At a loss for words, or trading versatility for nothing.

[A Man In Black]

Words of Power is a system that makes spellcasters less versatile, while requiring more bookkeeping for fewer possible effects. The main selling point of the system is allowing players to cobble together their own spells on the fly, but that takes more time than choosing spells from a pre-existing menu or library while allowing fewer possible effects. There's also the possibility of game-breaking combinations of effects, a non-issue with the selection of words available here.

The main, crippling issue is the fact that cobbling together spells on the fly is just unworkable. The Word Costs increase irregularly, costs don't correspond to spell level and thus need to be looked up every time, costs can vary situationally... it's all a huge mess. The sorcerer casting-on-the-fly advantage is similar to the supposed advantage of the beta summoner to lay down all his Pokeballs and flood the field: theoretically useful, but impractical in a real game. Even relatively simple and traditional effects like a Fireball require cross-referencing two different listings, rather than one. The practical upshot of this will be that players will use the same premade combos almost all of the time, which offers little advantage over a list of premade spells.

The words available are also very limited, offering players little incentive to use this list. It's comparable to a 4e spellcaster's ability set, focused entirely on effects which harm a dude or inflict a short-duration effect on a dude. While you can fiddle with elemental damage in more-versatile ways, there are zero options for dealing with problems which are not "That guy is stopping you from doing something you want to do." There are no options for overcoming a locked door, flying to something in the sky, getting to another plane, obstructing lines of sight, protecting camp, finding invisible foes, speaking to the dead, healing damage of any sort, etc. There are dozens of things a vanilla spellcaster of any given class can do that a wordcaster can't, and the wordcaster format is generally more space-consuming than the traditional format. Unless Ultimate Magic is going to be huge and half-filled with content which is only useful to wordcasters, wordcasters are going to be incapable of doing basic magical schticks that spellcasters are expected to handle in published adventures.

Even when an effect isn't entirely absent, the effects that are present are terribly weak. None of the buffs last longer than round/level, a simple old-school Fireball is a 4th-level spell, save-or-lose effects aren't available until level 3 (and even that is save-every-turn single-target nausea), high-end save-or-dies use the Power Word style (and are thus nearly useless), etc. Even in the narrow set of abilities that wordcasters and proper spellcasters do share, the wordcaster is almost always starting out a spell level or two behind a proper spellcaster, in return for the "privilege" of wordcasting.

On top of the complexity and low power level issue is the fact that wordcasting is completely incompatible with existing spellcasting. Presumably, Ultimate Magic will have spells for traditional spellcasters, but these will be useless to wordcasters (and vice versa!) Not only can you not use anyone else's existing material with this system, but previous Paizo Pathfinder material is almost entirely useless with wordcasting. Will future books be filled with wordcaster options, useless to everyone else, or are wordcasters going to see this book and no others? How does a wordcaster learn words in a game dominated by traditional spellcasting, or vice versa? How does this interact with the item creation rules? None of these questions are answered.

The Words of Power system is a trainwreck. It would need more than a game-session-length worth of time to try and adapt it to an existing game, and the reward for this work would be to make spellcasters less versatile, to make playing a spellcaster more cumbersome, and to make huge swathes of material in books I already own completely useless. My group will not be playtesting this mess of a system, and the only suggestion I can make to improve it is to not include it at all in the final version of Ultimate Magic.

[Matrixryu]

Paizo has already stated that they haven't given us all of the 'interesting' words of power because they're focusing mostly on damage balance at this moment. So, we won't see many of the utility spells that spellcasters normally get during the playtest.

[udalrich]

You can also do things with wordcasting that the traditional spells do not allow. A Single Fire Blast Spook spell will do d6/level fire damage and possible cause the target to be frightened. What existing 3rd level spell does that?

[Machaeus]

A Man In Black wrote:

Words of Power is a system that makes spellcasters less versatile, while requiring more bookkeeping for fewer possible effects. The main selling point of the system is allowing players to cobble together their own spells on the fly, but that takes more time than choosing spells from a pre-existing menu or library while allowing fewer possible effects. There's also the possibility of game-breaking combinations of effects, a non-issue with the selection of words available here.

I'll agree with you here, actually. But if you're finding it takes too much time, simply make note cards and shuffle them around to get the spell you want. Simple enough, right?

Quote:

The main, crippling issue is the fact that cobbling together spells on the fly is just unworkable.

I dunno. World of Darkness does it fairly well...but that's a lot more fast and loose. Maybe it is unworkable for d20...

Quote:

The Word Costs increase irregularly, costs don't correspond to spell level and thus need to be looked up every time, costs can vary situationally... it's all a huge mess.

Um. *reads the PDF*

The Word Costs don't increase unless you're cobbling multiple effects together, most of the time. There are a scant few exceptions. Plus, table 1-1 (page 4), though I can understand the irritation of constantly looking it up. It's a mess, yes, but not a huge one. But that's why it's a playtest and not the final product.

Quote:

The sorcerer casting-on-the-fly advantage is similar to the supposed advantage of the beta summoner to lay down all his Pokeballs and flood the field: theoretically useful, but impractical in a real game.

Haven't read that, but I have a bad memory. And yeah, that sounds more like a GM's worst nightmare... XD

Quote:

Even relatively simple and traditional effects like a Fireball require cross-referencing two different listings, rather than one. The practical upshot of this will be that players will use the same premade combos almost all of the time, which offers little advantage over a list of premade spells.

And that is why you have index cards. I plan on using them next time I have a NORMAL caster, so I'm not constantly looking into the damn book.

Quote:

The words available are also very limited, offering players little incentive to use this list. It's comparable to a 4e spellcaster's ability set, focused entirely on effects which harm a dude or inflict a short-duration effect on a dude.

That irritated me too, but if it's an incomplete list, we simply tell them to do a second playtest of this system later. Otherwise, they lose customers, and I'm sure they know this.

Quote:

While you can fiddle with elemental damage in more-versatile ways, there are zero options for dealing with problems which are not "That guy is stopping you from doing something you want to do."

I'm sorry, I honestly haven't a clue what you just said in what I made bold...

Quote:

There are no options for overcoming a locked door, flying to something in the sky, getting to another plane, obstructing lines of sight, protecting camp, finding invisible foes, speaking to the dead, healing damage of any sort, etc. There are dozens of things a vanilla spellcaster of any given class can do that a wordcaster can't, and the wordcaster is generally more space-consuming than the traditional format. Unless Ultimate Magic is going to be huge and half-filled with content which is only useful to wordcasters, wordcasters are going to be incapable of doing basic magical schticks that spellcasters are expected to handle in published adventures.

That's probably going to be the trade-off. It won't be for everyone, which is why it's an option.

Quote:

Even when an effect isn't entirely absent, the effects that are present are terribly weak. None of the buffs last longer than round/level, a simple old-school Fireball is a 4th-level spell,

*reads again* Huh. Yeah, it is. That there is crap, I'll agree. But again, playtest. Even if you don't play it, your feedback now is useful. Anyways.

Quote:

save-or-lose effects aren't available until level 3 (and even that is save-every-turn single-target nausea), high-end save-or-dies use the Power Word style (and are thus nearly useless), etc.

Maybe it's me, but I'm not a fan of save-or-lose/die spells and effects anyways...this may be perfect for me if they bump up the power level a bit. IMO these kinds of spells need to be easier to resist because they're too powerful. But that's my opinion, so never you mind.

Quote:

Even in the narrow set of abilities that wordcasters and proper spellcasters do share, the wordcaster is almost always starting out a spell level or two behind a proper spellcaster, in return for the "privilege" of wordcasting.

Yes, this is something I agree on. But this is why it's necessary for you to say this stuff. If you didn't, maybe no one would. That would suck and invalidate the system.

This is probably one of the first times I think I've ever liked someone complaining - because it's in a constructive format for once instead of whining like a 6-year-old powergamer.

Quote:

On top of the complexity and low power level issue is the fact that wordcasting is completely incompatible with existing spellcasting. Presumably, Ultimate Magic will have spells for traditional spellcasters, but these will be useless to wordcasters (and vice versa!)

You can change this with a feat, but they'll make the NEXT PLAYTEST (hint hint Paizo) more complete, I'm sure.

Quote:

Not only can you not use anyone else's existing material with this system

That's a flaw? If so it's not even the size of an atom. Isn't a lot of 3rd-party stuff - and even 1st-party stuff - broken? Isn't that what everyone complains about? Make up your mind.

Quote:

but previous Paizo Pathfinder material is almost entirely useless with wordcasting. Will future books be filled with wordcaster options, useless to everyone else, or are wordcasters going to see this book and no others?

I'd like to see more, that's for damn sure. And yes, wordcasting is exclusive. That's the point.

Quote:

How does a wordcaster learn words in a game dominated by traditional spellcasting, or vice versa? How does this interact with the item creation rules? None of these questions are answered.

Good points. Glad you brought them up - I missed them, to be honest.

Quote:

The Words of Power system is a trainwreck

At the moment, it is a mess. It's not a full-on train wreck. You just helped straighten the tracks. Congrats, you're part of the system.

Quote:

It would need more than a game-session-length worth of time to try and adapt it to an existing game, and the reward for this work would be to make spellcasters less versatile, to make playing a spellcaster more cumbersome

Agreed so far, but maybe that's a player's style - true flexibility.

Quote:

and to make huge swathes of material in books I already own completely useless.

Huge swathes of material in books that are probably broken beyond most repair.

Quote:

My group will not be playtesting this mess of a system, and the only suggestion I can make to improve it is to not include it at all in the final version of Ultimate Magic.

Now, while you make many good points, that's just insulting.

Ever heard of Keiji Inafune? He made a game character and series, and was told, "There's no way this will sell." It's now celebrated over 25 years (I think) of ROUSING success, even if imperfect at times, including many spin-offs. That game character was Megaman.

To tell someone working in creating something to "stop trying, you fail" is like telling them you're going to urinate on everything they've ever made. And then doing it.

[xevious573]

For being at a loss for words, you sure had a lot to say...

Your concerns are very premature in my opinion. You're right that we don't yet have the ability to heal or inflict wounds. Our list of Save or Die Effects is limited to about 4 words. But the truth of the matter is we have a small portion of the words as is! Give Words of Power another 15 pages, maybe 20 pages or so putting it up to 40 pages give or take out of a 256 page document (which alloted 67 pages or so to new spells and their spell lists) and you will probably be able to crank out the teleportation spells, the scrying spells, healing spells, inflict spells, the hold person spells, flying spells and yadyadya. And don't say new and old spells won't be useful to Wordcasters! They can use wands, scrolls, and such without any difficulty.

Even if you didn't use it as an option during the game, it makes for a very interesting way to go about streamlining the spell research system (which currently exists as compare it to other spells and see which level it fits in).

If you really don't enjoy the system no one is twisting your arm to participate but this post is taking a very premature stance on the matter.

[A Man In Black]

Matrixryu wrote:

Paizo has already stated that they haven't given us all of the 'interesting' words of power because they're focusing mostly on damage balance at this moment. So, we won't see many of the utility spells that spellcasters normally get during the playtest.

Then this playtest document is useless; it's a dozen words which all do the same thing (slightly scaling damage) and none of the actual grunt work of spellcasting. There's no way to evaluate the spellcasting system based on the weakest, least interesting of the spells, especially when those weakest, most boring spells are made even weaker.

Quote:

You can also do things with wordcasting that the traditional spells do not allow. A Single Fire Blast Spook spell will do d6/level fire damage and possible cause the target to be frightened. What existing 3rd level spell does that?

That's unique but not useful, especially since you're either zapping a single really weak foe to get the Spook effect (5HD at CR 5?) or using a single-target, shortranged Fireball (and Fireball is already weak as it is, especially on a single target). Regular spells don't allow that because there's no good reason to do that.

[Machaeus]

xevious573 wrote:

Even if you didn't use it as an option during the game, it makes for a very interesting way to go about streamlining the spell research system (which currently exists as compare it to other spells and see which level it fits in).

I believe mdt said the exact same thing.

[A Man In Black]

Machaeus wrote:

I'll agree with you here, actually. But if you're finding it takes too much time, simply make note cards and shuffle them around to get the spell you want. Simple enough, right?

Quote:

The main, crippling issue is the fact that cobbling together spells on the fly is just unworkable.

I dunno. World of Darkness does it fairly well...but that's a lot more fast and loose. Maybe it is unworkable for d20...

You're agreeing with my intro before reading the supporting paragraphs. Yes, you can premake spells and put them on index cards, but that's only if you're a prepared caster or else you're giving up half of the advantage of being a spontaneous wordcaster. Also, if you're writing premade spells on index cards, how is this system more interesting than a system where you choose premade spells from a list?

And the WOD system (Mage spells) is completely based on GM fiat, and not significantly better than playing mother-may-I. (Not interested in arguing about this further unless someone makes it relevant to this playtest doc, though.)

Quote:

The Word Costs don't increase unless you're cobbling multiple effects together, most of the time. There are a scant few exceptions. Plus, table 1-1 (page 4), though I can understand the irritation of constantly looking it up. It's a mess, yes, but not a huge one. But that's why it's a playtest and not the final product.

It is irritating to constantly look up an irregularly-increasing amount of points per spell level. That is a mess; it's one of many poorly-designed parts.

Quote:

That's a flaw? If so it's not even the size of an atom. Isn't a lot of 3rd-party stuff - and even 1st-party stuff - broken? Isn't that what everyone complains about? Make up your mind.

That Pathfinder is backwards compatible is a selling point right on the cover. You don't get to claim compatibility with "decades of game material" as Buhlmann and Jacobs have claimed in this very forum if you break compatibility. Not working with other material Paizo is selling, let alone the other material they promised to keep some sort of compatibility with, is not under any circumstances an advantage, no matter how much you bad-mouth other publishers.

Keep in mind, one of the publishers you're badmouthing for publishing "huge swathes of material in books that are probably broken beyond most repair" is Paizo; APG had dozens of pages of spells that wordcasters can't use.

xevious573 wrote:

For being at a loss for words, you sure had a lot to say...

Your concerns are very premature in my opinion. You're right that we don't yet have the ability to heal or inflict wounds. Our List of Save or Die Effects are limited to about 4 words. But the truth of the matter is we have a small portion of the words as is! give Words of Power another 15 pages, maybe 20 pages or so putting it up to 40 pages give or take out of a 256 page document and you will probably be able to crank out the teleportation spells, the scrying spells, healing spells, inflict spells, the hold person spells, flying spells and yadyadya. And don't say new and old spells won't be useful to Wordcasters! They can use wands, scrolls, and such without any difficulty.

It's a pun. Word casting, at a loss for words, get it?

The rest is addressed above. "We'll fix it later in an unspecified way" doesn't give me any information with which to evaluate this system, and I can't even playtest it because half of it is missing. For all the griping about people "lookcommenting" instead of "playtesting", it's insulting to be offered a playtest document which is so incomplete as to be unusable for playtesting.

[Machaeus]

I notice you not only ignored that I'm trying to show you that your feedback is helpful (by your not quoting that), but you're throwing my fairly kind words back in my face after dipping them in acid. And you wonder why everyone here dislikes, hates, or ignores you.

[TriOmegaZero]

Machaeus wrote:

And you wonder why everyone here dislikes, hates, or ignores you.

Some, or most. Not everyone. Just pointing out.

[kyrt-ryder]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Machaeus wrote:

And you wonder why everyone here dislikes, hates, or ignores you.

Some, or most. Not everyone. Just pointing out.

MiB might not be the most sociable person, but he usually knows what he's talking about, and makes his points in the game's best interest.

[Machaeus]

kyrt-ryder wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Machaeus wrote:

And you wonder why everyone here dislikes, hates, or ignores you.

Some, or most. Not everyone. Just pointing out.

MiB might not be the most sociable person, but he usually knows what he's talking about, and makes his points in the game's best interest.

This may surprise you, but I know this. It wouldn't hurt him to be a little less of a jerk, though.

Also, fine. I can admit when I've screwed up. [correction]Almost[/correction] everyone [correction]I've seen[/correction].

[Juton]

If WoP where being forced down player's throats it would be a bad thing, but if it can coexist with regular 3.5 style casting there shouldn't be a problem. A lot of players have a play style that revolves around 'Kill it with fire!', this system will give them a flexible way to kill things with fire and other energy types. So a good many players may never notice a lack of versatility.

A lot of the spells inherited from 3.5 are easily abusable, while I think one could go through and prune them, just creating a new system of magic can accomplish the same goal of assign effects to reasonable character levels. So maybe permanently blinding someone on a failed save may no longer be a level 2 spell, I'm OK with that.

Just to reiterate, this system will need to coexist with conventional casting, it will be a lot more powerful with spontaneous casters than prepared casters. So WoPs are going to have to walk a fine line between enticing players out of using the legacy spells while not being as abusable as those legacy spells. Maybe if prepared casters only had to prepare the effect words and could spontaneously add in the target words it would be more enticing.

[Ravingdork]

I agree with many of MiB's points, though I'm hopeful many will become moot as we see more of the system. I seriously doubt that the game designers forgot to incorporate this system into magic item creation or neglected to write rules for learning new words while adventuring outside of leveling up. Just cause we haven't seen them doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Still, I'm glad you are raising hell--just in case they did forget.

[meatrace]

I agree that this playtest document is largely useless for, you know, playtesting and that is a shame. It is however useful for the general direction they are going. Assuming they will add useful effects in later (slow, knock, dimension door, shrink item, etc.) I think the system is almost exactly what I expected and very close to what I and some friends have been designing.

I think the nuts and bolts of it are solid, however I see two possible and less than desirable outcomes.
1)If this is, as written, made the core casting system it will nerf casters. Maybe that's part of the plan I don't know, but the material in the playtest is appreciably weaker than core and as stated more cumbersome.
2)If all standard/core effects are accounted for, and you're able to functionally mix and match things that thematically should work (single target Slow as a 1st level spell) it will only be MORE options for casters who, as AMiB said, will pick the strongest effects or combinations and stick with them sort of defeating the concept of the "on the fly" aesthetic.

It needs a f@$*ton of work, to be sure. TBH the "playtest" stuff from Ultimate Magic has felt a lot less solid and more like nebulous brainstorms than previoius playtests which were actually working rulesets. I hope that's by design and not a sign of a decline in design quality to come, because IMO the APG was pretty much solid awesome cover to cover. I hoped the Magus was a hiccup but I'm having my doubts with this playtest.

[Loengrin]

Well, I think that giving us just "useless" spell first is intentional...

'cause if they give us all the words at once they'll never have a feedback on the words they have given us...

So yes, there's a lot of direct damage in words we are given and very few utility words... But if you want feedback on how Wordspell direct damage are balanced with previous spells you have to give us that kind of word only 'cause if you don't no one will test them 'cause, you know, they are "the weakest, least interesting of the spells"... ;)

[YuenglingDragon]

meatrace wrote:

It needs a f~#%ton of work, to be sure. TBH the "playtest" stuff from Ultimate Magic has felt a lot less solid and more like nebulous brainstorms than previoius playtests which were actually working rulesets. I hope that's by design and not a sign of a decline in design quality to come, because IMO the APG was pretty much solid awesome cover to cover. I hoped the Magus was a hiccup but I'm having my doubts with this playtest.

I've had similar thoughts, as well. The Magus came out of the box looking like the design team had run out of ideas for how to make a good, balanced class and just threw what they had out there for us to fix. That's not fair to Jason and them but I was a little frustrated with what they released.

With just the changes from the Know Direction podcast, I've found the Magus fun to make, fun to playtest, and (probably) fun to run in my upcoming campaign. I believe that Paizo has the capacity to make this into something competitive with normal casting and fun and interesting to use.

But it sure as hell isn't there now. Right now, I think very few casters could make decent use out of this system even once the Word list is expanded.

[Eradarus]

A Man In Black wrote:

Machaeus wrote:

I'll agree with you here, actually. But if you're finding it takes too much time, simply make note cards and shuffle them around to get the spell you want. Simple enough, right?

Quote:

The main, crippling issue is the fact that cobbling together spells on the fly is just unworkable.

I dunno. World of Darkness does it fairly well...but that's a lot more fast and loose. Maybe it is unworkable for d20...

You're agreeing with my intro before reading the supporting paragraphs. Yes, you can premake spells and put them on index cards, but that's only if you're a prepared caster or else you're giving up half of the advantage of being a spontaneous wordcaster. Also, if you're writing premade spells on index cards, how is this system more interesting than a system where you choose premade spells from a list?

And the WOD system (Mage spells) is completely based on GM fiat, and not significantly better than playing mother-may-I. (Not interested in arguing about this further unless someone makes it relevant to this playtest doc, though.)

Quote:

The Word Costs don't increase unless you're cobbling multiple effects together, most of the time. There are a scant few exceptions. Plus, table 1-1 (page 4), though I can understand the irritation of constantly looking it up. It's a mess, yes, but not a huge one. But that's why it's a playtest and not the final product.

It is irritating to constantly look up an irregularly-increasing amount of points per spell level. That is a mess; it's one of many poorly-designed parts.

Quote:

That's a flaw? If so it's not even the size of an atom. Isn't a lot of 3rd-party stuff - and even 1st-party stuff - broken? Isn't that what everyone complains about? Make up your mind.

That Pathfinder is backwards compatible is a selling point right on the cover. You don't get to claim compatibility with "decades of game material" as Buhlmann and Jacobs have claimed in this very forum if you break compatibility. Not working with...

Wow that's a lot of complaining... seriously.

Bottom line. This isn't a "playtest" its a "Focused Playtest". YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD WHAT THE INTENTIONS FOR THE DOCUMENT ARE. And you are ignoring them. This is simply a damage dealing test. Nothing more. The designers want to see how the damage output works with the system.

This is why you only have a fraction of it. This is why alot of it doesn't seem to be useful outside damage. BECAUSE THATS THE INTENT.

We will get the entire thing at a later date. Then you can complain. Until then there's nothing to complain about.

For its intent the words of power seem to scale decently for a BETA (This word means NOT FINAL RESULT btw... you seem to think this is the do all end all version...which is simply wrong) release. The final system will take some tweaks and some simplification of rules. But from the start I knew it was something worth looking at.

And you make an awful lot of absolute assertions about the system for not having but what amounts to a fraction of it.

And people who speak in absolutes are wrong 90% of the time. As such I personally will be ignoring all of your opinions until they show something more than knee jerk assumptions and fridge logic.

Sorry friend. Calm down, have a mocha, and think about the intent of the document. Your thoughts should shift when you look at the scope right.

[A Man In Black]

Eradarus wrote:

Bottom line. This isn't a "playtest" its a "Focused Playtest". YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD WHAT THE INTENTIONS FOR THE DOCUMENT ARE. And you are ignoring them. This is simply a damage dealing test. Nothing more. The designers want to see how the damage output works with the system.

Okay. The damage output is mediocre, and would rely entirely on sneaking a bunch of keywords onto the spells to stack up ancilliary bonuses like Elemental Focus, etc. It'll depend on what books you have access to, but the upshot is that under ideal circumstances you're about as good as a spellcaster throwing metamagicked Elemental Orbs from Spell Comp. I could do the math, but I am lazy and I'd be willing to bet that if I did the math I'd be right.

Quote:

This is why you only have a fraction of it. This is why alot of it doesn't seem to be useful outside damage. BECAUSE THATS THE INTENT.

We will get the entire thing at a later date. Then you can complain. Until then there's nothing to complain about.

For its intent the words of power seem to scale decently for a BETA (This word means NOT FINAL RESULT btw... you seem to think this is the do all end all version...which is simply wrong) release. The final system will take some tweaks and some simplification of rules. But from the start I knew it was something worth looking at.

And you make an awful lot of absolute assertions about the system for not having but what amounts to a fraction of it.

I'm aware of the intent, but this INTENDED LIMITED BETA is useless. It's a playtest fighter with no feats but Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization in the playtest document. Sorcerers and wizards are the worst class in the game for dealing neat little damage packets, not just because they have so many other effects to choose from but also because they do less damage with more limitations compared to other classes.

Where the rubber meets the road is how this system interacts with effects which aren't neat little damage packets. You can really break the game open by combining those effects, by allowing people to subvert both the spell slot economy and the action economy. Thing is, I don't know what sort of non-Xd6 damage effects there will be because there aren't any of them in this playtest document.

So. The lookjudge of the system in the playtest document? It sucks. The lookjudge of the hypothetical system that exists in your imagination? It could also suck, but I have no good way to know because I can't see it! Don't rag on people who comment on the playtest document for not evaluating the unreleased parts of the system.

I'd also like to point out that the needless addition of complexity has not yet really been addressed. We still have the problem of the sorcerer special ability being to slow the game down to a crawl, similar to the beta sorcerer. That's already unworkable, and will only get more unworkable as more spellwords are added.

[Eradarus]

A Man In Black wrote:

Eradarus wrote:

Bottom line. This isn't a "playtest" its a "Focused Playtest". YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD WHAT THE INTENTIONS FOR THE DOCUMENT ARE. And you are ignoring them. This is simply a damage dealing test. Nothing more. The designers want to see how the damage output works with the system.

Okay. The damage output is mediocre, and would rely entirely on sneaking a bunch of keywords onto the spells to stack up ancilliary bonuses like Elemental Focus, etc. It'll depend on what books you have access to, but the upshot is that under ideal circumstances you're about as good as a spellcaster throwing metamagicked Elemental Orbs from Spell Comp. I could do the math, but I am lazy and I'd be willing to bet that if I did the math I'd be right.

Quote:

This is why you only have a fraction of it. This is why alot of it doesn't seem to be useful outside damage. BECAUSE THATS THE INTENT.

We will get the entire thing at a later date. Then you can complain. Until then there's nothing to complain about.

For its intent the words of power seem to scale decently for a BETA (This word means NOT FINAL RESULT btw... you seem to think this is the do all end all version...which is simply wrong) release. The final system will take some tweaks and some simplification of rules. But from the start I knew it was something worth looking at.

And you make an awful lot of absolute assertions about the system for not having but what amounts to a fraction of it.

I'm aware of the intent, but this INTENDED LIMITED BETA is useless. It's a playtest fighter with no feats but Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization in the playtest document. Sorcerers and wizards are the worst class in the game for dealing neat little damage packets, not just because they have so many other effects to choose from but also because they do less damage with more limitations compared to other classes.

Where the rubber meets the road is how this system interacts with effects which aren't neat little damage packets. You can really...

1: I disagree. The system progresses along the same lines as normal spells for the most part. xd4 -> xd6 max 10 -> max 15 -> max 20

Just like most spells. And ontop of that you can add other effect words to customize the effect, say a fireball that greases its area, or a lightning bolt that has a stun effect.

When you add the secondary effects that you can toss in... its on par with the other damage dealing spells. As a stunned enemy is just as dead as one you dealt 150 damage to... he just gets to die more horribly...

2: If you don't like it. Don't participate. Simple as that. Wait for a wider scope test. Once Paizo has the data it needs I'm sure a wider scope test will be included, along with the revision of magus so that we can test what our opinions and testing have shown needs to change.

[A Man In Black]

Eradarus wrote:

1: I disagree. The system progresses along the same lines as normal spells for the most part. xd4 -> xd6 max 10 -> max 15 -> max 20

Just like most spells. And ontop of that you can add other effect words to customize the effect, say a fireball that greases its area, or a lightning bolt that has a stun effect.

When you add the secondary effects that you can toss in... its on par with the other damage dealing spells. As a stunned enemy is just as dead as one you dealt 150 damage to... he just gets to die more horribly...

2: If you don't like it. Don't participate. Simple as that. Wait for a wider scope test. Once Paizo has the data it needs I'm sure a wider scope test will be included, along with the revision of magus so that we can test what our opinions and testing have shown needs to change.

Normal spells don't do very much damage at all, that's my point. They do less damage than an even lazily optimized archer and there are lots of foes who just laugh at whatever damage type you pick unless it's force or sonic (and there you're looking at even worse damage). And generally you won't be able to afford to add extra effects without tanking your damage or adding really trivially lame effects.

Right now, there is no Grease keyword. The closest practical equivalent is a Small Burst - Cramp - Fire Blast, which is a fourth-level spell. It's not even close to Acid Pit, Fear, or Confusion. It's not even as good as Firefall. It's about as good as Shout, which is terrible. And that's assuming that Grease is only a two-point word; I seriously doubt it'd be that cheap.

The "If you don't like it, don't comment" crew is tiring. "This playtest document is has overcomplicated rules and is functionally incomplete" is feedback. I'd daresay it's more useful feedback than like-it-or-lump-it.

[Eradarus]

A Man In Black wrote:

Eradarus wrote:

1: I disagree. The system progresses along the same lines as normal spells for the most part. xd4 -> xd6 max 10 -> max 15 -> max 20

Just like most spells. And ontop of that you can add other effect words to customize the effect, say a fireball that greases its area, or a lightning bolt that has a stun effect.

When you add the secondary effects that you can toss in... its on par with the other damage dealing spells. As a stunned enemy is just as dead as one you dealt 150 damage to... he just gets to die more horribly...

2: If you don't like it. Don't participate. Simple as that. Wait for a wider scope test. Once Paizo has the data it needs I'm sure a wider scope test will be included, along with the revision of magus so that we can test what our opinions and testing have shown needs to change.

Normal spells don't do very much damage at all, that's my point. They do less damage than an even lazily optimized archer and there are lots of foes who just laugh at whatever damage type you pick unless it's force or sonic (and there you're looking at even worse damage). And generally you won't be able to afford to add extra effects without tanking your damage or adding really trivially lame effects.

Right now, there is no Grease keyword. The closest practical equivalent is a Small Burst - Cramp - Fire Blast, which is a fourth-level spell. It's not even close to Acid Pit, Fear, or Confusion. It's not even as good as Firefall. It's about as good as Shout, which is terrible. And that's assuming that Grease is only a two-point word; I seriously doubt it'd be that cheap.

The "If you don't like it, don't comment" crew is tiring. "This playtest document is has overcomplicated rules and is functionally incomplete" is feedback. I'd daresay it's more useful feedback than like-it-or-lump-it.

But its not "Feedback" at all...as it is tainted by opinion. Paizo doesn't want opinions. They want unbiased data...which you're not giving them. And even if you were. You've already biased yourself against things. So whatever data you give has to be thrown out anyway.

I'm done here. Talking to a wall isn't constructive.

[hogarth]

A Man In Black wrote:

I'm aware of the intent, but this INTENDED LIMITED BETA is useless. It's a playtest fighter with no feats but Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization in the playtest document. Sorcerers and wizards are the worst class in the game for dealing neat little damage packets, not just because they have so many other effects to choose from but also because they do less damage with more limitations compared to other classes.

Where the rubber meets the road is how this system interacts with effects which aren't neat little damage packets.

This is true, but it doesn't concern me too much since it seems clear to me how it's intended to work: you take a spell like Burning Hands or Cause Fear or Suggestion (keeping the original spell level mostly intact) and then add metamagic-like effects and/or combine spell effects.

My concerns are:

• The point system is too clunky.
  
• You end up with a sorcerer with a crappier spell list but with better access to metamagic (I'm ignoring the remote possibility that anyone sane would want to play a Words of Power wizard). That sounds like it could be done with a one-page sorcerer archetype and some way to combine spells (like 3.5's Arcane Fusion spell or PFRPG's Combine Extracts alchemist discovery) rather than being worthy of filling dozens of pages.
  
• The claim "we'll have lots of cool spell Words in the final version of the book" doesn't immediately inspire me with confidence, since there were similar assurances about what would be in the APG that didn't pan out.

Just my $0.02.

[Ravingdork]

One of my concerns is that they are being too limited with the individual power words. Take Barrier of Ice for example. It will pretty much always be a 120-ft. barrier since (1) it can only ever be a line, (2) using the smaller lines means it is STILL a 4th-level spell, and (3) it doesn't really stack with any of the power words shown to us.

Sadly, I expect many more such keywords that won't combine well due to excessive restrictions or not enough forethought. As a result, no matter how many power words they release, the system won't be as versatile as they let on.

[YuenglingDragon]

Eradarus wrote:

But its not "Feedback" at all...as it is tainted by opinion. Paizo doesn't want opinions. They want unbiased data...which you're not giving them.

This is the playtest discussion board. This is where opinions go. MiB has posted his in the correct forum for this kind of commentary.

In any case, lets just let that particular debate go. Lets talk about the substance of the post if we're going to talk about it at all.

[Jason Bulmahn]

Sneaky of you, posting a big piece of insulting flame-bait while I am recovering from a turkey coma.

The goals of this particular part of the playtest were clearly posted. It is the reason why we did not give out the complete system. You, obviously do not agree with these goals, and or think the entire system is suspect. I gotcha, your opinion has been noted.

This thread will serve no further purpose. It is locked.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

(As an aside, our playtests are happening a little earlier in the design process these days, or at least trying to, which means things are coming out a little less like the finals and a little bit more raw. Some folks have noticed this, and it is intentional.)