|
Then she'd have 4 (Lv1,3,5,7), she has 3 (hence my assumption of 2,4,6), and again, its more in keeping with rogue talents, barbarian rage powers, etc.
Though maybe it is odd and you get the curse instead at lv1, but I seriously doubt it, because then it would double up with feat acquisition, making every second level a big gain, and all the even levels less fun by comparison, which isnt something PFRPG is interested in.
Fair point, my assumption is based on the sorcerer's bloodline powers being gained on odd levels - which could imply that levels which grant access to a new level of spell don't need anything else.
|
From Merriam Webster Online:
--> a long list of examples...
Say, that was well done! A good reminder to all that many of the defined terms and names of things that we value in our fantasy RPGs frequently do not accurately model what we know of our histories and mythologies.
I can understand why "oracle" jars a bit, but D&D has always taken some licence with real life definitions. I am willing to hand-wave a bit once again... :-)
|
|
SCOOP!
The Witch!
1- takes elements of both arcane and divine spell lists and merges them together.
2- curse abilities.
3- familiar has more important role with the witch.
WOW! I'm SO pleased. This looks very much what I homebrewed in the past -- but I really like the emphasis in the third item!
I mentioned the idea of enhancing familiars, as did Generic Villain, over here...
So I am quite curious as to how the details on this gets fleshed out for the PF Witch since there are a number of ways to make a Witch's familiar class feature "more important". :-)
The combining of divine and arcane spells is not a surprise as almost all the OGL witches published did that. I figure arcane + druid oriented spells would be the Witch's mix...
The curse abilities are very much a trope of fantasy Witches too, so that makes good sense as well.
I like! Want more!! :-D
|
Orc Str +4, All mental -2. From John Wick's blog.
Okay, I hadn't seen that. Those stats appear unchanged from the SRD. Interesting angle on orc (comparisons to our) society btw ;-)
I'd had only one hour's sleep the night before flying to Brisbane, and this discussion was mid-afternoon, me asking expectant questions about my favourite race, so I could easily have read more into our conversation, and Jason wasn't getting into specifics because he didn't have the book in front of him, so apologies if any misdirection.
I've been impressed with Jason's insights into Pathfinder. Wherever he discusses some change to the rules, he usually follows up with reasons why that change was made, and generally they're all for the right reasons.
I'm still not sold on the name Oracle, but it rolls off the tongue a lot easier than alternatives I prefer such as Incarnate, so I'm willing to accept that it will become part of our Pathfinder vocabulary and represent "awesome". I don't think endlessly debating the name in every thread the class is mentioned is any more constructive than endlessly debating 4E in every thread that system is mentioned.
Here, here, well said. I'm looking forward to seeing if the orcs will get ferocity, similar to half-orcs!
I guess what I'm getting at is that while I understand that some people may not like oracle as a name, it doesn't follow that its name "isn't right" by definition, because most of the classes are named much more by connotation and association than by strict definition, and by strict definition the oracle is probably a lot closer than some of the classes are.
However, the name oracle does not "associate" with what they are trying to do. Nor is it a strict definition. I agree with your post if there was a connotation with the name to what they are trying to accomplish
Creative Director
|
However, the name oracle does not "associate" with what they are trying to do. Nor is it a strict definition. I agree with your post if there was a connotation with the name to what they are trying to accomplish
It will a month or three or twelve after the APG is printed. Just as monk now associates with "kung fu dude" and paladin associates with "lawful good knight dude."
Per a post suggestion from when the oracle was first announced, I'll likely be calling them Exemplars. That term sits with me much better than Oracle and more readily points out the "height of an ideal" character concept.
However, the name oracle does not "associate" with what they are trying to do. Nor is it a strict definition. I agree with your post if there was a connotation with the name to what they are trying to accomplishIt will a month or three or twelve after the APG is printed. Just as monk now associates with "kung fu dude" and paladin associates with "lawful good knight dude."
Don't get me wrong. I am not against the name per se. I just found the logic faulty. I do think after seeing the sample character that there are better choices like Exemplar or Paragon but I really don't care. Whats in a name?
And what you say is true. Perhaps in the early seventies there were players saying "I thought monks were those cats (70s term) in brown robes and bowl shaped haircuts not this" But is that the point of this name, to redefine the term from a gamers point of view?
Question: What are the chances that we will see old favs (at least favs of mine ;)) such as the Peryton and Jabberwocky down the line? Ive been clammoring for them for quite some time now...
I miss 'Quicklings', but I doubt '1E Monster Manual II" was OGL.
I miss 'Quicklings', but I doubt '1E Monster Manual II" was OGL.
Quicklings were in the Tome of Horrors (i.e. OGL content) and I believe that a Paizo adventure has already included them.
Quicklings were in the Tome of Horrors (i.e. OGL content) and I believe that a Paizo adventure has already included them.
Nice, didn't know that, thanks for the info!
Nice, didn't know that, thanks for the info!
Not a problem, I have a soft spot for Quicklings as well, and tortured my players with them several times after I first got the Tome of Horrors.
|
Creative Director
|
And what you say is true. Perhaps in the early seventies there were players saying "I thought monks were those cats (70s term) in brown robes and bowl shaped haircuts not this" But is that the point of this name, to redefine the term from a gamers point of view?
No... the point of a class name is to accomplish three things:
1) To be a one-word summation of what the class is.
2) To evoke with that one word a classic image or representation of what a member of that class would look like.
3) To assign a word to forevermore refer to a specific class without "stealing" that word from common use.
Orcale does all of these. Several of the alternative names do #1 and #3 above, but I've YET to see a suggestion that does #2 above half as well as the word "oracle" does.
|
|
And what you say is true. Perhaps in the early seventies there were players saying "I thought monks were those cats (70s term) in brown robes and bowl shaped haircuts not this" But is that the point of this name, to redefine the term from a gamers point of view?No... the point of a class name is to accomplish three things:
1) To be a one-word summation of what the class is.
2) To evoke with that one word a classic image or representation of what a member of that class would look like.
3) To assign a word to forevermore refer to a specific class without "stealing" that word from common use.Orcale does all of these. Several of the alternative names do #1 and #3 above, but I've YET to see a suggestion that does #2 above half as well as the word "oracle" does.
I guess I'm the odd man out since my first thought is still "has-been database."
|
And what you say is true. Perhaps in the early seventies there were players saying "I thought monks were those cats (70s term) in brown robes and bowl shaped haircuts not this" But is that the point of this name, to redefine the term from a gamers point of view?No... the point of a class name is to accomplish three things:
1) To be a one-word summation of what the class is.
2) To evoke with that one word a classic image or representation of what a member of that class would look like.
3) To assign a word to forevermore refer to a specific class without "stealing" that word from common use.Orcale does all of these. Several of the alternative names do #1 and #3 above, but I've YET to see a suggestion that does #2 above half as well as the word "oracle" does.
I'm just grateful that you folks have decided to avoid the WotC tradition of meaningless but cool sounding compound words. No Warparticipled or Spellnouns from Paizo!
No... the point of a class name is to accomplish three things:
1) To be a one-word summation of what the class is.
2) To evoke with that one word a classic image or representation of what a member of that class would look like.
3) To assign a word to forevermore refer to a specific class without "stealing" that word from common use.Orcale does all of these. Several of the alternative names do #1 and #3 above, but I've YET to see a suggestion that does #2 above half as well as the word "oracle" does.
Again, I must preface this by saying I am not against the name Oracle. I must also say that I was not at GenConOz so my only knowledge on this subject is the blog and the sample character posted here.
Having said that, I fail to see how this particular class name succeeds on either point 1 or 2 and I guess we will wait and see about #3
|
Without spoiling where I encountered it, I've run into a quickling in one of the pathfinder games as well.
Also, the oracle sounded fantastic from the description I heard from Jason at GenCon Oz. It sounded just about right from teh the oracles I've read about in fantasy tropes such as David Gemmels worlds. They are cursed with the gift of foresight and other abilities. Some of them can't see, some can't speak, others get deformed, but all of them have abilities and power to compensate.
Interestingly, not all of them were tapping into divine aspects or seeing the future either, many could channel healing powers, or see over vast distances but not fuure events. In one set of books, the Oracle gave blessings or added power through the summoning and binding of demons. She was pretty evil, but was referred to as teh oracle.
Fantasy authors have taken the concept of Oracle well and truly beyond the scope of "recieving visions from a deity" for many years.
The Oracle in Matrix was a computer programme who did nothing but give information about the past and suggest that these were linked to the future. Then she made him eat cookies. Sounds a bit like Lilith actually.
Cheers
|
|
No... the point of a class name is to accomplish three things:
1) To be a one-word summation of what the class is.
2) To evoke with that one word a classic image or representation of what a member of that class would look like.
3) To assign a word to forevermore refer to a specific class without "stealing" that word from common use.Orcale does all of these. Several of the alternative names do #1 and #3 above, but I've YET to see a suggestion that does #2 above half as well as the word "oracle" does.
Again, I must preface this by saying I am not against the name Oracle. I must also say that I was not at GenConOz so my only knowledge on this subject is the blog and the sample character posted here.
Having said that, I fail to see how this particular class name succeeds on either point 1 or 2 and I guess we will wait and see about #3
Well according to mister Jacobs, the paizo crew has an image of oracle that fits well and is evoked by the word, but is strange since any image brought to my mind is one that is completely unsuitable for combat lol.
I do think it fails at #3 though, I'm not sure of #2 because some of the possible choices seem to fit while others break it in its entirety so I'm on the fence for 2. I will give him that after a few months it will succeed at #1.
On an unrelated note, the only class name that has ever bothered me has been the barbarian. However, I think the reason barbarian works where oracle doesn't lies solely on the shoulders of Conan. That character is so woven into our culture that that's the image I'd bet most people get when they hear the class name barbarian, and it fits.
The problem Oracle has is that none of the examples given seem to fit most peoples idea of an oracle since the two we've been given so far have been hercules and this new fire oracle. And any literary oracle that we try to think of actually seems to defy the image that they are putting forth. If there was a Sarah the Oracle the way there was Conan the Barbarian it'd be a lot easier to make people accept the name for the class even if the definition doesn't mesh.
|
|
and now to say, I have to side with the group that doesn't like the idea of Drow lite.
I'm super excited about the rest of what I hear about BII
And I'm sooooo sad to hear that paizo is going down the road of "Paladins of other alignments, called X" although I'll be the first to admit there are lots of people who want such a thing.
However everything else has me really hyped.
Oh and for the record, I may not like the name oracle, but I think the class itself sounds awesome. Funnily,it sounds like a huge space consumer since it has to have unique abilities drawn up for every single domain, and then completely seperate from domains it has its drawbacks to choose from (unless those are tied to domains as well). Heh it sounds as if the oracle class will consume 1/3 of the book lol.
|
|
Well according to mister Jacobs, the paizo crew has an image of oracle that fits well and is evoked by the word, but is strange since any image brought to my mind is one that is completely unsuitable for combat lol.There's more to the game than combat.
OK completely unsuitable for 1/3 of the game, although my point was merely that the image I have doesn't fit nor did I say that combat was the only thing in the game.
|
Creative Director
|
And I'm sooooo sad to hear that paizo is going down the road of "Paladins of other alignments, called X" although I'll be the first to admit there are lots of people who want such a thing.
This concept isn't ironed out yet, and I for one have always felt that "variant paladins" should extend to the Antipaladin and stop there, so your concerns about this aren't alone.
The idea, as I understand it in its very early stages, is that there'll basically be three different paladin builds. The LG one we all know. The CE one that's the antipaladin or blackguard or whatever. And then there'll be a templar paladin variant for all the paladins that don't have what it takes to be LG or CE. So, basically, we've got two extremes and a third option for the in-betweeners.
Done right, this gives us only three paladin variants AND gives folks who want to do a LN or CG or N or whatever paladin rules to work with. Done right, this'll solve my concerns and the concerns of those who want a paladin for every flavor.
We'll see if it works. I know for sure I'll be keeping the skeptic's eye on this one as it goes through design and development... but Jason knows what he's doing and I'm pretty confident that what he'll come up with will be pretty damn cool.
|
Creative Director
|
OK completely unsuitable for 1/3 of the game, although my point was merely that the image I have doesn't fit nor did I say that combat was the only thing in the game.Well according to mister Jacobs, the paizo crew has an image of oracle that fits well and is evoked by the word, but is strange since any image brought to my mind is one that is completely unsuitable for combat lol.There's more to the game than combat.
Just out of curiosity... what image does it evoke?
Because some of our current iconics, like Seoni and Ezren and Lem, don't look really all that cut out for combat...
|
|
And I'm sooooo sad to hear that paizo is going down the road of "Paladins of other alignments, called X" although I'll be the first to admit there are lots of people who want such a thing.This concept isn't ironed out yet, and I for one have always felt that "variant paladins" should extend to the Antipaladin and stop there, so your concerns about this aren't alone.
The idea, as I understand it in its very early stages, is that there'll basically be three different paladin builds. The LG one we all know. The CE one that's the antipaladin or blackguard or whatever. And then there'll be a templar paladin variant for all the paladins that don't have what it takes to be LG or CE. So, basically, we've got two extremes and a third option for the in-betweeners.
Done right, this gives us only three paladin variants AND gives folks who want to do a LN or CG or N or whatever paladin rules to work with. Done right, this'll solve my concerns and the concerns of those who want a paladin for every flavor.
We'll see if it works. I know for sure I'll be keeping the skeptic's eye on this one as it goes through design and development... but Jason knows what he's doing and I'm pretty confident that what he'll come up with will be pretty damn cool.
Well I'm glad we have things we can agree on (since we seem to butt heads so much on the Oracle name which I hope you realize I'm not upset at or particularly bothered by, I'm just stating points and admiting that it doesn't feel like the best fit, I'm still gonna play the hell out of the class cause its a great sounding class regardless of name).
I just never liked the idea of the anti-paladin from level one, and the fact that interesting roleplaying ideas will get shoehorned into the variants the player didn't want because the DMs head is shoved into a little box and they say nope you have to play this variant instead. but that's one of those slippery slope things that isn't really relevant because while it can happen that doesn't mean it will happen.
|
|
OK completely unsuitable for 1/3 of the game, although my point was merely that the image I have doesn't fit nor did I say that combat was the only thing in the game.Well according to mister Jacobs, the paizo crew has an image of oracle that fits well and is evoked by the word, but is strange since any image brought to my mind is one that is completely unsuitable for combat lol.There's more to the game than combat.Just out of curiosity... what image does it evoke?
Because some of our current iconics, like Seoni and Ezren and Lem, don't look really all that cut out for combat...
I told you in the other thread, either a woman drugged out and half naked who gets visions, or an old blind man with a cloth over his eyes (not one with blindsense, blind) who gets visions.
In every instance someone who gets visions of the future (or about peoples fates) at a cost that leaves them unsuitable for normal life.
Admittedly your drawbacks for the class fit and somewhat capture what I'm talking about, they're just way weaker than the images I get in my head.
On an unrelated note, I've always disliked the blind but has blindsense for people, I mean I get that playing a blind character sucks in the game, but I do think that at the point you get a crutch that makes being blind meaningless then why play blind. I mean getting something at higher levels that makes being blind meaningless I have no problem with as you've slogged through the levels of being blind to earn it. Once again, nothing I'm upset about or dead set against having, just a personal prefrence
|
|
Can I just say that I'm turned around on the name of the Oracle, I think it works fine for what the class is.
Secondly can I say that I'm glad that there'll be an ECL 0 (Equivalent) Drow. I have a couple of players who first experienced fantasy gaming through Warhammer (40k and Fantasy) and the fact that they couldn't play a Dark Elf at 1st level was a little annoying for them. I've always shaved off the spell-like abilities and spell resistance of the Drow because frankly they just get in the way of the fun stuff. Having a Drow noble caste that keeps those abilities? Brilliant way of evoking the old while still ushering in the new.
I'm most excited to hear about the Witch Class, it sounds like it does exactly what I hoped a witch would do.
Finally, I like that the iconics don't all look like they are primarily combatants. One of my players loves playing as Seoni (she's a fan of sorcery and body art). Combat is definitely not all there is to the game and I hope all of the new classes have roles outside of combat too (exploration, interaction and item creation are important parts of the game too).
I have to admit I don't like the name "Oracle" either. It doesn't conjure images of Herakles, but rather of the oracle girl in 300 or The Oracle in The Matrix. I think Exemplar fits the three rules much better and has less baggage to overcome. I can definitely get the image of Herakles for an Exemplar of Strength, but as Oracle of Strength? I still get the mental picture of some overly-ritualized mouthpiece.
EDIT: I think what I mean by this, is I can't get a mental image of anything except an Oracle of Knowledge or an Oracle of Fate. I can't reconcile the term "Oracle" and how it's been used in media for the last hundred years with the way it seems it's going to be used as a class. I just think it's a mistake to name a class intended to cover a wide array of character concepts after a term that has a very specific, very narrow meaning in modern culture.
|
Creative Director
|
I told you in the other thread, either a woman drugged out and half naked who gets visions, or an old blind man with a cloth over his eyes (not one with blindsense, blind) who gets visions.
In every instance someone who gets visions of the future (or about peoples fates) at a cost that leaves them unsuitable for normal life.
OH! Yah. (turns out it's hard to keep track of dozens of different threads that are all basically about the same subject...)
In any case, your images are both pretty spot on for what an oracle is. And as I mentioned before, our idea for the iconic oracle is a blind woman in robes armed (probably) with a staff. Different than your idea, but similar in the blind category.
The point is that we both had images of what an oracle is when we heard the word oracle.
That doesn't work so well, for me at least, with words like exemplar or harbinger. It does with herald (an image of a dude blowing a trumpet to announce the king's arrival), but the word herald is already in use in Pathifnder for a CR 15 agent of a god.
Anyway, I'm starting to feel like I'm on a merry-go-round, so I'd better bail from the thread before I fall off and skin both knees.
|
|
Oh and so far I think the other class names have it pegged and don't bother me at all.
Cavalier might have, but luckily like conan the barbarian, there's a cavalier that captures the image. Funnily enough though it's from the DnD cartoon, and it took sooo many years for the class name to catch up to that image. since it usually attempted to fit the typical image of the cavalier. For people who aren't familiar with the cartoon I can see the class name being as problematic for them as Oracle is. In fact honestly it does bother me a little, but not that much.
|
|
I told you in the other thread, either a woman drugged out and half naked who gets visions, or an old blind man with a cloth over his eyes (not one with blindsense, blind) who gets visions.
In every instance someone who gets visions of the future (or about peoples fates) at a cost that leaves them unsuitable for normal life.
OH! Yah. (turns out it's hard to keep track of dozens of different threads that are all basically about the same subject...)
In any case, your images are both pretty spot on for what an oracle is. And as I mentioned before, our idea for the iconic oracle is a blind woman in robes armed (probably) with a staff. Different than your idea, but similar in the blind category.
The point is that we both had images of what an oracle is when we heard the word oracle.
That doesn't work so well, for me at least, with words like exemplar or harbinger. It does with herald (an image of a dude blowing a trumpet to announce the king's arrival), but the word herald is already in use in Pathifnder for a CR 15 agent of a god.
Anyway, I'm starting to feel like I'm on a merry-go-round, so I'd better bail from the thread before I fall off and skin both knees.
Yeah we are both on the same merry-go-round, I think the problem is we both are on the same threads and both love these boards so we keep coming to make the points we want to make whenever we see a thread about them. I'm sure it'll happen again.
I just wanted to make sure you understood that I'm not against the name or on some crusade against it, I just didn't think it fit as well as other names suggested although other names do have that lack of an image problem you talk about which I also agree can be a problem, I just think that if there is no image for a name it's easier to create an image than it is to have an image for a class that may not capture the class as well as you'd like and try to make it fit. But that's just a difference of opinion. I mean I agree that in several months people will have gotten used to the name and it will fit then, I just think if its a class worth playing that by the time people would have accepted oracle then another word would have sunk in and evoked that image you are going for.
None of this is me rallying against the name, in the long run I don't really care that much, I'm just going to make my points whenever I see a relevant time to make them. So I expect us to waltz on this a couple of times :)
Heck the only thing that's ever gotten under my skin and I can say that I'd rally against is the paladins smite evil doing double damage against certain types, but I did my rallying and I lost, you'll notice that didn't chase me away and I can say I still love pathfinder.
I told you in the other thread, either a woman drugged out and half naked who gets visions, or an old blind man with a cloth over his eyes (not one with blindsense, blind) who gets visions.
In every instance someone who gets visions of the future (or about peoples fates) at a cost that leaves them unsuitable for normal life.
OH! Yah. (turns out it's hard to keep track of dozens of different threads that are all basically about the same subject...)
In any case, your images are both pretty spot on for what an oracle is. And as I mentioned before, our idea for the iconic oracle is a blind woman in robes armed (probably) with a staff. Different than your idea, but similar in the blind category.
The point is that we both had images of what an oracle is when we heard the word oracle.
That doesn't work so well, for me at least, with words like exemplar or harbinger. It does with herald (an image of a dude blowing a trumpet to announce the king's arrival), but the word herald is already in use in Pathifnder for a CR 15 agent of a god.
Anyway, I'm starting to feel like I'm on a merry-go-round, so I'd better bail from the thread before I fall off and skin both knees.
Ok,
See, this is where those of us who don't like oracle get frustrated. This is exactly the image I get. I see this old man with white eyes, or an insane woman in a toga that spouts random nonsense mixed with prophecy.But that's not ALL of what you are describing for the class. Hercules does NOT fit in with that image, nor does the Firestarter (sorry, she reminds me of Drew Barry's character from that movie). That is where those of us that don't like the name get caught up. It's as if the entire class of 50 different options were named for 2 builds.
At least, that's my feeling. Which is why it doesn't do #1, #2, or #3 for me in your list above in the thread. Again though, it is your system and you can call them whatever you want. I'll just rename them in my game to something else. :)
|
Seeing as I wasn't playing in any PFS games in this time slot, I got to look through the ENTIRE bestiary. Oh my god, the artwork is awesome!
A fun tidbit: dragons no longer all fight exactly the same. All dragons got different thematic additions to their capabilities which now makes the different colours unique. For example, red dragons have an ability to create magma/lava, and I can't remember exactly but I believe that white dragons can freeze people in ice.
Another is that lycanthropes don't suck nearly as hard anymore with the animal hit dice and all. Jason said that SKR wrote the lycanthropes, and his Curse of the Moon document was an influence on that, obviously. They're more of a template you can add. They're kind of like a quick template, though slightly more complicated than the Advanced and Giant templates, for example. In the book were wererats and werewolves.
Let's see... there were 3 types of linnorms and they were all up the high end of the CR spectrum. I did notice a number of higher CR baddies actually.
The monster types are way more balanced in number. There are a number of new plants, such as the vegepygmy and... two things that looked like triffids that I can't remember what they were. One thing was like a venus fly trap and the other was the one on the blog a while back. And there are a couple of new fey as well, like mites.
And yes, there was a froghemoth.
ps. the vampire is AWWWWWESOME. She is fabulous. The lich picture was also badass beyond belief. I cannot understate how awesome the artwork is generally.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
and now to say, I have to side with the group that doesn't like the idea of Drow lite.
This comes from the "remove LA as a game mechanic" position at Paizo.
Without Level Adjustments, you can't have Drow gain all the same benefits OR you can't have PC Drow.So you either forbid players playing Drow or you make a watered down Drow you call the "Drow" and say that the beefy Drow are non playable "Noble Drow."
I always thought Level Adjustment was an elegant mechanic and I never really understood the seething hatred for the mechanic that you see on forums.
The only other way you might be able to duplicate the LA mechanic without doing LA's is to make a new experience chart based on Level Adjustment +1 and up that requires different experience totals to level.
Maybe something like LA +1 chart would require 3000 (3.5 difference between Level 1 and Level 2) / 20 = 150 more experience per level. So to get to 2nd level you would need 3150 experience instead of 3000 experience. Maybe this would be easier to understand to the few that found LA confusing or frustrating?
----------
As for Oracle, I love the name myself.
|
|
The hatred for LA has a very simple source: it bloody sucks to be 1-2 levels behind everybody. Especially if:
a) you're a caster
b) you are one level beind everybody because you have a couple of odd abilities that might be viable at levels 1-3, but at higher levels the fact that you have darkvision and can cast darkness 1/day doesn't make any difference.
Just out of curiosity... what image does it evoke?
- The Oracle in Matrix was a computer programme who did nothing but give information about the past and suggest that these were linked to the future.
If I were to pull an image of what I consider an Oracle, I'd have to point out Zellara from CotCT. Modern days they would be known as Fortune Tellers or Psychics.
I honestly couldn't care less what you call them as long as they are fun to play.
Hey all.
Henry here, the barrister-fighter...
I have Jasons interview well most of before the battery ran out...
Far to many happy snaps that drained the battery.
Anyway, here you guys go.
1st (7/day) - bless, cure light wounds, divine flavour, produce flame, remove fear, shield of faith
Oh! I'm interested in the new spell "divine flavour". It sounds delicious!
EDIT: Oops...way too late for that joke.
Fair point, my assumption is based on the sorcerer's bloodline powers being gained on odd levels - which could imply that levels which grant access to a new level of spell don't need anything else.Then she'd have 4 (Lv1,3,5,7), she has 3 (hence my assumption of 2,4,6), and again, its more in keeping with rogue talents, barbarian rage powers, etc.
Though maybe it is odd and you get the curse instead at lv1, but I seriously doubt it, because then it would double up with feat acquisition, making every second level a big gain, and all the even levels less fun by comparison, which isnt something PFRPG is interested in.
Jason stated she had just gained the Form of Flame revelation at 7th so I'm fairly sure that you gain your first revelation at 3rd and then every odd level after, though I don't remember whether or not they continued to be gained at the same rate all the way to 20th.
I think people are getting far too hung up on the name of the Oracle. Really, the only other names which seem to capture the class would be something like Incarnate or Paragon. But as far as the concept of recieving divine insight into the workings of particular aspects of the universe goes, Oracle seems fairly apt.
The idea, as I understand it in its very early stages, is that there'll basically be three different paladin builds. The LG one we all know. The CE one that's the antipaladin or blackguard or whatever. And then there'll be a templar paladin variant for all the paladins that don't have what it takes to be LG or CE. So, basically, we've got two extremes and a third option for the in-betweeners.
I agree. The Paladins of freedom and whatnot I never liked. But this Templar idea seems perfect. Its almost like its own class
I never understood why other gods wouldn't have thier own holy warrior.
|
|
and now to say, I have to side with the group that doesn't like the idea of Drow lite.This comes from the "remove LA as a game mechanic" position at Paizo.
Without Level Adjustments, you can't have Drow gain all the same benefits OR you can't have PC Drow.So you either forbid players playing Drow or you make a watered down Drow you call the "Drow" and say that the beefy Drow are non playable "Noble Drow."
I always thought Level Adjustment was an elegant mechanic and I never really understood the seething hatred for the mechanic that you see on forums.
The only other way you might be able to duplicate the LA mechanic without doing LA's is to make a new experience chart based on Level Adjustment +1 and up that requires different experience totals to level.
Maybe something like LA +1 chart would require 3000 (3.5 difference between Level 1 and Level 2) / 20 = 150 more experience per level. So to get to 2nd level you would need 3150 experience instead of 3000 experience. Maybe this would be easier to understand to the few that found LA confusing or frustrating?
----------
As for Oracle, I love the name myself.
As for LA... on my side at least ... part of the issue was balancewise and it does always suck. Pretty much LA classes say no casters allowed.
Also I love the name oracle myself - while the blind seer is a common use there are other uses of it which fits it extremely well - the name is flavourful and works.
And Divine Flavour is right :P (Note: Coboney is Canadian. )
The idea, as I understand it in its very early stages, is that there'll basically be three different paladin builds. The LG one we all know. The CE one that's the antipaladin or blackguard or whatever. And then there'll be a templar paladin variant for all the paladins that don't have what it takes to be LG or CE. So, basically, we've got two extremes and a third option for the in-betweeners.I agree. The Paladins of freedom and whatnot I never liked. But this Templar idea seems perfect. Its almost like its own class
I never understood why other gods wouldn't have thier own holy warrior.
I just hope they aren't all Paladins with the serial numbers filed off. All of the alternate Paladins of 3.5 were realy pretty 'blah' IMO.
The Anti Paladin should certainly look like a reflection of the Paladin. Smite Good vs. Smite Evil, Poison Immunity vs. Disease Immunity, etc.
The Templars however, I hope are a class unto themselves. A 'Paladin-like' class that doesn't feel a need to mimic every Paladin ability in some way. Otherwise... bleh.
Thanks for the videos, Caladors. I am now officially whipped up into excitement over these new base classes.