|
Right forgot that we weren't still working with a base 15+ for CMB. However there is still the fact that a 1st level caster can get his spells off next to a 20th level fighter with no difference in difficulty unless the fighter has trained specifically to mess with casters.You're right. I liked adding in a BAB component myself. But even so, in actual gameplay, does it really matter? The 20th level fighter is still going to mop the floor with a 1st level cleric.
That was sort of my thinking as well. The concentration check (as opposed to the Concentration check) is to keep you from being any more exposed than you already are - that could be viewed as taking the opponent's skill into account, but you could also look at it as something entirely internal, with your general ability to avoid getting hit being subsumed into your AC. I would have been fine with a system that included the opponent's BAB, but I don't think it's really necessary - it's just a question of how you picture the mechanics playing out in the "real world" of the game...
|
|
Yes - but the point is, if there are half a dozen 1 HD skeletons around you and a vampire Big Bad behind them, you don't lose 6 HD of turning against the skeletons and then have your remaining 6 HD of turning splash harmlessly off of the vampire's turn resistance. This way, everyone takes damage, period, even if there is a save for half - the turning doesn't get wasted on the meaningless minions in front alone.
cof cor
err... if you have the level to go against a vampire the 1st channel ennergy should put down the 1dh skeletos and let the party prepare for the vampire... otherwise you should prepare for a TPK... vampires are absolute murderers... and having one at 30 ft... ist to HIS benefit :P
Yes - but the point is, if there are half a dozen 1 HD skeletons around you and a vampire Big Bad behind them, you don't lose 6 HD of turning against the skeletons and then have your remaining 6 HD of turning splash harmlessly off of the vampire's turn resistance. This way, everyone takes damage, period, even if there is a save for half - the turning doesn't get wasted on the meaningless minions in front alone.cof cor
err... if you have the level to go against a vampire the 1st channel ennergy should put down the 1dh skeletos and let the party prepare for the vampire... otherwise you should prepare for a TPK... vampires are absolute murderers... and having one at 30 ft... ist to HIS benefit :P
The issue was to illustrate that the old 60 foot turn system usually ended up ablating on unintentional, expendable and often pointless targets compared to the new Pathfinder system, often rendering it's increased range somewhat moot.
This was in no way an analysis of the superiority of the Beta or Final system.
Still... Yes. Vampire...
AIEEEEEE...
-----------------
By the way, I'm very impressed with the discussion so far and the maturity of the posters, both Pro and Con, especially since the board hasn't degenerated into human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
|
I don't mean to sound offensive, but I do not understand why is there this sudden sense of gloom and doom pervading the forum.Agreed.
First, we don't have a full sense of perspective. We don't know the wording of the Turn Undead feat, or some details that may matter. And secondly, a lot of these changes are based on *playtest feedback*. We can be armchair generals, or try playing it and see how it works.
I'm excited about the changes, for one.
QFT.
I like what I see, but will wait to see the full context.
anyone notice her CMD is CMB+9 instead of +15? Typo? All other preview icons maintain the +15 (to my dismay).
anyone notice her CMD is CMB+9 instead of +15? Typo? All other preview icons maintain the +15 (to my dismay).
So far is looks like CMD is 10 + str bonus + dex bonus + deflection bonus...and may include other things.
That was sort of my thinking as well. The concentration check (as opposed to the Concentration check) is to keep you from being any more exposed than you already are - that could be viewed as taking the opponent's skill into account, but you could also look at it as something entirely internal, with your general ability to avoid getting hit being subsumed into your AC. I would have been fine with a system that included the opponent's BAB, but I don't think it's really necessary - it's just a question of how you picture the mechanics playing out in the "real world" of the game...Right forgot that we weren't still working with a base 15+ for CMB. However there is still the fact that a 1st level caster can get his spells off next to a 20th level fighter with no difference in difficulty unless the fighter has trained specifically to mess with casters.You're right. I liked adding in a BAB component myself. But even so, in actual gameplay, does it really matter? The 20th level fighter is still going to mop the floor with a 1st level cleric.
Thanks for saying this so much better than I was going to Shisumo. Something I *often* forget is that the casting on the defensive roll is *not* to prevent an attack, it's to succeed at the spell. The choice to prevent an attack has already been made, instead risking the focus on the spell.
By the way:
> A fairly easy casting defensive check,
"Easy, you call that easy?"
The DC at any level that a caster gains a new spell level, to cast that spell level, leads caster level by *16*. That means a roll of 16-ability mod will be needed to cast the highest spells until 18th+ levels. I've seen some crazy builds, but not many that get 40 ability scores pre-epic (or post frankly).
I don't consider this to be easy, when the roll needed before (assuming maxed concentration) was 12-Con mod, and dropped by one at every new spell level. It's also a harder DC than 15+BAB, vs. a fighter of equal level, with a reduction for casting simpler spells.
|
One the one hand, I like that this Cleric is much more 'backwards compatible' with 3.5 than the one we saw in Beta.
On the other hand, my conversions of the Scalykind and Void domains to the new Pathfinder Domain system are kinda wasted now. :)
I'm still not 100% happy with the Channel Energy mechanic. Having it be an either / or choice of damage undead / heal living (or damage living / heal undead) looks like a serious blow to the positive energy channeler, and, qu'elle surprise, more of one to the negative energy channeler (which, IMO, always seems to be utterly forgotten when changes are made to Turn mechanics, since the negative energy channeler is often unable to use his class ability in a group, unless that entire group is undead, or he's got Epic point-buy to bump up Charisma and a free feat to burn on Selective Channeling).
more of a blow to the negative energy channeler (which, IMO, always seems to be utterly forgotten when changes are made to Turn mechanics, since the negative energy channeler is often unable to use his class ability in a group, unless that entire group is undead, or he's got Epic point-buy to bump up Charisma and a free feat to burn on Selective Channeling).
How so? I agree they can be forgotten, but this seems like a boon - let's the negative channeler heal his undead minions without hurting his party, or take the "Rebuke Undead" feat and control other undead without hurting party. On the "kill living" front, there's not really a change.
Am I missing something?
Overall I like the changes to the cleric especially the change to the concentration check. Changing the domains back to more like 3.5 brings a little more balance between the domains. Healing was too good to pass up with getting CLW as a spell like ability up to 10 times a day. I also makes it easier for me to convert Kingdom of Kalamar domains to Pathfiner.
Being a player of a high level cleric (16th level) domains of good and sun I like the new changes to channel energy. Being able to choose beteeen the 3 options gives me more tactical advantages. Hopefully the Turn Outsider and Turn Elemental feats made it into the final.
Doug
Domains in Beta:
Spells at most spell levels, excepting 4th at least.
Ability at first level, eight level and twentieth level.
Domains in PFRPG:
Spells at every spell level. Better spell list, more powerful, Fire domain has nice offensive spells.
Ability at first level, 6-8th level, and probably 20th.
So they're ultimately similar. I don't understand the arguement that they are less flavourful, the special abilities are still there, and in the same number. Also, given the promised increase of spell power, on the domain lists, and availablitiy at every level the spell portion of the domain is more powerful. Which is pretty inarguable right? More spells and more powerful spells is more powerful, while the ability part is still almost the exact same.
Channel is nerfed. Undoubtedly.
So whats the balance here. The cleric gets more spell and domain power, which is effective against most enemies and actually increases the flavour and uniqueness of clerics of different dieties, but she is less so the master of undead combat.
So general bump in power to balance an actual nerf of undead capabilities, which is okay. Most importantly, not all clerics are neccesarily undead busters/controllers, hardly flavorful for say Gorum or Desna, but all of them get a unique power boost from their domains which is quite relevant. Should Turning still damage foes, maybe, has individuality or flavour been lost from Beta? I really don't see it.
And as for power, it balances out.
So, I don't get the outrage, especially not the anger at the domains change. Their pretty identical, just mesh better with stat blocks, and are pretty much more powerful.
Some spells have been nerfed for cleric, but this is certain to be true for arcane spells. Its been stated it will be.
I think I like the new take on domains: one special ability and the rest is bonus spells.That is how old domains worked.
Maybe they changed a few of the special abilities, but 1 ability + spells == 3.5
And actually its not one ability, its three, at 1st, 6-8th and probably 20th. Which is what it was in Beta. Seriously, domains havent really changed, certainly not on the ability front.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Montalve, you still have cool and useful domain powers, but you also have bonus spells. :) your beloved cleric is maybe no more codzilla but it's the most attractive ever!
The beta mechanic of domains and schools was great, but these two class features were too similar to each other for my guts. Waiting for arcane school rules, this solution is really lovely, both for players and for backward compatibility.
i disagree... and again I play the cleric not for the CoDzilla factor, but for the cool concept I garnered since I met it... aka templars, hospitalers, teutons... etc
going back to 1 fomain power in 1st level and bonus spells...
That's simply not true.
Kyra's domain powers at 1st level, yep they're there. But you overlooked:
Domain power at 6th level (fire resistance)
Domain power at 8th level (nimbus of light)
Jason B. describes these in the opening paragraphs of text under her stat block.
It stands to reason (and people can verify this for themselves at PaizoCon when they preview the rules; I can neither confirm nor deny that I have any foreknowledge of the final rules) that there are more domain powers at higher levels for each domain.
In effect, domains are SRD *plus* Beta; they are just organized slightly differently, so that instead of everybody getting their domain powers at 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, etc., they are at 1st, 6th/8th, probably 12th-16th, and no doubt 20th.
but more importantly diluting the roll and concept of the cleric (this is how i see it... sorry)
The role and concept of cleric have nothing to do with mechanics; the 1st Ed cleric was ultra-light on mechanics (short spell list and uniform turn/control undead) but its role and concept were the same as clerics are in PF. The introduction of specialty priests with deity-specific domains and powers to tailor them to their deity goes back as far in D&D as the 1st Ed Dragonlance Adventures book, and was formalized systemwide in 2nd Ed, and every method since has been a mechanical tweak on a static role and concept - cleric as fighter, healer, and now with powers tailored to their deity.
so its ok for the wizards to have cool mechanics, but Clerics should use what left overs of the old editions were left? just to have Wizards fans happy, who surely would get more spells nerfed too?
Wizards got tons of spells nerfed in Beta, and still have the leftovers of old editions (familiars, specialist wizard spells and prohibited schools). Add that to the fact that clerics get to keep things from the SRD version *AND* add new abilities for domains (as opposed to LOSING extra spells and simply replacing them with SLAs as in Beta) - I'm really kind of confused about how it is you think clerics are being violated here.
for the sake of completation, since I have ben follwing this since Alpha 2 I might buy he PDF in september... but definitively... I will cancel this pre-order
again.. a shame... I had all my hopes in this product :S
well at least Sean keeps writing about gods and Wes hopefully about Ustakav... so there are products for me within paizo in the future...
Hey, buy what you like. Far be it from me to encourage someone to spend 50 bucks on something they don't want. My point is simply that your reasoning for why you think clerics suddenly suck or have been shortchanged somehow doesn't seem to hold up to analysis. I think you should reread the entry and you'll see that some of your fears about what they did to the cleric are unfounded, but I can tell you that clerics certainly do get more than (1 ability plus spells) for each domain in the final draft of PF.
|
|
the thing that I find interesting in this preview is the fact that they reached congruency with Sarenrae's domains (fire & sun)... interestingly enough in the Beta Sarentar had not the Sun domain
vagrant... easy... ok you know have a bit more spells... you get 2 options to arm your bonus list and abilities... yet... in Beta you got both domains's powers working at the same time... which gives your true versatility
|
|
I checked d20srd, 3.5 PHB, and even the 3.0 PHB, and I have no clue where we took it that it was a cone...I guess the Pathfinder Channel Energy is far inferior to the 3.5 Turn Undead now... Well, to me, and the group I play with.
I understand you are saying that it's just the opinion of the group you play with but...really? Inferior?
Let's assume a good cleric. In 3.5, there was no damage, no healing. A burst would just have a chance at causing the opponents to run away, or nothing at all. And if the cleric was *double* the hit dice, they could be destroyed.
Now let's take a good cleric in Pathfinder. We jump straight to the damage route against undead (Kyra, the 8th level cleric, can do 4d6+8 damage). This is an average of 22 damage to *all* undead in a 30 ft. burst, with a save for half. Either way, she does some damage. And if she's double the hit dice? They're likely destroyed if they fail the save. 4 hit dice of d12 means 22 hit points exactly.
And the biggest utility is she doesn't have to use this against just undead, this is also a party heal. 4d6 for 14 heal on a 4 person damaged party is feasibly 56 points of heal PER burst! Huge!
Even with the final changes, this still seems to surpass any of the 3.5 Turning.
the thing that I find interesting in this preview is the fact that they reached congruency with Sarenrae's domains (fire & sun)... interestingly enough in the Beta Sarentar had not the Sun domain
Uh, not true. pg22. Saranrae.
Sarenrae NG
Portfolios: Goddess of the sun, redemption, honesty, healing
Domains: Fire, Glory, Good, Healing, Sun
FAvored Weapon: scimitar
vagrant... easy... ok you know have a bit more spells... you get 2 options to arm your bonus list and abilities... yet... in Beta you got both domains's powers working at the same time... which gives your true versatility
Sorry if I'm sounding agressive, I have clipped speech, especially on the net, I talk fast. I get that you like the flavour, your a writer, I've read your stuff, its good. But seriously, Domains aren't that changed.
You get tactical variety in choosing your domain spells, and their relevance increases as they are now among your more powerful abilities.
Also. you can use them ever spell level. You didn't use to get them at 4th spell level say. So quality over quantity, flavour is maintained by abilities, which are identical. Or close to.
So that too is balanced, And with the increase in power which is useful against everything, it counteracts the nerf of channeling, which only affects undead combat.
I understand you are saying that it's just the opinion of the group you play with but...really? Inferior?
I checked d20srd, 3.5 PHB, and even the 3.0 PHB, and I have no clue where we took it that it was a cone...I guess the Pathfinder Channel Energy is far inferior to the 3.5 Turn Undead now... Well, to me, and the group I play with.
Tactically speaking?
Absolutely.
60 feat is within charging range of any undead that I am aware of other than zombies.
3.5 Turn Undead kept undead from charging (if it worked).
I'll take the time to admit I understand the aggravation of making undead flee to the DM, but tactically it is a better option.
Pathfinder RPG allows all undead to charge, including zombies - unless Partial Charge is altered/removed, and let's face it. Most undead are at their most deadly at melee range. Especially now that death ward was nerfed.
So yes, tactically Pathfinder's Channel Energy is far inferior. It is almost begging the undead to lay their special abilities all over the party. It is far better to keep the ghouls/ghasts, wraiths, specters, and all the others far away from the group.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
the thing that I find interesting in this preview is the fact that they reached congruency with Sarenrae's domains (fire & sun)... interestingly enough in the Beta Sarentar had not the Sun domain
vagrant... easy... ok you know have a bit more spells... you get 2 options to arm your bonus list and abilities... yet... in Beta you got both domains's powers working at the same time... which gives your true versatility
That would be true if they were domain powers that did not require activation, but in Beta that was not the case, since the vast majority were spell-like abilities and the remainder were almost all supernatural abilities. There were very few abilities that were simply "on" all the time. In fact, I'm looking at the Beta domains right now, and do you know how many domain powers I see that are "working at the same time"?
None.
ALL of the domain powers in Beta are spell-like or supernatural abilities that require actions to activate. Sure, they can work together once you activate them, but so can any two spells you choose to prepare.
Strangely, the flavor you seem to want, to have domain powers working together, investing the cleric with the raw power of their deity, seems to exist ONLY in PF and NOT in the Beta version.
Look at Kyra: She has fire resistance and sun's blessing working at the same time, ALL THE TIME. On top of that, she also can invoke Sarenrae's power directly for two other domain powers (fire bolt and nimbus of light).
I probably shouldn't be wasting time when I'm supposed to be at work, but I'm just genuinely perplexed as to how you would interpret the change from Beta domains to the final PF version as so crucially broken and unflavorful, when what you describe wanting out of domains for the cleric class seems like exactly what PF gives you and Beta DOESN'T!
|
|
Uh, not true. pg22. Saranrae.
Sarenrae NG
Portfolios: Goddess of the sun, redemption, honesty, healing
Domains: Fire, Glory, Good, Healing, Sun
FAvored Weapon: scimitar
mmm ok I missed this then... my mistake
vagrant... easy... ok you know have a bit more spells... you get 2 options to arm your bonus list and abilities... yet... in Beta you got both domains's powers working at the same time... which gives your true versatility
Sorry if I'm sounding agressive, I have clipped speech, especially on the net, I talk fast. I get that you like the flavour, your a writer, I've read your stuff, its good. But seriously, Domains aren't that changed.
You get tactical variety in choosing your domain spells, and their relevance increases as they are now among your more powerful abilities.
Also. you can use them ever spell level. You didn't use to get them at 4th spell level say. So quality over quantity, flavour is maintained by abilities, which are identical. Or close to.
So that too is balanced, And with the increase in power which is useful against everything, it counteracts the nerf of channeling, which only affects undead combat.
je no Vagrant, you got me wrong, my "easy" was to explain, not to tell you to calm... I understand how one now cast spells with his spellcaster level on mind...
still I prefered lower level spells with a few more uses...
this is MORE because of context... domain powers and the extra spells worked more like blessings of the gods... something they gave you...
bonus Spells is "just the same spells, plus 1 extra spell limited by your domains.. and only 1", making all the domain as supernatural abilities made it a lot more itneresting, actually I had hopped that they took some of those spells and gave them ore domain powers... so seeing the bonus spells in there was pretty much a hearthbreaker... that incluthing the other changes I have seen... made Pathfinder RPG an unlikely option for me... mostly because anyway I would be using the Beta for the domains...
as I told a friend... I can take most changes... but if the cleric doesn't make me wanting to play it... well I have no reason to play a game with clerics :P
PS: thanks for the comment on my stuff :), and as you mentioned... I live and die on flavor... truth to be told... there are rulebooks I just don't swallow... i check what I need and get over with it... its the stories and flavor what really sell a product for me... If i find this lackig... no art, mechanics or marketing would change my heart...
a friend is still complaining that I HATED Exalted for the small detail "of messing with my reality" by making what was supposed to be amgic into a bad example of technomagic... (aka... "no way I don't want mechas in my fanatsy game...")
Because if Kyra was 11th level, we could see if the spell progression is still reduced to compensate the power of Channel Energy.
It never was reduced because of that.
The reduction of spells/day was done to have one chart for all full-time spellcasters that prepare spells. It never made sense to me that clerics would get more spells.
Montalve, I'm sorry to see this is a dealbreaker for you. Hopefully when you get the PDF you'll change you mind, because I think the Cleric has become more tactically flexible.
I don't think he'll get the PDF. Why should he?
lets see, a first level cleric with a 20 wisdom, you know what, although I see that all the time lets just say 18 wisdom that's more the baseline.
My personal experience is that cleric wisdom is lower than that. Unless you want to miss out on several of your class's strengths, you need str, cha, and of course some con. That means less points to put into wis (unless you roll, but then you cannot assume anything)
Which is why I think a caster power check still favours the wrong classes: Wizards and sorcerers can afford higher key ability scores.
I'd go with a flat con, and I think I will.
I'm still dissapointed that the cleric is getting a ranged touch attack, but at least it's limited to a # per day, as opposed to being an unlimited thing. Still I hate how the cleric is looking more and more like the wizard in armor.
Actually, I hate how the 1st-level abilities are limited now. And still parsecs away from wizard in armour.
Clerics (...) are ultimately, in no way inferior to an old 3.5 Cleric
I disagree. DF+DP+RM+Haste doesn't work any more.
I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but I do say that the cleric lost power there.
As far as my experiences go, in my own group play, the Beta Cleric in an undead heavy encounter was essentially when the rogue went to the toilet, the wizard left to refill the chips, the monk started re-reading his abilities and the fighter stacked dice, which from a DM's perspective is bad for the game.
In my experience, that only happens if there are hordes of weak undead. And fights like that are no challenge, anyway.
What happens now is that he can easily wipe out groups of undead weaklings (not a big deal, a lot of classes can do that), and can do something with his channel energy against stronger undead.
*background behind channeling... well it pretty went to the ashtray and become nothing more than a mechanic... originally for what I read it was the pure energy of the good coming from you, the energy was amout to something... now you click the "on damage" or "on deffensive" button... i myself find it lame... but i understand many dm cried their clerics "were" to powerful...
I'm totally with you on this. It's a rule. Not something that makes sense within the game. Just a rule. A change done for balance, the consequences be damned.
I have no problem with the loss of the scare effect. More an annoyance than anything, and the function can work without.
But the offense/defense thing goes again what was at first a great rule: They wanted consistency, so channel energy channeled energy, just like spells that use energy, like cure/inflict.
But now the logic chain is broken. It's a rule for rules sake, and those should stay out of RPGs.
WHY THE HELL DOES A CLERY ACTUALLY NEEDS A DAMNED FIREBALL?
Well, it does look like the sun...
It seems domains still get bonus abilities like in beta. Those could still be okay.
That's normal, medium armor does that.
I, and some other people, thought that they fixed that: Medium armour reduces run speed, heavy reduces walk speed - not the other way around.
What I wonder is wether the cleric has been downgraded to medium armor proficiency (I hope so!).
I hope not. And I don't think so, either.
I can't make any sense of chainmail having been bumped to 6 AC
I do: medium armour (and often heavy, too) just wasn't good enough.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I understand you are saying that it's just the opinion of the group you play with but...really? Inferior?
I checked d20srd, 3.5 PHB, and even the 3.0 PHB, and I have no clue where we took it that it was a cone...I guess the Pathfinder Channel Energy is far inferior to the 3.5 Turn Undead now... Well, to me, and the group I play with.
Tactically speaking?
Absolutely.
60 feat is within charging range of any undead that I am aware of other than zombies.
3.5 Turn Undead kept undead from charging (if it worked).
I'll take the time to admit I understand the aggravation of making undead flee to the DM, but tactically it is a better option.Pathfinder RPG allows all undead to charge, including zombies - unless Partial Charge is altered/removed, and let's face it. Most undead are at their most deadly at melee range. Especially now that death ward was nerfed.
So yes, tactically Pathfinder's Channel Energy is far inferior. It is almost begging the undead to lay their special abilities all over the party. It is far better to keep the ghouls/ghasts, wraiths, specters, and all the others far away from the group.
I find this to be only partly true, for a couple of reasons:
1. Channeling now can affect a wider range of undead. In 3.5, if an undead has too many HD, turning is useless against it. Take a minotaur zombie, frinstance - CR 4 but 12 HD. When you are fighting CR 4 creatures, around 4th-7th level, you have NO CHANCE to do anything to creature in 3.5. It is immune to your turning ability. This is not some super-undead; it's a pretty bog standard undead brute/grunt/mook at those levels, really, but it is impervious to 3.5 turning because it is more than 4 HD above your cleric level, assuming a single-classed cleric (never mind a paladin).
2. Channeling can affect many MORE undead than before. With the HD limit, you would often affect only one or two level-appropriate undead, leaving the rest unaffected. PF channeling affects EVERY creature in the AoE, whether that be damage or (with the Turn Undead feat) running away.
3. For incorporeal undead, the worst thing you can do is make them run away, because what makes them so obnoxious is their ability to ambush you jumping out of walls, floors, etc. You turn them, they flee, then they sneak up on you and bushwhack you again, attacking vs. flat-footed AC on top of already cheating by attacking touch AC.
4. Oh yeah, that little thing about healing EVERY LIVING CREATURE within 30' is a pretty sweet side effect when you're fighting undead - it's a double dip - damage them, heal you.
5. The tactical difference between 30' and 60' depends a great deal on the setting. Out in the open, big difference. In the dungeon, where you often aren't going to have very much of long/clear straight approach vector, very effective difference.
Now, I agree that there are certainly tactical uses for making undead run away, and if there were a way to freeze them at a modest range, keeping them in sight but 60 feet away, that would be handy, certainly more handy than just making them run away period.
|
|
4. Oh yeah, that little thing about healing EVERY LIVING CREATURE within 30' is a pretty sweet side effect when you're fighting undead - it's a double dip - damage them, heal you.
I agree with everything Jason just said, the Pathfinder version seems ultimately superior to Turn Undead. The only thing I wanted to comment on was this point, as healing your allies and damaging the undead is no longer both at the same time, in the Final, it appears to be one or the other.
Still awesome, in my mind.
je no Vagrant, you got me wrong, my "easy" was to explain, not to tell you to calm... I understand how one now cast spells with his spellcaster level on mind...
still I prefered lower level spells with a few more uses...
this is MORE because of context... domain powers and the extra spells worked more like blessings of the gods... something they gave you...
bonus Spells is "just the same spells, plus 1 extra spell limited by your domains.. and only 1", making all the domain as supernatural abilities made it a lot more itneresting, actually I had hopped that they took some of those spells and gave them ore domain powers... so seeing the bonus spells in there was pretty much a hearthbreaker... that incluthing the other changes I have seen... made Pathfinder RPG an...
They weren't supernatural abilities, though, they *were* bonus spells. Look at them, look at the mechanics. In fact all cleric spells are direct supernatural ablities from thier diety. I think the problem is less they've lost their specialness, more that you don't see spells as special and different. But that's a bad race for a designer to embrace. Then everyone needs not spells, but supernatural powers, then everyone gets them, then you need something more special again, its bad road to go down. This is simpler, and as seen from a person living in the PFRPG world, say golarion, is still amazing and unique.
And the domain spells are unique. Say a person sees a cleric casting fireball, they instantly recognize it as the ability of a fire domain cleric, if they are familiar with such rare and wonderful magics.
Not a spell or supernatural ability, its ultimately the same thing, all of a cleric's spells are those divine gifts, so why would some be labelled differently?
|
|
After I post this, I'll go back and read all the messages before it (hope that isn't too naughty). I wanted to write my knee-jerk reaction to Kyra's stat block. I totally love it. I am so on board with the final, I have even more confidence in the PFRPG than before, if that's even possible. Awesome.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I like most of the changes in the cleric preview. I'm glad that Turn Undead is now an option instead of a default for channelling, since I've always hated making foes run so you have to fight them later or chase them down. I'm guessing that most people playing clerics won't be taking this feat, but it's good that it's still a part of the game for those who want it.
I'm also a big fan of the new concentration check rules, there's now uncertaincy in the outcome, and the combat casting feat means something. I'm hoping that it now will apply it's bonus to all uses of concentration, not just casting defensively. As for using caster level and how this affects multi-classed characters - I hope that multi classed casters can stack their caster level for concentration checks.
As for the argument about domains now not being as good, I completely am missing the point being made. It seems that the only real change in how they work is that the bonuses from them are clearly bonus spells and fully use the spell rules insteaed of SLAs and therefore have the normal DC based on the wisdom of the caster, etc. There still are multiple special abilities that come with the domains. Based on the changes we're seeing in Sun and Fire, I hope some of the other domains that had weaker abilities are also changes, and hopefully there isn't going to be as much domain overlap between different ones (obscuring mist in 4 domains should be a thing of the past.)
I don't feel that the new light rules have enough information to see how they'll really work, but since this subset of rules has been pretty pathetic in all previous editions, it can't be any worse in PRPG (and I have faith that Jason will have something better, even if it's not perfect.)
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
When working on channel energy, we took a long, hard look at how it worked in 3.5, how it worked in the Beta, and how we wanted it to work in the final version of the game.
In 3.5, there were serious problems with how turn undead affected encounters, from both sides of the screen. It was an all or nothing proposal, but even that is a bit of an illusion. Often times, the undead ended up fleeing into another encounter area, where they simply made the next fight all the harder. Or, they ended up leaving the field entirely, which meant the party spent very little in the way of resources for a sizable XP award. To top it off, at higher levels, due to undead Hit Die scaling, they were often totally immune.
In the Beta, we attempted to address these issues with the damage/healing scheme. While this solved many of the 3.5 problems, it created a new one. Undead fights were way too easy. While the undead were taking damage, the rest of the party kept healing.
This led us to the final solution, which was one or the other. While the range is less than the 3.5 rules, we wanted the cleric to be in the thick of things, fighting off undead in the name of her deity. Yes this means that undead get to use some of their powers and are within charge range, but that adds to the risk of the encounter, which many of the undead sorely needed.
You may not agree.. but this was the best solution that met all of our goals.
As to the domain issue, each domain grants a pair of special abilities, and has a spell list that is better tailored to the theme. Considering you get two domains, this is four special abilities, whereas in 3.5 you only got a pair of relatively lackluster granted powers. Although we liked the versatility of the domains in the Beta, there were some compatibility issues that we just could not overcome. The domains were just too different. Granting a host of spell-like abilities was a problem as well, since they are forced to work off Cha. There was also a number of problems with the way that spell-like abilities are used that we just did not want to tangle with. Once they were changed back to bonus spells, there really was no reason not to go back to the domain spell lists. This allow you to use the 3.5 domains with relatively few adjustments (all you need to do is tweak and add to the granted power and you are good to go).
So, while I can understand some frustration on these issues, we hardly removed that much flavor from the Beta, and it has quite a bit more than the rather bland 3.5 domains.
Hope that clarifies the issue a bit.. glad to hear that most people are happy with the changes. Of all the classes, the cleric got a lot of feedback that we really took to heart.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Edit: As an aside, we also wanted to make sure that the option to make undead run or fall under your control still existed, hence the new feats. They also serve to kill two birds with one stone. They open up options and they give some cool cleric specific feats, which 3.5 sorely lacked in the core rules.
Come on Jason Nelson. Don't turn this into a pissing match.
1) A minataur zombie is a good example. It is a simple undead grunt. One that has no special abilities to worry about. One that the melee characters in the group should have an easy time of, and would be a waste of any turn/channel attempt.
2) How many "level appropriate" undead are you expecting to face at one time?
3) You are assuming the incorporeal undead have a reason to come back and ambush. I never really got the "oh, the party must be my mortal enemy and I should hunt them down at all costs" mentality that most DM's give the party opponents - not just undead. But that is another topic.
4) Um... You only heal every living creature in the area if you aren't affecting undead. Moot to the discussion of Channel Energy being far inferior on a tactical basis than 3.5 Turn Undead.
5) The range in close areas is still important when you factor in the built in fear like affect. Keeping corporeal undead cowering against the walls lets the undead be dealt with in a more permanent fashion while keeping them far enough away from the group to keep the group safe.
You don't get my aversion. Fair enough. But leave it at that.
Because if Kyra was 11th level, we could see if the spell progression is still reduced to compensate the power of Channel Energy.
It never was reduced because of that.
The reduction of spells/day was done to have one chart for all full-time spellcasters that prepare spells. It never made sense to me that clerics would get more spells.
Link me to the source of that insight.
I took it as a reduction of healing spells to counter the increase of healing potential that Channel Energy gave.
I'm happy that healing and undead destruction is separate.
Me too.
Clerics healing their allies and simultaneously blasting undead made undead a trivial challenge.
Evil cleric necromancers blasting the party while simultaneously healing their undead minions became overwhelming challenges.
Personally, I feel the new style of handling undead is both good and bad. Good because the D12 HD of an undead critter usually goes poof when a cleric with double its levels channels (which is technically two d6s for every D12) which is similar to the older turning system,
This is good, but it hasn't changed from 3.x, has it?
somewhat happy that I don't have to deal with stupidly long blind chases,
Absolutely agreed.
yet slightly miffed that I have to spend a feat to get the option to Benny Hill AND still sacrifice my damage.
Personally, I'd have preferred that the Turn Undead FEAT let you do damage AND perform an OPTIONAL turn attempt.
Agreed again.
Feats are supposed to give you something.
A cleric could take, say, Extend Spell and now his buffs all last longer. Or Divine Metamagic for all the chewy goodness it provides.
Instead, he chooses the Turn Undead feat.
What does he get?
Now (when he uses the feat) he damages nothing but has a chance that some undead run away, returning us to the "run and chase" game of turning undead.
I thought the idea was to get rid of that "runa nd chase" system.
OK, yeah, the new Pathfinder rule did get rid of it, which is awesome.
But then they put in this feat so some crazy clerics can restore the "run and chase" mechanic. Worse, that cleric must spend a precious feat to restore the crappy mechanic. But the worst part of all is that the cleric also loses the damaging aspect of Channel Energy.
1. Feat spent.
2. Crappy "run and chase" mechanic.
3. No damage dealt.
This may top my list as the most useless feat in the book (of course, I haven't seen them all, so I may find other useless feats to challenge for the title).
It will certainly be at or near the top of my list of houserules to immediately put in place when I buy the Pathfinder book. I'm leaning toward damage AND flee, which fully justifies the feat for anyone who actually desires to restore the "run and chase" mechanic - at least you may drop some undead, and you'll be chasing wounded undead that fled.
|
|
That would be true if they were domain powers that did not require activation, but in Beta that was not the case, since the vast majority were spell-like abilities and the remainder were almost all supernatural abilities. There were very few abilities that were simply "on" all the time. In fact, I'm looking at the Beta domains right now, and do you know how many domain powers I see that are "working at the same time"?
my mistake, i emant that you had all the options of your domains at all times, not you decided at the beginning of day if you wanted to be more fire or more sun related
ALL of the domain powers in Beta are spell-like or supernatural abilities that require actions to activate. Sure, they can work together once you activate them, but so can any two spells you choose to prepare.
Strangely, the flavor you seem to want, to have domain powers working together, investing the cleric with the raw power of their deity, seems to exist ONLY in PF and NOT in the Beta version.
Look at Kyra: She has fire resistance and sun's blessing working at the same time, ALL THE TIME. On top of that, she also can invoke Sarenrae's power directly for two other domain powers (fire bolt and nimbus of light).
I probably shouldn't be wasting time when I'm supposed to be at work, but I'm just genuinely perplexed as to how you would interpret the change from Beta domains to the final PF version as so crucially broken and unflavorful, when what you describe wanting out of domains for the cleric class seems like exactly what PF gives you and Beta DOESN'T!
maybe its just the fact that I don't really like the bonus spells... would had to see Glory (Glory and Sun are the domains I mostly use), maybe I just expected to see more domain powers isntead of going back to bonus spells... I see it as a step back in something that was creative and actually brought soemthing new to the table in an 'old' mechanic without much changes in what... 6 or 8 years?
the RAW power from the gods I saw it on channeling energy... now dilutted and nerfed... and the turn undead (taxed and nerfed)
again I may be overreacting... but that is my interpretation
again... I LOVE Golarion... I am just not pleased with the turn of events on Pathfinder RPG... which is an irony... a month, maybe 2 ago in the Dragonstar Forums a company mentioned that they didn't liked where PF RPG was heading off and decided to do their own thing using 3.5... I lamented it because I saw (and still do...) that for Pathfinder and the bussiness to prosper, trying to go in the same direction is a must for success... why? momentum... Pathfinder has momentum and support, many of the smaller RPG companies have a custoemr base and niche of stories they support... working toguether with Pathfidner they both win, mixing both products and customers, one taking the momentum from the other, the other having accesible the customer base...
also as a community is easiert o have a flag to support...
I didn't explained all this, I just lamented they were heading a separate way... because as a friend says... "Divide & Conquer"...
now I am the one uncomfortable for how things look to the point of changing my perspective from "I want to play this and make it my main support for RPG" to "ok... maybe... but to expensive for splatterbook"
if to play the game I want I need 3 extra books, and one is the Beta, DO i really need PF RPG?
I like the revised channel energy rules.
The beta rules were a solid improvement over the 3.5 rules, but they had their flaws in game. I've been using those rules since they popped up in the alpha, and they had the potential to make undead encounters almost laughable.
Horde of undead? Boom, cleric uses channel energy. Now the undead are severely injured/running away and the party is healed up. Dungeon full of undead? A cleric with high Charisma can end a half dozen otherwise challenging encounters in a few rolls. Then if you put in an evil cleric on one side, it becomes a matter of who used channel energy the least that day. Good cleric turns undead minions and heals the group, evil cleric controls undead and harms the group. It could turn into a see-saw battle.
Note that I don't think every encounter would run like that, but more than a few undead encounters in my games were turned into laughers by the previous channel energy rules. Adding the either/or mechanic keeps the improvements over the 3.5 system without making undead totally useless against clerics.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Sorry for cutting out your post, but those are all very good points.
I accept that the changes probably fit your goals very well. And from the general accolades, it did it's job well.
However, given my reaction, as well as a few others, it seems the Cleric is still the Red Headed Step Child of many groups.
I'd hazard a guess that where the Cleric is a Red Headed Step Child, is where there is an expectation of a certain ethos/code of conduct of the "religious" classes, and where these changes are seen as a step in the right direction is in groups where the "role play tax" of those classes are much lighter.
And as a side note, even taking away the healing aspect of channel energy in Curse of the Crimson Throne using the Beta rules, undead are an easy fight. Whenever Channel Energy was used, the healing side was often wasted.
|
|
thanks for the explanation Jason, my issues with channeling is not with turn undead (except that it doesn't do damage... which would have been useful), the other part is mostly about flavor... but I do udnerstand the thing about balance
Hey there all,
When working on channel energy, we took a long, hard look at how it worked in 3.5, how it worked in the Beta, and how we wanted it to work in the final version of the game.
In 3.5, there were serious problems with how turn undead affected encounters, from both sides of the screen. It was an all or nothing proposal, but even that is a bit of an illusion. Often times, the undead ended up fleeing into another encounter area, where they simply made the next fight all the harder. Or, they ended up leaving the field entirely, which meant the party spent very little in the way of resources for a sizable XP award. To top it off, at higher levels, due to undead Hit Die scaling, they were often totally immune.
In the Beta, we attempted to address these issues with the damage/healing scheme. While this solved many of the 3.5 problems, it created a new one. Undead fights were way too easy. While the undead were taking damage, the rest of the party kept healing.
This led us to the final solution, which was one or the other. While the range is less than the 3.5 rules, we wanted the cleric to be in the thick of things, fighting off undead in the name of her deity. Yes this means that undead get to use some of their powers and are within charge range, but that adds to the risk of the encounter, which many of the undead sorely needed.
You may not agree.. but this was the best solution that met all of our goals.
i understand the compatibility reason... in fact that is mostly my frustration, you had an option to make soemthing interesting, even if it was linked to another attribute... then jumping back was like cutting something that looked a lot more itneresting that the same old list, I know they have been twinckled and reworked... I myself hoped for a different thing.
have been playing for almost a year with this in mind... and the Beta domains have saved my character live much more times than the bonus spells would ever be...
and I believe the domains are ebtter than in 3.5, just Beta worked better, as how I see things. But of course that IMHO
As to the domain issue, each domain grants a pair of special abilities, and has a spell list that is better tailored to the theme. Considering you get two domains, this is four special abilities, whereas in 3.5 you only got a pair of relatively lackluster granted powers. Although we liked the versatility of the domains in the Beta, there were some compatibility issues that we just could not overcome. The domains were just too different. Granting a host of spell-like abilities was a problem as well, since they are forced to work off Cha. There was also a number of problems with the way that spell-like abilities are used that we just did not want to tangle with. Once they were changed back to bonus spells, there really was no reason not to go back to the domain spell lists. This allow you to use the 3.5 domains with relatively few adjustments (all you need to do is tweak and add to the granted power and you are good to go).
So, while I can understand some frustration on these issues, we hardly removed that much flavor from the Beta, and it has quite a bit more than the rather bland 3.5 domains.
I don't mean to sound offensive, but I do not understand why is there this sudden sense of gloom and doom pervading the forum.
Considering I added to that early... they finally got around to some of the more contentious changes during the Alpha and Beta. Cleric Domains, Concentration, and Channel Energy. All three had very different supporters in the fan base during development. In a way these changes/unchanges seem to fall under the category of a 'good compromise' where no one is happy. Therefore more gloom.
Concentration seemed a bit of bombshell though, IMO.
Not a fan of the new way to handle concentration checks. Double the spell level is too much, way too much. A level 17 mage/cleric once he gets caught in melee with a fighter will have little chance to use their level 9 spell. 17 + 7 (maybe if they are lucky)....against needing a 33 to cast defensively. 40% chance to blow it? No, that is too much. Sorry, wont use a rule that will destroy casters in melee. The guy at the end of RoTRL will get crushed like a baby using that rule.
Well I own markers will just cross that out of the pathfinder book when it comes. I like getting rid of the skill, but not this way. It's ok. Never expected pathfinder to be perfect.
|
Director of Games
|
Granting a host of spell-like abilities was a problem as well, since they are forced to work off Cha.This got my attention. Is this a rule, somewhere, that all spell-like abilities must be based off of Charisma?
Is there a similar rule about Supernatural Abilities?
Its more of an unspoken rule than a written one. There are very few examples of this working differently...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Granting a host of spell-like abilities was a problem as well, since they are forced to work off Cha.This got my attention. Is this a rule, somewhere, that all spell-like abilities must be based off of Charisma?
Is there a similar rule about Supernatural Abilities?
I found this on d20srd.
The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is:
10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Cha modifier.
And there is this on SU.
The saving throw (if any) against a supernatural ability is:
10 + ½ the creature’s HD + the creature’s ability modifier (usually Charisma).
|
|
Granting a host of spell-like abilities was a problem as well, since they are forced to work off Cha.This got my attention. Is this a rule, somewhere, that all spell-like abilities must be based off of Charisma?
Taken from D20srd.org
The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is:10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Cha modifier.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Not a fan of the new way to handle concentration checks. Double the spell level is too much, way too much. A level 17 mage/cleric once he gets caught in melee with a fighter will have little chance to use their level 9 spell. 17 + 7 (maybe if they are lucky)....against needing a 33 to cast defensively. 40% chance to blow it? No, that is too much. Sorry, wont use a rule that will destroy casters in melee. The guy at the end of RoTRL will get crushed like a baby using that rule.
He will, but only if:
1. The fighter is able to get up next to him (and the HL wizard had better have a jillion ways to keep that from happening, including mooks and illusions to divert the fighter from the real target, things like mislead, project image, mirror image, greater invisibility, etc.).
2. Once the fighter is next to him he actually can hit the guy (no magical effects blocking or impeding his attack).
3. Most importantly, nowhere does it say the wizard MUST use his highest-level spells at all times. He's got 9 levels of spells (plus cantrips). So, assuming #1 and #2 are already true, and the fighter is ready to rock, then heaven forbid the 17th-level caster needs to auto-succeed (0% chance to blow it) at Concentration to cast dimension door (or similar effect) to move away.
So, the smart caster will make sure he's prepared for melee-ers, but should one get up in his grill, he casts a lower-level spell to get away, then brings out the big guns again once he's put some distance between himself and the attacker(s).
Well I own markers will just cross that out of the pathfinder book when it comes. I like getting rid of the skill, but not this way. It's ok. Never expected pathfinder to be perfect.
Nothing ever is, but I'd classify the ability of melee characters to honestly threaten or inconvenience spellcasters at high level on the rare occasions they can actually get up into melee with them as a feature, not a bug. YMMV.
|
|
For my part? I definitely see the problem with the Concentration check that others have mentioned. Does Spellcraft add to that still, however?
I genuinely hate the limiting of the first-level power to a number of times per day, myself... it just seems to work agains the whole
"everyone with magic should have something magical to do at all times" bit for me.
The Channelling bit isn't a deal-breaker for me. It probably was a little too good for its purposes, although it'll really annoy the Necromancer in my group. :) ("OK, so they destroyed my minion this turn, but at least they healed me too!")
*As to DC, it's what 33 for a 9th level spell? 18th level wizard with a 20 int has a 23 modifier, so that's a 50/50 chance. 18th level ranger has a 35/65 chance with a 20 wis. Difficult yes, but not insurmountable.
A wizard casting his 9th level spell with a 50/50 chance to cast defensively at level 18 is not insurmountable?
How about a level 1 cleric with a 15 wisdom? He gets a massive +3 on his check and has to hit 17....so he's failing 65% of the time.
That's not very cool. How about a level 9 cleric casting his level 5 spell, give him a 20 wisdom. He fails half the time with a bloody 20 wisdom at level 9. This will really push the value of inflated stats way up. And will make combat casting not an option, but a requirement, and against a fighter only a method of breaking even. They should up the melee strength of clerics and mages with this change, because once stuck in they can't rely on spells to get them through it. A 50% failure rate to cast your best spell defensively is way too much. Poorly thought out change, maybe they should have posted this idea before sending the book to the printer. It's a real shame they didn't care to do so.
if to play the game I want I need 3 extra books, and one is the Beta, DO i really need PF RPG?
Sorry, I do not get you here. If I read you correctly, you were rather satisfied with the Beta Cleric mechanics... hence, what are the other 3 extra books you need? It would seem to be Beta (a free download) and the PF core.
I can see the final version not meeting my expectations in some departments when compared to the Beta and to some 3.5 rule options. I think that would be a consequence of:1) having the Beta. Hey, it's free, and convenient in .pdf format.
2) having played a few years of 3.5 and thus *already owning* the books. You need the extra books because you already know that they have rules options you like better.
I can see that this is going to be the situation of a lot of prospective PFRPG buyers. We have experience with 3.5. Part of the "backward compability" concern goes into this direction: not only adapting 3.5 adventures, but letting 3.5 players incorporate their favorite PrClass, race, domain, whatever, or a rule variation they prefer from pre-PF incarnations of the game. Most of us have a history with the game and have personal big yes and nos for certain rules. That is certainly not the PF designers' fault, it is due to our own gaming baggage (and actually, trying to find a midpoint amidsts those many baggages is a designer's virtue).
So far, the game seems pretty well-defined as "modular" to me. It does not seem too hard to retain or convert Beta or 3.5 features. If it comes down to it, one could run future PF products with just a "conversion table" of important rule changes, the 3.5 manual (or the Beta) and little else. It would be the reverse of the people now running 3.5 APs with the Beta, with the advantage of a year-long playtest.
On the other hand, I am pretty happy that 3.5 remains in print in a single tome (+ bestiary, you cannot help that), especially if the tome takes as default a campaign work I like for its flavor and quality.
|
Taking time to think about it, I like the new rules for concentration, they aren't my prefered system, I much prefer it to be based off of enemy BAB, but compared to the old by level 4 you can always succesfully cast without provoking the AoO. Now you can still cast your lower level spells in melee at higher level with no risk, but casting the big ones you're liable to take an AoO, Combat casting looks like a decent feat at all levels, and with feats for people to follow, there isn't always the option of 5' step back and fire. Now we just have to see how your check to keep a spell when you take damage works. So getting past my dissapointment that it isn't harder and BAB based, I think this version is a good one. At least I'll playtest it before making any changes.
The nerf of darkness still bugs the heck out of me, but cest la vie, I can live with just one houserule.
