|
I was going through some old books like my Gazeteer etc and noted there are some rules that are designed for 3.5 and not for PFRPG. Are these going to be changed and will the old books be reprinted or will there be some sort of erratta to update any old rules to fit with PFRPG?
eg of what I am talking about: Optional cleric build allowing you to have only 1 domain but be able to swap out memorized spells for your domain spells as per swapping out healing spells. Only problem PFRPG doesn't have spells for domains it has special abilities instead?
Has anybody else noted discrepencies like this one and any idea on how they will be rectified to mesh with the new rules?
As far as I'm aware there's no plans to change such things or reprint the books. Nor do I believe there are any plans for official errata, though members of the community will likely provide their own changes for aspects that appeal to them.
The books in question were largely written crunch light because it was known this would be the case. By focusing more on fluff, the majority of these products can be used regardless of the ruleset used to play the game. In addition, by keeping PFRPG as backwards-compatible with 3.5 as was done, such instances of the crunch not jiving with the new rules is limited as much as possible.
I was going through some old books like my Gazeteer etc and noted there are some rules that are designed for 3.5 and not for PFRPG. Are these going to be changed and will the old books be reprinted or will there be some sort of erratta to update any old rules to fit with PFRPG?
eg of what I am talking about: Optional cleric build allowing you to have only 1 domain but be able to swap out memorized spells for your domain spells as per swapping out healing spells. Only problem PFRPG doesn't have spells for domains it has special abilities instead?
Has anybody else noted discrepencies like this one and any idea on how they will be rectified to mesh with the new rules?
I am playing with all of the currently available PRPG rules and I haven't had to convert any source material. Of course, I'm not a GM who needs my hand held, but really I do very little conversion work.
The specific rule you mention, cleric domains, shouldn't pose a problem. The final version evidently reverts to a "domain list" type rule like in 3.5, they just added some higher level domain powers in as well to discourage dipping and make it a class worth 20 levels. You can keep playing with a 3.5 cleric, and just add the higher level domain power at whatever level.
Incidentally, I too use the default-to-domains rule. From what was discussed in the playtest, it seems that preserving the variant rules around domains was a factor in their final decision.
I have followed the whole PRPG process, and I sincerely doubt that there will be a book I need to re-purchase. Their goal of backwards compatibility has been met, AFAIC, because 95% of statblocks can be used as is without the game falling apart. There may be corner cases, but I advise you not to spend $20-50 on a new book for a single updated rule. I don't think Paizo wants people to buy rehashed stuff either, they'd rather publish new material.
EDIT: BTW, since playing with PRPG, I've been pulling out old 3.5 books I thought were retired and using them... so I'm pretty sure Paizo's own material isn't useless either.
To your specific example, like Toyrobots said, the Final Rules WILL retain Domain Spells:
Specific individual spells may be replaced (Fire Domain now granting access to FIREBALL!, for one) and the 1st level bonuses (Class Skills, etc) may be altered somewhat, but Domain Spells IN GENERAL look to work identically. Domains WILL have additional Supernatural/SLA abilities at certain levels (1st, 6/8th, ~14th, 18-20th?) but those are ON TOP of the Domain Spells.
In any case, from what the Cleric Preview revealed (see Preview #5 in the Paizo Blog), I'd expect you to be able to use the Spontaneous Domain Substitution from the Gazetteer 100% as-is, with no conversion whatsoever. Given Jason's comments (that the Final rules conform closer to 3.5 than the Beta does), I'd expect this level of compatability to be TYPICAL for PRPG, i.e. things like Urban Ranger or Whirling Frenzy Barbarian should carry over to PRPG with no problems.
...And no, I don't have any advice on how to stand the extended anticipation of waiting for the book to be released! :-)
Pathfinder made the core classes desirable again, and that is a good thing. The apocryphal classes are usable, but they are specialized and some of them do need a little help.
I allow any 3.5 classes in my own game, I think it's part of Pathfinder's charm. If someone wants to play a class that seems out of place (Artificer) or woefully underpowered (Soulknife) I will roll out my GM's scalpel and fix the problem, usually by comparing it to the new classes.
By the same token, I think some people might get carried away with the power ratchet and start "Pathfinderizing" classes that were actually pretty good to begin with, so be careful. Remember that the Pathfinder changes were made to put the core classes on par with the best apocryphal classes.
Anyway, I'm having fun in the big 3.5 sandbox. I hope all those weird 3.5 classes don't gather dust in other people's games just because the Fighter is worth it now.
I allow any 3.5 classes in my own game, I think it's part of Pathfinder's charm. If someone wants to play a class that seems out of place (Artificer) or woefully underpowered (Soulknife) I will roll out my GM's scalpel and fix the problem, usually by comparing it to the new classes.
That is how our current DM rules it also, but still generally and understandably prefers if he actually owns the splat book in which your pulling said craziness. I see a lot of the splat book classes becoming 'dip classes' now in use with PFRPG... Marshal, Ninja, Scout, etc. (My 3 personal favorites BTW)
By the same token, I think some people might get carried away with the power ratchet and start "Pathfinderizing" classes that were actually pretty good to begin with, so be careful. Remember that the Pathfinder changes were made to put the core classes on par with the best apocryphal classes.
I'm pretty sure we're still not allowed to play Duskblades and I don't believe the problem is in munchkin'ing, but with the fact that they "replace" (or at least use to) 2 or more core classes... sometimes leaving other party members wondering why they're in the group at all.
I agree and as I mentioned above I think even using them to 'dip' multi-class might be a potential bad power-hike.
I'm pretty sure we're still not allowed to play Duskblades and I don't believe the problem is in munchkin'ing, but with the fact that they "replace" (or at least use to) 2 or more core classes... sometimes leaving other party members wondering why they're in the group at all.
A Duskblade cannot really replace a fighter OR a wizard. The fighter will have an easier time to hit enemies (you can't obliterate someone you don't even hit), and the wizard will have powerful magic at his disposal.
|
The only classes Paizo can really retool are the ones in the SRD. With the exception of the Psionic classes, I think they will all be in the core book. I personnaly don't expect to see them publishing a bunch of 'almost' classes where they just change a few abilities and hope it slips through the OGL. (I'm sure there will be some thrd party and fan efforts to that effect, but not in the official channels.)
They will probably do a few more concepts as base classes, and some might have already been attempted before - but that doesn't mean that the PF versions will be converted D&D classes.
Take, for example, the Samurai.
It's not unlikely that a PF Oriental Adventures will come along, with information about Golarion's East and wuxia classes.
So there will be a new samurai in there. Yes, wizards did that one already in complete warrior. But the PF will be different (for one thing, the CW samurai blew big baby chunks). It might resemble the OA 3e samurai, but even that will not be more than a vague resemblance.
Speaking specifically about the Oriental style classes, I don't think they need to be recreated as new base classes. One of the bigger issues with WotC work was that it cocked the game up with endless base and prestige class, trying to fill niche aspects. It took several years to finally get to the better solution of substitution levels and replacement class features. Granted their were some niches that worked well. The duskblade and artificer come to the fore in my mind.
It is actually fairly easy to replicate an educated noble warrior using the Fighter and the replacement class feature presented in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting. The same can be done for a ninja like class and the Rogue, again using the PFCS replacement feature for poison use. The Cloistered Cleric form Unearthed Arcana(UA) could be a decent stand in for a more Oriental style priest or monk (not the martial artist kind). The only loose thread is an Oriental arcane substitute, however the Sorcerer and the new blood lines are a good start in my book, it may just need a little tweak.
Even without those mentioned above, it would make more sense to use alternate class features and minor class tweaking the build and balance whole new classes from scratch and have them compete with the newly minted PFRPG core classes.
Something like the Noble or Courtier (Rokugan L5R d20) are much harder to replicate with pure replacement features. Out on a limb the Bard or perhaps Rogue (UA variant that replaces sneak attack with fighter bonus feats) could be used with some effect.
What about base classes from the many many supplements? Wouldn't they need an overhaul to keep up with the core classes now? If so how will//would our saviors from paizo go about doing it? or will there be a thread made so that us players/DMs (DM in my case) can take cracks and pot shots at it?
What you do with the base classes from wizard's supplemental boooks is up to you and your GM. Most of them can be played as is, some folks have made conversions. There will be no new versions of your old Wizard's books to buy so you are kind of on your own there. I figure most of it is usable as is and the stuff that isn't was likely broken before in one way or the other.
Paizo rules bits shouldn't require much changes, a few isolated cases yeah but in general no.
If I remember rightly AEG retained all the IP for Oriental Adventures..now if Lisa could negotiate a deal..we might yet get the Wu-Jen and the Shugenja into PF
I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that the terms Wu Jen and Shugenja come from actual words, and weren't just invented for D&D or L5R, however, the classes, as expressed in a WOTC rulebook, would pretty much still be WOTC's.
WOTC did the old Diablo D&D RPG books, and while Blizzard can use the term barbarian all they like, I'm pretty sure the barbarian class, as detailed in those books, are still WOTC's to use, so long as they don't use the Blizzard IP names for anything with said class.
Assuming I'm right about the terms for the classes, Paizo wouldn't need anyone to give them permission to make those classes, but would have to make sure that those classes aren't too close to the WOTC version of them, probably by making sure that they track closely to whatever the initial terminology referred to.
I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that the terms Wu Jen and Shugenja come from actual words, and weren't just invented for D&D or L5R, however, the classes, as expressed in a WOTC rulebook, would pretty much still be WOTC's.
You are correct. Shuganja, Samari, and Ninja, are all open... Wu Jen I'm not so sure about. A casual search on Google doesn't reveal anything beyond a lot of references to WotC.
Regardless, the classes would have to be unique to Paizo, not just rehashes of existing stuff and rebranded.
Anyway, I'm having fun in the big 3.5 sandbox. I hope all those weird 3.5 classes don't gather dust in other people's games just because the Fighter is worth it now.
Wasn't that actually one of the design goals of the Pathfinder RPG? (i.e., that a lot of those wierd classes would be unnecessary because "the Fighter is worth it now."
|
If I remember rightly AEG retained all the IP for Oriental Adventures..now if Lisa could negotiate a deal..we might yet get the Wu-Jen and the Shugenja into PF
If you take any of the d20 Oriental Adventures books published by AEG and look at the declaration of Open Game Content and Product Identity required by the OGL, you will find that AEG was very generous with the amount of open content it permitted - the stuff specific to Rogukan remained product identity, but most of the other stuff is available for third-party use and could be adapted for the Pathfinder RPG.
The declaration is usually worded something like this:
AECs intention is to open up as much of the book Magic of Rokugan as possible to be used as open Game Content (OGC), while maintaining Product Identity (PI) to all aspects of the Legend ofthe Five Rings intellectual property Publishers who wish to use the OGC materials from this book are encouraged to contact AEGJohnZ@aolcom if they have any questions or concerns about reproducing material from Magic of Rokugan in other OGL works. AEG would appreciate anyone using OGC material from Magic of Rokugan in other OGL works to kindly reference Magic of Rokugan as the source of that material within the text of their work. Open Game Content may only he used under and in accordance with the terms of the OGL as was set forth in the previous column.
And this:
USE OF MATERIAL AS OPEN GAME CONTENT: It is the clear and expressed intent of Alderac Entertainment Group to add all classes, skills, feats, equipment, prestige classes, spell effects, magic item effects, artifact effects, and monster and NPC statistics (hence forth “goodies”)contained in this volume to the canon of Open Game Content for free use pursuant to the open Game License hy future open Game publishers. Some of the aforementioned items, however, contain Product Identity, as designated above, and that designation remains. A limited license is provided below which allows use of content designated as Product Identity for these items only.
The interesting thing is that AEG had a special license from Wizards of the Coast to produce material based on the Oriental Adventures hardcover for the Rokugan setting and often uses terms derived from that work (including Wu Jen, Shugenja, etc) in sections clearly designated as Open Game Content. This might make it possible to produce new OGC versions of these classes for the Pathfinder system.
Interesting, Prime Evil. I'd love to hear more about this.
That is almost identical to the OGC declaration in the Rokugan setting book however it is important to look at the Product Identity declaration. I don't have Magic of Rokugan so Prime Evil is going to need to double check but in the setting book under PI I find:
any and all material adapted from Oriental Adventures, except material noted in the work as Open Game Content
Granted in that book that only covers the Samurai and Shugenja classes, however I get the feeling that a similar situation is true for mentions of the Wu Jen in Magic of Rokugan.
Personally I think it best from an OGL/OGC standpoint to just walk way from anything related to WotC Oriental Adventures and rebuild from scratch. Names like Shuganja, Samari, and Ninja are fair game. What remains is to look for something that would fit the arcane caster class mold.
I'm still of the opinion that if Paizo or a 3rd party were to create a Pathfinder built Oriental book it would be best to use alternate class features to adapt the core classes.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I'm still of the opinion that if Paizo or a 3rd party were to create a Pathfinder built Oriental book it would be best to use alternate class features to adapt the core classes.
But if you do more than two or three alternate class features for a class, aren't you really just making a new class? I'm pretty sure I wouldn't pay for a hardcover book marketed as Oriental crunch if it were just new feats, equipment and alternate classes. I'm also the kind of person who doesn't mind more options, since most of the time they never get used, but if I were playing a character or campaign in which they fit, I'd be really glad that they weren't just adaptations of the base classes but their own unique entities that fill a distinct role.
The other question is, do the Samurai, Ninja, Wu Jen and Shugenja classes from the Complete books supersede that or not?
That seems like a non-issue considering that none of it is open content. Just because WotC reprinted and changed Monkey Grip in "Complete Warrior" doesn't make the Monkey Grip in "Sword and Fist" OGC. At that point you're down to the individual DMs game as to which version they want to use.
yoda8myhead, I think you and I are viewing it from different angles. My assumption is that such an Oriental book, especially from Paizo, would be mainly focus on fluff and not crunch. I also don't really need more then one or two changes need to be made for most of the classes to make them fit a different fluff. What new abilities does a Samurai class need that a Fighter is not geared to do? The only real issue I see is the lack of skills for a class that is supposed to be an educated warrior in the elite of society, thus the use of the small variation offered in the PFCS.
*Edit*
As to filling new roles, wouldn't space in such a crunch based book be better spent on introducing a new class that actually does have a different role. Speaking on the OGC front the Rokugan Courtier class would be an example. Although maybe a bit over specialized social encounters. The concept would be hard to replicate with a modified Rogue or Bard class. Why use space to reprint the class 20 level block on something like a Samuria (your warrior of the setting) or the Ninja (your stealth/sneak class) when minor modified Fighters and Rogues can provide the crunch to back the fluff?
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I guess the question is whether it would be a PFRPG rule book, which will be flavor-light since they are setting neutral, or a Pathfinder Chronicles book about Minkai or other parts of Tian Xia. If it were the latter, I would expect more flavor and no new classes except for something unique to Golarion that wouldn't really fit in a setting neutral book. For a hardcover rulebook, I would want new rules. I doubt that they wouldn't have the room to print a full 20-level class table in a hardcover book, assuming future books in the line are comparable in size to WotC's 3.5 splatbooks. And as to the niches and roles, I see the role of a samurai different enough that a variant fighter isn't really what I'd want. But this is several years off at the soonest, so we have plenty of time to speculate and suggest different plans of attack to Paizo before they release something like this to support Jade Regent.
|
I believe the OP is talking about rebuying the Pathfinder line of books, not all the OGL/d20 books...in that vein, I'm hoping that the good folks at Pathfinder put up a web Enhancement updating the alternate class abilities presented in the PCS, and the 3.5 based feats and magic items presented in the APs and Chronicle like of products.
Pathfinder Clerics will have domain spells again per the previews