|
I picked the Pathfinder RPG up from my FLGS and downloaded Tome of Secrets both this afternoon. So which was the first product I perused on arriving home? It was Tome of Secrets.
I love that I've got my copy of Pathfinder RPG, but I've been reading nothing but PFRPG playtests, previews and talk on these boards for the last two years, and it's basically a 3.5 revision, so while the rules have been given a shiny new polish, they're still largely familiar.
Meanwhile, Tome of Secrets is a collection of new 3.5 races, classes and more, the likes of which I haven't seen since WotC's 4E announcement scared every third-party publisher (except for Paizo) into hiding. Tome of Secrets is exactly the kind of sourcebook I enjoy supplementing my 3.5 collection with.
This is by no means an in-depth review, I haven't had time to read the whole thing yet, but here are some initial impressions based on the few things I have read:
On first sight of the half-ogre, my firt thoughts were also this is too good a choice for fighers/barbarians to consider any standard race.
The HD/BAB anomaly mightn't have disturbed me as much if there weren't other basic Pathfinder design philosophies seemingly ignored or overlooked:
The new classes seem to lack "capstone" abilities for attaining 20th level. This isn't likely to concern me, as I've never played a character to 20th level, though this might discourage some players.
The Warlock has dead class levels:
12th +9/+4 +4 +4 +8 School ability
13th +9/+4 +4 +4 +8 -
16th +12/+7/+2 +5 +5 +10 School ability
17th +12/+7/+2 +5 +5 +10 -
None of the above are deal-breakers for me. Tome of Secrets introduces a handful of interesting new races, classes and other optional rules. Many of you are already discussing house-ruling changes to these, and that's a fine way to deal with optional rules in your home games that aren't going to see play in any official capacity (eg, Pathfinder Scoiety).
The product download notification email from AdamAntEntertainment, as well as Tome of Secret's intro page, both struck me as highly respectful of Paizo, Pathfinder and the 3.5 community - not merely reaching out to us as potential customers, but as individuals who love the game as much as they do. AdamAnt have gained my respect.
Paizo have demonstrated a strong tradition of using third-party OGL content in their own products (notably the Adventure Paths) - for example, creatures from Advanced Bestiary, Tome of Horrors, Thaumaturge class, etc. I would be very interested to see if down the track Paizo incorporate any of the races or classes from Tome of Secrets as NPCs appearing in any future Adventure Paths?
|
|
Y'know, I feel even more strongly about the HD/BAB inconsistency, capstone abilties and dead levels after downloading and reading the Pathfinder RPG Conversion Guide where these three points are specifically mentioned under Base Classes (page 13).
The first step is to ensure that the class's Hit Dice and base attack progression match. If the class has a slow base attack progression (such as the wizard), it should use d6s for Hit Dice. Classes with the medium progression (such as clerics) should use d8s for Hit Dice, while those with a fast progression (such as f ighters) should use d10s.
When the core classes in the Pathfinder RPG were redesigned, we kept the following rules in mind.
- Classes should get something beyond their base attack bonus and save progression at every level. If the class you are converting has holes, you should consider adding some simple abilities to increase its utility.
- Classes should get something cool at 20th level. This capstone ability should make it truly worthwhile to attain the heights of power in one class. It is not mandatory, but it is a great tool to encourage a character to stick with one class.
|
My feeling about the BAB/HD discrepancies is that they work for those particular classes. The Knight might as well be considered grandfathered in from the 3.5 version... it's got the same deal as the Barbarian for the very good reason that it's SUPPOSED to take extra hits to protect others, as opposed to just extra hp for its own reasons. If your class feature makes you more likely to take more hits, you need the d12. Anything less makes the class unworkable as the meat-shield it's supposed to be.
The Spellblade, as a front-line fighter AND a spellcaster has a d8 simply because it's halfway between a fighter and a wizard. If they had full hit die AND mage abilities, they'd be broken. As is, they're PERFECT for the "gish" class, sacrificing a little on HD for a better magical progression than its d10 peers. It might ignore a base assumption, but it IS ideal for what it is.
The Artificer's full BAB's a little harder to justify, but when you stop looking at it as "Eberron's Artificer" and start looking at it as "Ash in Army of Darkness", it makes more sense. Since all of their abilities are based on being able to make an attack roll and hit the enemy, they need a decent BAB to survive. At the same time, they are scientists rather than warriors, so them being able to take a hit on the level of the Wizard also makes sense. The extra restriction made it worthwhile for them. I was also under the impression that their COMPLETE lack of weapons proficiencies was on purpose, meaning that, while they have full BAB, it's only with their own devices. I may be wrong on that... we'll wait for the errata. I agree with those who say it would do better using the cleric BAB/HD table, but this still kind of works, and it makes the finished product more like what I suspect the designer was going after.
The Half-Ogre was a nice addition, but I'll admit the strength seemed unbalanced. I suspect, however, that the designer's seen the Bestiary and knows what orcs look like, and wanted to create something on-par with them, hence these limitations. Which makes sense, by my way of looking at the universe. This also makes them slightly weaker, but more stable, than the Ogrekin that are their close kin in other Paizo products. The difference between those two SHOULD equal at least one subtraction to the +2 level adjustment Ogrekin have, and the rest can be written off the same way that Tieflings are in the Council of Thieves player's guide (free download now, if you missed it).
EVERYTHING else was balanced nicely. I, personally, prefer the drawbacks = feat deal, but this works too, and nobody says you can't just use them that way anyhow. :)
My singular regret was that some of the things on the magic item table don't have a clear-cut analog in the Pathfinder system for pricing. I wish something had been done for that, but that's the only thing I even remotely complain about. I'll buy from Adamant again.
|
I thought the spellblade was over powered myself. I would never choose a sorcerer over this.
First problem I have with it is that they get their spells at the same level as a sorcerer.
Second problem is that they know more spells than a sorcerer.
Third problem is that at 20th, a sorcerer can cast one extra 1-6 level spell over the spell blade.
fourth problem is that, unless I missed something, the can choose from every sorcerer spell.
Fifth is that it has all this plus a D8, at least light armor and a full BAB. They would never miss a ranged touch attack.
Again, I think it is a little overboard compared to the other PFRPG Core classes.
As for the Warlock, I am finding it confusing.
"At 1st level, the warlock may select two school abilities...
School abilities come from the arcane school lists in The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game...
The warlock may only take a school ability less than
or equal to his warlock level."
I paraphrased it, but what does this mean? At 9th level warlock, I can take 9th level spells? is it really the 1st level spell at first level, second level spell at level 3 etc...
I believe it is the second, but it is worded weird. Plus, can I take ANY arcane Spell as a school ability? If so, fireball every round ftw?
Any clarification on the warlock would be more then appreciated.
Plus, I don't like the warlocks blast doing acid at first level. Why take the other energy choices? Most times Acid bypassed magic resistance, right?
|
|
On the Spellblade - yeah, he'll rarely miss a ranged touch attack. That makes sense for the concept, since he's a warrior-type. A sorceror is an artillery piece... the spellblade's something totally different, and letting him be better than the sorceror at what his concept does makes total sense to me. Everyone's got a niche...
A 20th level Sorceror only having one more sixth level spell than a 20th level Spellblade is fine with me too... since they also have 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells, plus a host of bloodline powers to keep them supremely magical. Seems fairly balanced to me. It's notable that the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana had the Battle Sorceror gaining ALMOST as good a BAB as the Spellblade, plus full access to 7th-9th level spells for the same spell per day cost.
Realistically, them getting spells at the same level as a sorceror is about as far as you can drag the concept down without totally destroying it, so that makes sense.
Them knowing more spells than a sorceror is something I hadn't noticed... and is rather odd. That'd be fine with me if they weren't spontaneous casters, but, as-is, it's a concern.
Them having access to the full, unfettered Wizard/Sorceror spell list is probably the single thing I like the best about the class, however. It's a good feature, since every sword-swinging mage type wouldn't pick the same spells. (Well, True Strike, for sure, but the rest is open for discussion. :>)
The Warlock pretty clearly limits the concept to only taking school abilities and NOT bonus spells or specialist bonuses, as it clearly states, and limits them to the same level that the Wizard gets them by the example provided. Personally, I'd have went with Bloodline Abilities here, rather than Wizard school abilities, but that's just me. :)
You're right about the acid bit though. I had never noticed it before, but every acid spell in the book bypasses spell resistance! I'll assume that the Warlock blast does not because it doesn't say it bypasses it, and doesn't for the other energy types for my own games, but I DO see the intellectual inconsistency in that.
|
JUST got it. Won't have time to fully digest it for a while yet, but I will say this:
The flaws are nice.
I think I'm really going to like professions.
Whoever did the art for those splash pages, such as pages 5 and 172, Adamant needs to hold onto him/her. Seriously. I have more mostly positive stuff to say about the art, but time being time...
I didn't have a problem with the Knight's d12, since WOTC's Knight had it and Green Ronin's Cavalier had it as well. At least the d12 is matched to a full BaB progression.
I don't regret that I picked up the PDF of this to give it a look, but I won't be picking up the hard copy, and I'm not likely to incorporate most of this into my own campaigns.
The Knight and the Warlord were interesting to me, and their abilities didn't jump out so much as not matching up with PF RPG conventions, but the mismatched BaB/HD on the Artificer and the Spellblade, as well as some confusing wording on how the Artificer and the Warlock work started to set off my "3rd party" sense, meaning that, while they may not be bad, they still feel like a 3rd party publisher doing what they want rather than trying to match up closely to how PF RPG sets things up as a baseline.
I kind of like the Swashbuckler and the Priest, but essentially, these two are "Thug Fighter Variant" and "Cloistered Cleric" from Unearthed Arcana rather than fully new class concepts.
While the stunts and morale make for interesting reading, I'm not sure how easily they would be incorporated into a campaign without slowing it down too much.
The races just struck me as a bit odd. Not that they were bad, but they didn't really follow a theme or even fill in gaps that might not be in the core rulebook. The closest one to that was the half-ogre.
Its not a bad book, but I really think that it could have used a bit more reworking and polishing before it felt like something that fits seamlessly with the PF RPG book.
|
You're right about the acid bit though. I had never noticed it before, but every acid spell in the book bypasses spell resistance! I'll assume that the Warlock blast does not because it doesn't say it bypasses it, and doesn't for the other energy...
The Warlock's blast bypasses any and all SR automatically as a Supernatural ability, regardless of what energy type it has. It's not a Spell-Like ability.
|
|
... started to set off my "3rd party" sense, meaning that, while they may not be bad, they still feel like a 3rd party publisher doing what they want rather than trying to match up closely to how PF RPG sets things up as a baseline.
I think this bears repeating, as it's something that many third-party publishers fall prey to.
In their defence, I don't know how long they had to develop and get this to print with the advance preview of the full rules. It's easy for us to criticise with the hind-sight of a conversion document that spells out many of Paizo's design philosophies for base classes and other elements. I am sure there was a lot of pressure to get this ready for GenCon and the Pathfinder RPG launch day deadline, which doesn't necessarily make it excusable.
Its not a bad book, but I really think that it could have used a bit more reworking and polishing before it felt like something that fits seamlessly with the PF RPG book.
Would be my assessment too. I generally enjoy new races/classes/options, and might like to use them in my game, but I would have to run a careful eye over them first. Unfortunately, even a few items raising caution flags puts everything else under suspicion.
Not having played the new Pathfinder RPG rules yet, or the material within Tome of Secrets, it's difficult to say whether this is just a storm in a teacup? But it's important that publishers know that their customers care about these things.
In their defence, I don't know how long they had to develop and get this to print with the advance preview of the full rules. It's easy for us to criticise with the hind-sight of a conversion document that spells out many of Paizo's design philosophies for base classes and other elements. I am sure there was a lot of pressure to get this ready for GenCon and the Pathfinder RPG launch day deadline, which doesn't necessarily make it excusable.
Emphasis mine. This excuse really doesn't work for me, especially when those design philosophies have been mentioned on these boards several times. Sure, maybe not everyone at Adamant reads these boards regularly, but I would think that someone would, at least for research.
Anyway, for my games, I'll probably allow the races (Though Half-Ogres will be tweaked with a -2 to Dex), Prefessions and Drawbacks are good enough to use. Classes will likely not be allowed in their current form. If they fix them and update the PDF, maybe but not as is and I'm not doing the work.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ok, because I'm double checking my own spellblade type (Arcane Legionary), I wanted to comment on the Adamant spellblade.
Whoa.
Infuse Weapon. Not sure on this, definately not as the text reads. "At fourth level and every level thereafter, the spellblade may infuse a cumulative bonus to attack and damage into his weapon." I'm pretty sure they meant 'Every four levels' since that's what the table says, but hey, who doesn't want a +17 weapon at 20th level?
Some of the examples contradict themselves as well. It seems to say the the spell blade at 9th level could make a +1 weapon, with three +1 enhancements so he could (for example) make a +1 ghost touch thundering keen weapon. But then the next paragrap reads "the spellblade may either take two +1 enhancements or select a +2
enhancement from the following list:" Which seems to say that he can't take two plus one enchantments until 12th level. Or is it saying he could load 5 +1 enchantments at 12th level?
The Arcane Armour training, when combined with arcane armour mastery would allow the spellblade to throw spells with 0 asf in breast plate and heavy shield. Or they could take full plate and for two feats have a 5% asf.
When combined with full BAB, full bardic spell, casting and full access to the wizard/sorcerer spell table, I think it's just a wee bit over balanced
|
|
I still don't understand the warlock and his school abilities. The term "School abilities" is just another word for the wizards spells in that school, corect? I see no other special abilities that the wizard gets from the schools.
If I can pick from any spell on the wizard list, what stops me from taking "disintegrate" at level 12 or "Summon Monster IX" or "Meteor swarm" at level 18. I figure I am missing something on that as who wouldn't want to cast those all day long as supernatural abilities?
|
|
I still don't understand the warlock and his school abilities. The term "School abilities" is just another word for the wizards spells in that school, corect? I see no other special abilities that the wizard gets from the schools.
If I can pick from any spell on the wizard list, what stops me from taking "disintegrate" at level 12 or "Summon Monster IX" or "Meteor swarm" at level 18. I figure I am missing something on that as who wouldn't want to cast those all day long as supernatural abilities?
The School abilities are things like the Evoker's Force Bolt, or the Unversalist's Hand of the Apprentice, or the Transmuter's Shape Change. The schools do not provide bonus spells any more, just the specialist school spell slot they did in 3.5. See pages 79-82 in the final for the Wizard's school powers.
EDIT: Or look in the handy dandy Pathfinder RPG SRD
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
OK other than starting a new Thread to ask, I thought I'd just try here first.
Swashbuckler: I love this class sooo much! This is what a Swashbuckler should have been in 3.5. That aside, I do have one question for you all (and hopefully GMS will be on here to have a gander).
Under their Evade speacial ability it states Evade may be substituted for the Dodge feat as a prerequisite for other feats (for example, a swashbuckler with Evade +1 need not take the Dodge feat in order to select the Mobility feat). Can it also be substituted to qualify for Prestige Classes that require Dodge? Specifically I am converting a character and she will be going into Shadowdancer, whose Pre-requisites are Combat Reflexes, Dodge and Mobility. Evade will let me get the Mobility without the Dodge, but I am not sure whether I would still need to have the Dodge to qualify for Shadowdancer?
|
|
OK other than starting a new Thread to ask, I thought I'd just try here first.
Swashbuckler: I love this class sooo much! This is what a Swashbuckler should have been in 3.5. That aside, I do have one question for you all (and hopefully GMS will be on here to have a gander).
Under their Evade speacial ability it states Evade may be substituted for the Dodge feat as a prerequisite for other feats (for example, a swashbuckler with Evade +1 need not take the Dodge feat in order to select the Mobility feat). Can it also be substituted to qualify for Prestige Classes that require Dodge? Specifically I am converting a character and she will be going into Shadowdancer, whose Pre-requisites are Combat Reflexes, Dodge and Mobility. Evade will let me get the Mobility without the Dodge, but I am not sure whether I would still need to have the Dodge to qualify for Shadowdancer?
Common sense would suggest to me yes, but that doesn't mean the GM of whatever campaign you're trying this idea for will say yes as well.
Any thoughts on the chase, stunt and morale rules? How do stunt rules compare to those presented in the Book of Iron Might and Iron Heroes?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ok couple other things I've noticed:
The knight: Actually a pretty good class. They most likely can't use the Knightly Presense ability they get at 1st level. Code of Chivalry is undefined, so Lawful Evil Knights are possible. He's going to be a team leader, but I think to use an example, he's the difference between say, Faramir and those under his command. I can see a Taldor/Cormyr/Thrane/Great Kingdom knight pretty easily.
The Priest. Disappointing. It's the 3.5 cloistered cleric written up with Pathfinder skills and channel energy. Unfotunately the only way for the cloiste- er, priest gets access to his deity's chosen martial weapon is to take the War Domain, and then he gets the 3.5 domain benefits as a result of C&P
Thanks to everyone for the constructive criticism we've received here and via email.
We will be revising the PDF to correct outright errors that slipped through the editing process in our haste to make the GenCon deadline, and everyone will be able to download that updated PDF.
The corrections will appear in the print version of the TOME that ships to distributors in the next few weeks as well.
Regarding design considerations (BAB, etc.) --the TOME was always intended as a book of options, and hence we purposefully deviated from Pathfinder's norms in a few instances in order to make more interesting classes, as Paizo themselves did with the Barbarian, for example.
In the end, of course, it's your game, and you should alter classes in ways that you feel better suit your campaign.
|
Thanks to everyone for the constructive criticism we've received here and via email.
We will be revising the PDF to correct outright errors that slipped through the editing process in our haste to make the GenCon deadline, and everyone will be able to download that updated PDF.
The corrections will appear in the print version of the TOME that ships to distributors in the next few weeks as well.
Regarding design considerations (BAB, etc.) --the TOME was always intended as a book of options, and hence we purposefully deviated from Pathfinder's norms in a few instances in order to make more interesting classes, as Paizo themselves did with the Barbarian, for example.
In the end, of course, it's your game, and you should alter classes in ways that you feel better suit your campaign.
That's too bad. The Barbarian was a very specific exception noted by Paizo with their reasoning. I guess that means you have no intention of bringing these in line with the stated design goals. And the same for the overpowered Half-ogre?
Oh well, I can still get use out of the Disadvantages and Occupations, but I will be unable to recommend what I consider to be a source of broken races and classes to those I game with.
Thanks to everyone for the constructive criticism we've received here and via email.
We will be revising the PDF to correct outright errors that slipped through the editing process in our haste to make the GenCon deadline, and everyone will be able to download that updated PDF.
The corrections will appear in the print version of the TOME that ships to distributors in the next few weeks as well.
Regarding design considerations (BAB, etc.) --the TOME was always intended as a book of options, and hence we purposefully deviated from Pathfinder's norms in a few instances in order to make more interesting classes, as Paizo themselves did with the Barbarian, for example.
In the end, of course, it's your game, and you should alter classes in ways that you feel better suit your campaign.
That's too bad. The Barbarian was a very specific exception noted by Paizo with their reasoning. I guess that means you have no intention of bringing these in line with the stated design goals. And the same for the overpowered Half-ogre?
Oh well, I can still get use out of the Disadvantages and Occupations,
but I will be unable to recommend what I consider to be a source of broken races and classes to those I game with.
And that's the thing. I as a DM can houserule it. But when I go to someone else's house and ask to use them, there will be problems. There always is with 3rd party books. Taking a look at third party books that are good, like say Scarred Lands. There they did not change one basic thing and yet it was miles from being ordinary D&D. In fact I would say it was BETTER than anything WOTC put out.Case in point was the change they did with arcane spellcasters. When casting a spell the caster heated up and so most wore loose robes they had to take off to make casting bearable. No rule changes but an idea that changes and gives flavor that was not there before.I am NOT saying that Tome of Secrets is a bad book. There are great ideas in it.You can add to the rules, but not change, case in point dead levels and BAB. But by going against the basic rule set, it makes it seem a cheap 3rd party book. I do not mean to be cruel, but it's how I, someone that has been playing D&D for 30 years feels about it.I have a BFA degree in Fine Arts and there was nothing worst than having my fellow classmates rip to shreds with criticism a piece I had spent a week on saying it was not good.Learning to take criticism and distilling the good from the bad will take you far.
|
|
Thanks to everyone for the constructive criticism we've received here and via email.
We will be revising the PDF to correct outright errors that slipped through the editing process in our haste to make the GenCon deadline, and everyone will be able to download that updated PDF.
The corrections will appear in the print version of the TOME that ships to distributors in the next few weeks as well.
Regarding design considerations (BAB, etc.) --the TOME was always intended as a book of options, and hence we purposefully deviated from Pathfinder's norms in a few instances in order to make more interesting classes, as Paizo themselves did with the Barbarian, for example.
In the end, of course, it's your game, and you should alter classes in ways that you feel better suit your campaign.
GMS, for what it's worth I think Tome of Secrets is a fine book. I look forward to using it to add flavor and a further sense of wonder to my campaign. I've recommended it to my players, and I'd recommend it to anyone playing PFRPG. My hat off to you and every one else involved in its creation.
That's good to hear. The knight d12 I do not care for but can live with but the spellblade I did not like having full BAB...Now if I may..whats up with the artificer? Just what is he a Full BAB class that one really confuses me
|
I really like what I hear so far and will be buying this as a pdf as soon as I can get some money that works in the virtual world.
I'm merging the warlock's powers with the sorcerer's bloodlines and calling it a Sorcerer. IMO, that's how the sorcerer should have been from the very beginning. IIRC, a warlock is a renegade witch anyway.
I can't wait to see the firearms rules! I've been wanting to do a pirate campaign for some time and this will make it happen!
So far I haven't seen anything in this thread that is a deal-breaker for me. Most things mentioned are minor things that I can fix before I present it to my players.
I'm going to refrain from anymore comments until I've actually seen it, read it and thunked it over; and if I really, really like it then I'll pick up the hardback!
Sm
I like what I'm hearing about the Shaman class, but I'd love to know more (if someone would oblige). They seem to be spirit shamans with a static spell list (ala cleric), the ability to gain a single domain & its spells, and the same crappy chastise spirit thing that remains as worthless as it was in 3.5?
Few of y'all are talking about it. :D
I didnt see it, it was just off, artificer does not come off as a front line guy and if your gonna brake BAB/HD then 2 spots is way to much,
He is glass, giving him a full bab puts him in front yet he can't survive long enough for it to matter.
D8/Medium BAB would have seem to fit the concept better
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
OK other than starting a new Thread to ask, I thought I'd just try here first.
Swashbuckler: I love this class sooo much! This is what a Swashbuckler should have been in 3.5. That aside, I do have one question for you all.
Under their Evade speacial ability it states Evade may be substituted for the Dodge feat as a prerequisite for other feats (for example, a swashbuckler with Evade +1 need not take the Dodge feat in order to select the Mobility feat). Can it also be substituted to qualify for Prestige Classes that require Dodge? Specifically I am converting a character and she will be going into Shadowdancer, whose Pre-requisites are Combat Reflexes, Dodge and Mobility. Evade will let me get the Mobility without the Dodge, but I am not sure whether I would still need to have the Dodge to qualify for Shadowdancer?
Just bumping this down so you can see it Walt. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Hey everybody!
<snip>
No, the BAB for the spellblade is not correct. Initially, I was going to make him more like a paladin or ranger (primarily a front-liner, but with a few arcane spells). As I came to see him as more of an "arcane cleric" role-wise, I'd intended to set the BAB and hit dice accordingly. Unfortunately, only the hit die was corrected. This should be fixed for the full print run.
Sorry for the confusion.
Walt
I'm glad to hear that. Would you be able to answer my question on the enhance weapon ability?
Some of the examples contradict themselves as well. It seems to say the the spell blade at 9th level could make a +1 weapon, with three +1 enhancements so he could (for example) make a +1 ghost touch thundering keen weapon. But then the next paragrap reads "the spellblade may either take two +1 enhancements or select a +2
enhancement from the following list:" Which seems to say that he can't take two plus one enchantments until 12th level. Or is it saying he could load 5 +1 enchantments at 12th level?
Personal preference states that I'd have preferred a seperate spell list, but I don't think that is overwhelingly dangerous now.
Just bought it. Looked through it.
I'm impressed, but not in all areas. Let me give you my positives:
Well thought out and designed
Classes are pretty interesting
One Million Magic items - Really cool, but game breaking
Alchemy is very nice
Pathfinder RPG specific :)
The cons:
The races were underwhelming, especially the half ogres.
The classes were interesting, but not spectacular
One Million Magic items. Reeaaally game breaking.
Other minor things.
Worth the 9.99, but I don't wanna waste the 192 pages to print it. I'll print up the things I really want... Warlock seems... interesting, I'll have to take a closer look.
That's good to hear. The knight d12 I do not care for but can live with but the spellblade I did not like having full BAB
The knight from the PHBII has a d12. I think it fits.
The spellblade is a warrior first. I'm GLAD an arcane fighter finally has full BAB. Kudos.
That's good to hear. The knight d12 I do not care for but can live with but the spellblade I did not like having full BABThe knight from the PHBII has a d12. I think it fits.
The spellblade is a warrior first. I'm GLAD an arcane fighter finally has full BAB. Kudos.
That is a typo it seems. He gains Medium and a D8 just like a cleric. Full casting and full BAB is to much
That is a typo it seems. He gains Medium and a D8 just like a cleric. Full casting and full BAB is to much
Boo.
That is a typo it seems. He gains Medium and a D8 just like a cleric. Full casting and full BAB is to muchBoo.
I was glad, the knight has grown on me however. The Artificer I am still confused over. The Spellblade now looks like it might be a usable class. Not over powered no worse then a cleric good mix so far have to dig into it to really know
The Warlock's blast bypasses any and all SR automatically as a Supernatural ability, regardless of what energy type it has. It's not a Spell-Like ability.
If we're talking about the Complete Arcane version, then it's a spell-like ability that does get Spell Resistance applied to it.
The Artificer I am still confused over. The Spellblade now looks like it might be a usable class. Not over powered no worse then a cleric good mix so far have to dig into it to really know
The artificer has a few weird fits to it.
5 + Int skills, Typo on the Fort save, proficiencies, etc. I really like the idea of a more balanced artificer, especially one queued in on Pathfinder rules.
I hope they follow through with their revisions. I look forward to re-downloading this book! :)
|
|
The Warlock's blast bypasses any and all SR automatically as a Supernatural ability, regardless of what energy type it has. It's not a Spell-Like ability.If we're talking about the Complete Arcane version, then it's a spell-like ability that does get Spell Resistance applied to it.
Unless you're using the Vitriolic Blast Eldritch Essence invocation. Then it's a spell-like ability that ignores SR.
But that's the WotC non-Open Content version from Complete Arcane. The arcane blast ability of the Open Content Warlock class from Tome of Secrets is a Supernatural ability, and thus ignores SR of any kind.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
@Matthew Morris - Yep, that should be "every four levels thereafter."
A spellblade can never add more infusions/special abilities to his weapon than (1/2 spellblade level, round down). This maxixum also includes adding infusions/special abilities to magic weapons. So even though a 9th level spellblade knows 3 special abilities and has a +2 infuse weapon bonus, he could only make a +2 weapon with 2 special abilities or a +1 weapon with all three.
Ah. I am enlightened. Thank you.
And yes, felt that was 'every four levels thereafter' but thought best to point it up. :-)
The TOME OF SECRETS PDF has been updated!
In our rush to have the book available at GenCon for the launch of THE PATHFINDER ROLEPLAYING GAME, several errors managed to slip through the editing process. We weren't happy with this, and so we've gone through the PDF, correcting typos, fixing errata, and clarifying confusing passages.
I'll be posting a list of the errata in the appropriate thread -- but I wanted to let you know that in addition to correcting the error on the Spellblade's BAB, I decided to take the opportunity of the revision to change the Artificer as well, given the response that many people here have had. The Artificer's BAB now matches that of the Bard -- although they still use a d6 for Hit Dice (They are intended to be academics, after all....).
A summary PDF, in addition to the revised PDF, will be made available for Pre-Order customers whose print copies are from the first batch.
The revised PDF is now available on RPGNow and DriveThruRPG (and you can download it via your account if you've already ordered it from there), and I'm just waiting on Paizo to get back to me so that I can update the file here at the Paizo store as well (since there is no automatic revision process here).
Thank you for your continued support, and watch for future PATHFINDER-compatible releases, coming soon from Adamant Entertainment.
Chief Technical Officer
|
The revised PDF is now available on RPGNow and DriveThruRPG (and you can download it via your account if you've already ordered it from there), and I'm just waiting on Paizo to get back to me so that I can update the file here at the Paizo store as well (since there is no automatic revision process here).
I posted the revised PDF at about 3:55 Pacific Time, and notified everyone who had purchased it. Those purchasers who wish to download the updated version may do so for free at http://paizo.com/paizo/account/assets. (If the file shows that it has already been personalized, you'll need to repersonalize it before you can download the new version.)
I posted the revised PDF at about 3:55 Pacific Time, and notified everyone who had purchased it.
Thank you, Vic!