still be a big headache for him, although obviously you also would find them easy to deal with.
I actually suggested in that thread changing the 1 minute cooldowns to "until the next Encounter" so regardless of DMs attention to minute details, the powers' cooldown would be easily fitted to the organic flow of the game. Otherwise, Jeff might call you a cheater if you didn't count down the 10 rounds of those cooldowns...
|
|
Jeff is particularly insistent on tracking every detail of NPCs, even when they will die before being able to make use of their other abilities, or it's superfluous to the encounter
Please do not put words in my mouth. It is rude.
If something is genuinely superflous to an encounter, I don't track it. (A simple example: the duration of mage armor.) But I certainly don't believe that anything tracked in rounds is automatically superflous to an encounter. Anything automatically superfluous to an encounter shouldn't have a duration in rounds, to turn it the other way. (Thus, "until the end of the encounter" and "until 10 rounds have passed" is not the same thing. Either is fine with me, and yes, the latter is simpler, but they're not equivalent in practical terms.) Nor do I believe that, as a DM, I know how every encounter will play out.
Therefore, yes, I track durations of those game effects measured in rounds. And, yes, I find it easy to do so. It is necessary to track such things to run a fair and consistent 3.5/PFRPG combat, and any competent DM is set up to do so. (In my case, we use a magnetic initiative board. You can buy it from Paizo, in fact.)
--Jeff
|
I don't dislike Rage Points, I just frankly find the rage rounds superior. I've play tested this character with both, and I have more fun using the rounds system. What I found with the points is that the skills weren't well balanced against each other, or their point value, I felt obligated to take certain ones, and every round I used the same one because point for point it was most worth while.
With the rage rounds I find that I'm in there knocking people back and intimidating, so I can make my way to the most deadly foe. I feel like I'm a berserk, pushing my weight around and crying out a great battle roar. With rage points, I felt I had to act more reserved and shrewd.
I don't think the abilities of the rage point system can stand as they are, and that many of the changes for rage rounds would be applied to the rage point abilities if it stuck that way.
|
Just love the rage points, and while I thought that they would be complicated for novice dms, and even posted my concerns on other topic, some people showed some ideas that simplify them (like "just think of them as rounds!" -this one really clarifies things. "Rounds per day" seems so much easier than "points per day" -that's the way of the human mind).
And the idea os the chips is great! I just bought some red glass beads used in some card games to give to a barbarian's plaers! It seems so cool!
I also like the rage points (and the barbarian's player in my group *loves* them). I just can't fathom why so many people are now claiming that "yeah, those rounds are so much *easier* to keep track of", although they're just rage points under a different name -- same amount of book-keeping (i.e. "pool of rounds" instead of "point pool"). And, in the end, rage points were a point pool similar to HPs -- should we get rid of HPs, too, because they are just as difficult to keep track of as rage points? I saw sheets with an elegant 'Point Pool' box on them, but where on the character sheet do you keep track of "rounds of rage"?
|
|
I also like the rage points (and the barbarian's player in my group *loves* them). I just can't fathom why so many people are now claiming that "yeah, those rounds are so much *easier* to keep track of", although they're just rage points under a different name -- same amount of book-keeping (i.e. "pool of rounds" instead of "point pool"). And, in the end, rage points were a point pool similar to HPs -- should we get rid of HPs, too, because they are just as difficult to keep track of as rage points? I saw sheets with an elegant 'Point Pool' box on them, but where on the character sheet do you keep track of "rounds of rage"?
The elegant Point Pool box is replaced with an equally elegant Rounds box, in which I tick off one tick, not several each round I rage. But for me the simplicity isn't what impresses me. It is the polish that the second revision brought to each of the abilities. I really thought that in the point system some of the abilities you just had to take, if you didn't you would be crippled and if you didn't use that same ability nearly every round you would be "wasting damage." The other abilities really became rarely used, or exceptionally situational. With the new system I maybe do a little less damage each round, but I have half my foes shaken, and I keep knocking the rest around. I can feel truly barbaric as I rush in knock the minions out of my way and go toe to toe with "the boss."