I've got a Knowledge (Warfare) skill that theoretically will govern battlefield-scale tactics and broader military strategy. And I already use Profession (sailor) to determine attacks against enemy ships, etc.Profession soldier could cover armies
profession sailor could cover ship commands
Then I think I will just expand on those.
Here is what I am thinking so far:
for every five ranks in the skill you can control another formation.
the number allowed in the formation while still having it remain under your control is equal to your ranks squared.
Before each battle you roll against a DC (I was thinking number of formations under your control could tie into the DC as well as mitigating factors like high ground, the wind on your side, etc) which I havent set yet.
You roll with your total bonus against the DC before a battle to organize the formation.
If you beat the DC by 10 or more you can apply one of the following benefits:
+3 AC Formation bonus
add another die to one "formation attack" (works like a swarm attack with longswords and a ranged swarm with long bows)
grant one feat for which each member of the formation meets the prerequisites for
grant the toughness feat equal to the total hitdice of the formation plus 3
Formations must at all times be touching atleast one other square of the same formation and there can be no broken spaces between parts of the same formation. If a formation splits into two smaller formations they become two seperate formations and can be commanded as such. If the leader loses control of that formation (either to wounding or lack of ranks) it loses its formation characteristics unless a "leader" arises in that group.
Commanding a formation is a standard action but once commanded acts on its own and will continue to act until changed commands.
If the formation reaches the "heavy wounded status", you must roll a check to "hold formation" equal to the original DC plus 5. If this check is failed all parties in the formation disband and go back to individual creatures. If the first check allowed you to grant them a benefit (such as a bonus feat or bonus to ac) but the second check is not high enough you lose this benefit.
One question though how would spellcasting formations go? or should those not exist because most casting is actually a solo thing?
*This does not grant you soldiers, those must either be attained through the Leadership feat or by means of payment.
Something like that could work. And if we set the mob/swarm rules right (higher damage potential, etc.), a tactical unit could be a match for a decent CR monster -- making fighters' advanced leadership abilities vastly more viable, rather than meaningless window dressing.
In the current 3.5/PF rules, one planar binding spell conjures a monster that can destroy armies of any size with impunity. Flipping that around would sure be nice.
Something like that could work. And if we set the mob/swarm rules right (higher damage potential, etc.), a tactical unit could be a match for a decent CR monster -- making fighters' advanced leadership abilities vastly more viable, rather than meaningless window dressing.
In the current 3.5/PF rules, one planar binding spell conjures a monster that can destroy armies of any size with impunity. Flipping that around would sure be nice.
exactly thats why I figured making reflex saves being the thing that prevents damage.
perhaps making it the players choice between the save bonus versus total armor bonus for half against the damage?
Plus it makes war something that is not only feasible but realistic. Many PCs might actually go to war against nations with this system if I do it right.
OK, I've just superseded the ninja "class" from the Ultimate Combat playtest by adding one (1) monk sutra and one (1) rogue talent, respectively:
Ninjitsu Training: Your monk levels and rogue levels stack for determining your monk unarmed attack damage, your Weapon Form damage bonus, and your rogue sneak attack damage. Your monk level also stacks with your rogue level for determining the effects of level-dependent rogue talents, and you can freely select rogue talent in place of monk sutras, or advanced rogue talents in place of advanced monk sutras. When you use an unarmed attack or temple weapon to deliver a Stunning Fist attack, you add a +2 synergy bonus to the DC. This sutra supersedes the Ascetic Rogue feat from Complete Adventurer.
Ascetic Stalker: You must have at least one level in monk to select this talent. Your rogue level stacks with to your monk level to determine your ki powers known and ki powers per day, the manifester level for your ki powers, and the enhancement bonus from your ki strike ability. Your rogue level also stacks with your monk level for determining the effects of level-dependent monk sutras. This talent supersedes the feat of the same name from Complete Scoundrel.
Ah damn. Now I have more choices for Auris.
"You've got a trapeze and no pajamas! What kind of a ninja are you supposed to be, anyway?"
"I'm a circus ninja, dammit!"
BTW, TOZ and Derek, you guys have convinced me, in principle, against "per day" martial abilities. However, in a lot of cases I'm drawing a blank in coming up with an alternative. For example, the following feats: Improved Great Fortitude (etc.), Ignore Condition, Paragon of Agility, Fight On/Increased Vigor (which I've merged), Inspirational Victory, "deadly charge" function of the Spirited Charge feat, Perfect Blow, Retributive Attack, Stunning Fist; the Warmaster fighter class feature; the following Fighter talents: Challenge, Commanding Presence, Fleet Footed, Ki Damage, Knightly Banner, Recklessness, Second Wind, the maximum damage function of Steady Aim, Vigor, Blinding Speed; etc.
If you can give specific suggestions that seem workable, I'll work on switching them over. Until then, like I said, although I agree with your stance on a philosophical level, I'm not sure how to implement it on a practical level.
Suggestions, errata, and clarifications for the wizard
Page 1 Table 1 cantrips seem to be out of alphabetical order; also school spell can be added to the table at first level. Do you want to just say “Class Skills:” to be consistent with the rest of the classes. Above class skills you could add “Bonus Languages: You may substitute Draconic or another arcane language for one of the bonus languages available to you because of your race.” Similar to how you added bonus skills for the bard or ranger rather than placing it in the abilities description text. Add (all) for the craft and profession skills.
Page 2 In the 3rd paragraph of the spellbooks section change “the” to “your” spellbook. Under arcane bond you may want to change to “a bonded object, an eidetic memory, a familiar, or a watchful spirit” to keep the options in alphabetical order.
Page 3 Under low arcana one could remove the “item of” part; second paragraph remove the “an” before “another”.
Page 4 Under Mastery of shaping change “or” to “of” effect.
Page 5 Under Presence of the Mage delete the “ride checks within the area suffer a -2 penalty.”
Note: Under low arcana there are multiple abilities that start with wording like “At 8th level, you can gain the ability to emit”. I am making the assumption that one is allowed to be 8th level or higher to select these arcana and that you do not need to “gain the ability to”, you just “can emit” something. I would propose adding a sentence at the end of these abilities stating something like “You must be at least 8th level to select this Arcanum.” The abilities affected are (Universalist) hand of the apprentice, lesser aspect of power, metamagic mastery, (Abjuration) aura of banishment, (Conjuration) Creator’s will, dimensional steps, (Divination) foretell, scrying adept, (Enchantment) aura of despair, irresistible demand, shape emotions, (Evocation) elemental wall, energy manipulation, (Illusion) bedeviling aura, invisibility field, (Necromancy) life sight, (Transmutation) effortless change, reflexive change.
Page 6 Under hand of the apprentice the attack roll should be based on intelligence rather than “wisdom” instead of “dexterity.” Under abjuration change “magics” to “magic”.
Page 7 Under energy abjuration I think it should read “When you cast a spell of the acid, cold, electricity, fire, force, sonic, negative or positive energy subtype, you gain resistance to that energy equal to 5 x the spell's level. This energy resistance lasts for 1 round per level of the spell or until you are struck by that type of energy damage (acid, cold, electricity, fire, force, negative or positive energy subtype, or sonic” to keep them in alphabetical order. Energy absorption is out of alphabetical order. Energy resistance as written is different than most other energy resistance types, would you rather say something like “gain resistance 5 + 5 for every two wizard class levels after 2nd to an energy.” Under protective ward change “abjurer” to “wizard” class levels.
Page 8 Under unstable bonds do you want to add the clause “that does not provoke an attack of opportunity,”. Under urgent spell change “abjurer” to “wizard”. Under bolster summons add “of” before “your (wizard) class levels”; also change the second reference of conjurer to wizard in this section. Under create gear do you want to add the word “nonmagical” before “object”.
Page 9 Spontaneous Summoning is out of alphabetical order. Under toughen summoning change “conjurer” to “wizard”. Under diviner’s fortune change “school power” to “Arcanum”.
Page 10 Under persistent divination change “diviner” to “wizard”. Under send senses clairvoyance is misspelled, same as in the APG.
Page 11 Under charmer and commanding enchantment do you want these to give you a “competency bonus” to DC and do you want to add the clause “is an exception to the normal rule and stacks with the bonuses provided by the Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus feats.” Under combat enchanter least in misspelled. Under dazing touch should the clause “that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.” be added.
Page 12 Under the evocation feats, I cannot find the brimstone spell and change to “blistering evocation” and “irresistible evocation”.
Page 13 Under Piercing evocation electricity comes before fire alphabetically.
Page 14 Under chains of disbelief add “by” in the first sentence. Under concealing glamour illusion and glamour are misspelled.
Page 15 Under shadow shaper rogues no longer can gain the “hide in plain sight” talent. Under shadow step add “can” to the first sentence. Under terror do you want to add a clause “that does not provoke an attack of opportunity,” Under necromancy did you mean “dreaded” Under bind spirit did you mean – Con hit points.
Page 16 Under cursed glance did you mean “(Will save negates; DC 10 + half your class level + your Int modifier)”. Does grave touch provoke an attack of opportunity? Also for power over the undead should it be 3 + Cha rather than 3 + Int?
Page 17 Under shroud of death add “to” before eat. Under sickening grasp is it (DC = 10 + ½ your character level + your Int modifier) and does it provoke an attack of opportunity? At the end of effortless change did you mean to say “benefit does not increase the spell’s level or casting time, nor does it require any special preparation.” Under override transmutation change “save” to “saves”.
Page 18 Raving transmutation seems to do very little damage as written.
Page 19 Under school spells remove “these”. Note: under each elemental school’s energy substitution should the clause allowing you to change banned energy types (air changing acid spells to electricity for example) be removed?
Page 20 Again under fire school spells remove “these”. Under dancing flame do you want to add “by removing any number of 5 foot by 5 foot squares from its area of affect”.
Page 21 Fire jet is out of alphabetical order. Under fire supremacy do you have to be 18th level also to draw fire from a camp fire around yourself? Under school spells delete these.
Page 22 Under reckless dweomer Arcanum is misspelled. Under student of chaos, after rod of wonder), add “you”. Under wild strike colors is spelled using the British spelling.
Page 23 Note: under witchcraft did you want to give them access to the spells one level earlier like you did with the sorcerer and favored soul?
Page 25 Does Blight provoke an attack of opportunity when used as a melee touch attack? Under cackle it could be changed to “Any creature within 30 feet that”.
Page 27 Under waxen image for the last sentence change “the” to “this is”. Under death’s curse one could change to “becomes fatigued on the first round of the hex.”
Page 29 Under bonded objects second paragraph change to “If (you) attempt to cast”. I propose you change the 4th paragraph’s wording to “You can add additional magic abilities to your bonded object as if you had the imbue item feat and the appropriate Craft skill. For example, a wizard with a bonded dagger must be at least 5th level to add magic abilities to the dagger (see the craft skill)”
Page 30 In the first paragraph of the familiars delete “a” between “by” and “you”.
Page 31 In both the table and description improved evasion and empathic link are out of alphabetical order.
|
If you can give specific suggestions that seem workable, I'll work on switching them over. Until then, like I said, although I agree with your stance on a philosophical level, I'm not sure how to implement it on a practical level.
Some of them, like 1/day rerolls from Great Fort and the like, are fine. Other ones, I'll have to think about.
BTW, TOZ and Derek, you guys have convinced me, in principle, against "per day" martial abilities. However, in a lot of cases I'm drawing a blank in coming up with an alternative. For example, the following feats: Improved Great Fortitude (etc.), Ignore Condition, Paragon of Agility, Fight On/Increased Vigor (which I've merged), Inspirational Victory, "deadly charge" function of the Spirited Charge feat, Perfect Blow, Retributive Attack, Stunning Fist; the Warmaster fighter class feature; the following Fighter talents: Challenge, Commanding Presence, Fleet Footed, Ki Damage, Knightly Banner, Recklessness, Second Wind, the maximum damage function of Steady Aim, Vigor, Blinding Speed; etc.
If you can give specific suggestions that seem workable, I'll work on switching them over. Until then, like I said, although I agree with your stance on a philosophical level, I'm not sure how to implement it on a practical level.
Have you looked at the rest mechanic from trailblazer? I like it as a house rule and it would allow you to keep the existing wording on all your feats and abilities but allow them to change into per encounter rather than per day abilities. Of course trailblazer also breaks up spells into 3 types: rote, restricted, or ritual. Rote spells are single target spells with short durations (other than the big 3: divinations, teleports, and raise dead effects) which also can be regained through the rest mechanic, restricted spells are ones with multiple targets, conjuration spells, and spells with longer durations and these require an action point in the trailblazer system to regain (all the slots), finally ritual spells (the big three and spells with gp material components) require an action point per spell regained. They also add a clause that all non instantaneous or permanent spell like effects are lost (no matter the supposed duration) and you gain a set percentage of your hit points back.
I am sure you could individualize some type of rest mechanic into something that would work for your house rules. Just determine how long the rest period is, if you want hit points to be regained this way, if you want it only to effect some classes (though having spells have different tiers does increase the value of some spells that otherwise are "weak" as choices for their level). Make sure it “ends” longer spell like effects so they cannot be “stacked” and there you go.
OK, I've just superseded the ninja "class" from the Ultimate Combat playtest by adding one (1) monk sutra and one (1) rogue talent, respectively:
Ninjitsu Training: Your monk levels and rogue levels stack for determining your monk unarmed attack damage, your Weapon Form damage bonus, and your rogue sneak attack damage. Your monk level also stacks with your rogue level for determining the effects of level-dependent rogue talents, and you can freely select rogue talent in place of monk sutras, or advanced rogue talents in place of advanced monk sutras. When you use an unarmed attack or temple weapon to deliver a Stunning Fist attack, you add a +2 synergy bonus to the DC. This sutra supersedes the Ascetic Rogue feat from Complete Adventurer.
Ascetic Stalker: You must have at least one level in monk to select this talent. Your rogue level stacks with to your monk level to determine your ki powers known and ki powers per day, the manifester level for your ki powers, and the enhancement bonus from your ki strike ability. Your rogue level also stacks with your monk level for determining the effects of level-dependent monk sutras. This talent supersedes the feat of the same name from Complete Scoundrel.
Um. So, one level of monk, one level of rogue, and you can get a character doing full UA dmg +10d6 Sneak attack damage? How is that not broken compared to a standard character? I'm not neccessarily saying the effect is broken, just in comparison to a non-Rogue. He gives up nothing, and gains everything.
====Aelryinth
Um. So, one level of monk, one level of rogue, and you can get a character doing full UA dmg +10d6 Sneak attack damage?
Read it again; that would require 1 level in monk, eighteen levels of rogue; or one level of rogue, 18 levels of monk. Not one of each. And, no, +10d6 sneak attack and better unarmed damage is not "broken" for a 19th level character.
You know, I have never been a fan of those being 1/day. I always thought they should be 3/day, but I guess it's been working out for you guys.
GREAT FORTITUDE, IMPROVED
Prerequisite: Great Fortitude.Benefit: You receive a +2 feat bonus on all Fortitude saves. In addition, once per day you may reroll any one Fortitude save. You must decide to use this ability before the results are revealed. You must take the second roll, even if it is worse.
nice on the ninjitsu.
Elegant multiclass solution. I wouldn't call it ninjitsu training... just because I am one of those Anti-name ninja people... why cant my rogue be a ninja? :P
I assume that +2 synergy bonus to stunning fist is for the absent monk levels? A suggestion would be making it possible to sacrifice sneak attack die to up the DC. Just a thought, fits with a ninka to me. I will probably do that.
|
|
Um. So, one level of monk, one level of rogue, and you can get a character doing full UA dmg +10d6 Sneak attack damage?Read it again; that would require 1 level in monk, eighteen levels of rogue; or one level of rogue, 18 levels of monk. Not one of each. And, no, +10d6 sneak attack and better unarmed damage is not "broken" for a 19th level character.
Something along those lines, I think multiclass characters should be able to take advanced talents at 10th+. Not sure how to word it, but a 5th Monk/5th Rogue should be able to take any advanced talents he qualifies for when he next gets a talent. Heck, I'd even be fine with a 10th level Cleric taking a level of Fighter and getting an advanced talent. He's not likely to get the best one due to other talent prereqs anyway. But multiclass characters should have the opportunity to get as many advanced talents as single class characters. Single class characters have the advantage of regular talent slots making sure they don't have to spend advanced slots on regular talents to fulfill prereqs for advanced talents.
Have you looked at the rest mechanic from trailblazer?
No; I don't own it, although I think TOZ has a copy.
Something along those lines, I think multiclass characters should be able to take advanced talents at 10th+. Not sure how to word it, but a 5th Monk/5th Rogue should be able to take any advanced talents he qualifies for when he next gets a talent.
That's sort of why I included the clause "you can freely select rogue talents in place of monk sutras, or advanced rogue talents in place of advanced monk sutras" (and I intended that to work vice-versa as well; will have to clean up that wording). For example:
Granted, that breaks down if you keep more or less equal levels (e.g., rogue 7/monk 6), so maybe some sort of stacking is in order for those types of progressions.
I'm basically envisioning "At 10th character level, you may select talents from the advanced talent list as well."
I'd have to veto that wording outright; I don't want a barbarian 9/fighter 1 pulling advanced fighter talents out of his shorts.
I'm basically envisioning "At 10th character level, you may select talents from the advanced talent list as well."I'd have to veto that wording outright; I don't want a barbarian 9/fighter 1 pulling advanced fighter talents out of his shorts.
I agree, mainly because it restricts certain classes from doing it vice versa.
For instance Barbarians have four levels of rage powers.
Wizards have only low arcana til 19th
Basically dont make it to multiclass friendly to the point that it encourages the players to take longer to look and powergame more than idealize.
Multiclassing is already tasty, especially the new ninja one kirth made. might have to give that one a shot myself, I really like it.
|
|
I'm basically envisioning "At 10th character level, you may select talents from the advanced talent list as well."I'd have to veto that wording outright; I don't want a barbarian 9/fighter 1 pulling advanced fighter talents out of his shorts.
I do, because he is a 10th level character, and 10th level characters get advanced talents. (Check that, 11th level. So have the text read "At 11th" instead.)
Even then, there are only 10-15 advanced fighter talents that have no prerequisites. Some of the others only require feats, but for the ones that require other talents, that barbarian 10/fighter 1 has to spend his first advanced talent on a regular talent if he wants one of the advanced with talent prereqs.
Add that to the fact that he is only going to get 5 talents total instead of 10 like a straight classed fighter, and I think that is a fine balancing factor.
I would accept requiring it to be a talent choice as well, instead of a blanket rule. I'm just laying my thoughts out for examination.
I would accept requiring it to be a talent choice as well, instead of a blanket rule. I'm just laying my thoughts out for examination.
What about a "Practiced Fighter" feat, something along these lines?
FIGHTER, PRACTICED (COMBAT)
Prerequisite: Fighter level 1st
Benefit: For purposes of qualifying for fighter talents and determining the effects of level-dependent fighter talents and class features, treat your fighter level as 4 levels higher than is actually the case, to a maximum effective fighter level equal to your hit dice.
Your barbarian 4/fighter 7 now qualifies for Advanced fighter talents.
Acceptable at first glance.
Good deal; I envision, ultimately, a whole line of these "practiced" feats - one or two for every class (I've already written a bunch of them).
|
|
Good deal; I envision, ultimately, a whole line of these "practiced" feats - one or two for every class (I've already written a bunch of them).
Honestly, they can probably be collapsed down into one feat like the +2/+2 skill feats. Thus you can choose two classes and gain limited stacking benefits on certain things.
This!Good deal; I envision, ultimately, a whole line of these "practiced" feats - one or two for every class (I've already written a bunch of them).Honestly, they can probably be collapsed down into one feat like the +2/+2 skill feats. Thus you can choose two classes and gain limited stacking benefits on certain things.
Thirded
Honestly, they can probably be collapsed down into one feat like the +2/+2 skill feats. Thus you can choose two classes and gain limited stacking benefits on certain things.This! Thirded
Can you guys write one for me, then? Because I have no idea in the world how this would work. "Pick two classes, and you can stack them to get any class features you pick," is open to so much abuse and misiniterpretation that I don't even want to think about it.
Using specific talents for specific multiclass comninations, and then also including a line of "Practiced X" feats, avoids a lot of ambiguity.
Combined Training: Choose any two 'Talent-based classes' (meaning no full spellcasters.) For purpose of talents available, treat your combined levels in both classes as your class level for each class. Furthermore, you may take use the talent slots from one class to purchase talents from the other.
This would supplement, rather than replace, the "Practiced" line, then; for example, this one from the ranger section:
TRACKER, PRACTICED
Prerequisites: Track class feature.
Benefit: For purposes of tracking and ranger tracking class abilities, treat your effective ranger level as 4 higher than is actually the case, to a maximum equal to your total number of hit dice. For example, a ranger 4/druid 4 would receive a +4 bonus to Survival checks to track, and would have the track, direction sense, swift tracker, and anchored navigation class features.
Something like that is specific enough that I don't see all of them for all classes being collapsed into a single feat!
Also, the feat you wrote above wouldn't help the barbarian/fighter we were talking about at all, unless we declare that rage powers are talents. But then do prestige paladin mercies or auras count as "talents" as well? And what about bards (1 talent/3 levels) vs. rogues (1 talent/2 levels) -- do we give multiclassed bards a LOT more talents than their single-classed brethren?
Given all of these ambiguities, for now I'd like to go on a case-by-case basis, and at the end maybe a number of them can be combined, if they match as well as we hope they do.
Um. So, one level of monk, one level of rogue, and you can get a character doing full UA dmg +10d6 Sneak attack damage?Read it again; that would require 1 level in monk, eighteen levels of rogue; or one level of rogue, 18 levels of monk. Not one of each. And, no, +10d6 sneak attack and better unarmed damage is not "broken" for a 19th level character.
You read only half the quote. Look at the other half.
The Rogue 19/monk 1 does +10d6 Sa, and has UA worth far more dmg then a Rogue/20's shortswords.
The Rogue1/monk 19 effectively has +10d6 SA dmg more then the monk/20.
The only thing you give up is the CAPSTONE...at level 20. At every other level, you are kicking arse.
I don't have a problem with the Talent purchasing, but the discrepency in damage between these and a straight 20 level character is ridiculous, and to be avoided...otherwise, we're back to 3.5 mandatory multiclassing to keep up with the power curve again.
==Aelryinth
The Rogue 1/monk 19 effectively has +10d6 SA dmg more then the monk/20. The only thing you give up is the CAPSTONE...at level 20.
And you also give up evasion at 2nd and sixth sense at 3rd and skill mastery at 3, 7, 11, 15, and 19 and uncanny dodge at 4th and surprise attacks at 5th and improved uncanny dodge at 8th and a host of spell-like abilities through Skill Excellence at 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th and 20th and improved evasion at 13th and sneak attack of opportunity at 19th. And also 76 skill points (4 per level). Ignoring all of that is disingenuous.
However, if the concern is instead centered around essentially creating a full BAB class with full sneak attack, then it becomes a bit more understandable. I'd originally thought to make half your monk level stack with rogue level, for sneak attack, so a monk 10/rogue 10 would end up with sneak attack +8d6 instead of +10d6. That's somewhat of a drop from the Paizo ninja, but the better BAB should make up for it. Better still, it matches the SA stacking from the Martial Outlaw talent, bringing us one step closer to folding those together at some point as TOZ, Midnight, and kyrt suggested.
A revised sutra might look something like this:
Ninjitsu Training: Your monk level stacks with your rogue level for determining the effects of level-dependent rogue talents, and you can freely select rogue talents in place of monk sutras, or advanced rogue talents in place of advanced monk sutras.
Add your rogue level to your monk level for purposes of determining your monk unarmed attack damage and your Weapon Form damage bonus. When determining sneak attack damage, you can add half your monk level to your rogue level. Finally, when you use the Stunning Fist feat in conjunction with a sneak attack, you gain a synergy bonus to the save DC equal to half your number of sneak attack dice +1 (for example, a monk 5/rogue 5 would have sneak attack +4d6 and would gain a +3 bonus to the save DC of his Stunning Fist when used in conjunction with a sneak attack.
This sutra supersedes the Ascetic Rogue feat from Complete Adventurer.
What if you made it "choose two class features (such as Sneak attack, favored enemy, Rage, Spells, etc) from one other class. These class features stack with one half your level in another class of your choice.
or something like that.
Grants more flexibility for characters anyways. That way you can craft your ninja however you want. Maybe instead of sneak attack you wanted the skill excellence
just a suggestion.
I spent the morning drafting an "all-in-one" feat for talents for fighters, monks, rangers, and rogues, and although it works OK, it left me feeling flat for a couple of reasons:
(1) It's a lot of work, clearing up ambiguous wording and closing loopholes, simply to save a total of five short entries... especially considering that the language needed to clarify it adds almost as much text as I'd be saving; and, more importantly
(2) It prevents me from adding in minor "extras" that really aren't worth a feat or talent, but are fun perks nonetheless (like a bonus to Stunning Fist on a sneak attack) that are specific to individual combinations.
For the flexibility you were looking for, Midnight, I'm currently assuming that just about any recurrent/improving class feature will have a "Practiced X" feat associated with it: "For purposes of blah, blah, your level is treated as 4 higher than actual, to a max effective level equal to your total HD." Or maybe instead of +4, it can be made as a fraction of total HD, but that leads to wanky wording: "Take your total HD and subtract your level in X class. Half of the remainder plus your level in X is your effective level for purposes of Y..." Hmmm... (1/2)(A+B+C-A)+A = A+(1/2)(B+C)...
One other thing I noticed while doing this is that barbarian rage powers come at the same rate as rogue talents, but also have "levels" analogous to ranger and monk spells -- and they'd match exactly if improved rage powers came at 6th level, greater at 10th, mighty at 14th, and then I added primal rage powers at 18th. That could facilitate multiclassing talents with the barbarian quite a bit...
The Rogue 1/monk 19 effectively has +10d6 SA dmg more then the monk/20. The only thing you give up is the CAPSTONE...at level 20.And you also give up evasion at 2nd and sixth sense at 3rd and skill mastery at 3, 7, 11, 15, and 19 and uncanny dodge at 4th and surprise attacks at 5th and improved uncanny dodge at 8th and a host of spell-like abilities through Skill Excellence at 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th and 20th and improved evasion at 13th and sneak attack of opportunity at 19th. And also 76 skill points (4 per level). Ignoring all of that is disingenuous.
However, if the concern is instead centered around essentially creating a full BAB class with full sneak attack, then it becomes a bit more understandable. I'd originally thought to make half your monk level stack with rogue level, for sneak attack, so a monk 10/rogue 10 would end up with sneak attack +8d6 instead of +10d6. That's somewhat of a drop from the Paizo ninja, but the better BAB should make up for it. Better still, it matches the SA stacking from the Martial Outlaw talent, bringing us one step closer to folding those together at some point as TOZ, Midnight, and kyrt suggested.
WHAT?
Excuse me, why are you comparing the Rogue to the monk? I'm comparing a Monk19/Rogue 1 to a Monk/20. The Monk 19 BLOWS HIM AWAY with that +10d6 SA. THe only thing he gives up is the capstone.
Likewise, the Rogue/19 Monk/1 blows away the Rogue/20 in the dmg department with that scaling UA dmg.
ADD to that, the broader selection of talents and stuff, and any monk who doesn't take a rogue level is pretty much an idiot.
I didn't read the ninja that close. Does it really get all that UA dmg and +SA on top of it, gutting both the rogue and the monk?
basically I'd force the ninja to make a tradeoff...advance UA dmg and flurry, or advance SA. The default should be half the advances of the monk, and half the SA of a rogue...at best. After all, the sneakiest ninja shouldn't be the greatest martial artists...that's why they have sneak attack.
==Aelryinth
Cool off. The half-progression for sneak attack is in, so your monk 19/rogue 1 is giving up a sutra (a valuable class feature in itself) and his capstone, and is perpetually a level behind on ki powers, ki strike, etc., in exchange for sneak attack +5d6.
For comparison, the Paizo ninja gets a full monk ki pool, full sneak attack progression, and full rogue talent progression, but has only 3/4 BAB.
For fighters sharing talents: it bugs me a bit that fighter talents are his main class feature, aside from incidentals, unless Leadership and armies get to be big following the creation of rules for those.
I'd like to change the 6th level Multiattack to Onslaught of Blows (no iterative penalty for 2nd attack). At 11th he'd get Improved Onslaught of Blows (no iterative penalty for 2nd and 3rd attacks), and at 16th he'd get Greater Onlslaught of Blows (all iterative attacks at full BAB). This would provide a small benefit at 6th (-0 instead of -2 for one attack), but provides strong incentive to stay a fighter instead of multiclassing into monk ASAP.
I'm not even going to go into all the reasons why Dex to hit for Melee is a bad idea. Let's just note that Str becomes completely unimportant then. And it isn't realistic. Being graceful and coordinated is no compensation for just being able to move a weapon incredibly fast because it's so light to you. Good big men beat good small men who are quicker. Str just works much better with skill in hand-to-hand combat.
==Aelryinth
We may actually delevel the characters somewhat so I don’t have to go back through and rebuild the main cast of adversaries just to fit their current power level.
When DMing, I try to avoid the "Sea Monster Syndrome," so I'm not too slavish about following "CR-appropriate encounters." Sometimes the threats are trivial, and the party wipes the floor with the enemy. Sometimes they're pretty close. Sometimes they're way too tough, and the party has to retreat.
Kirthfinder Friends ASSEMBL!!!!!!!!!!
so ok I am having trouble with parts of the Formation template:
How many squares can a formation target with a ranged attack? a number of squares equal to its total formation squares? if so what is the swarm damage?
Does evasion make the save against swarm attack 0?
Do squares dissappear in a formation after a certain amount of damage or do the ranks just thin? If they do disappear when and at what rate?
What should the swarm damage for melee be? do the number of squares you touch effect the damage level?
What effects happen to the "formation" of different level? can levels vary within a formation? if so how? does this effect the swarm damage as a whole?
Also I figured 1 1/2 damage from AoE's was fair as swarm
I was thinking that an entire formation can be buffed by radial effects (such as bardic stuff) but I dont know if thats too good for a bard (or martial).
The rules for managing a formation I almost have them to a T:
I think Profession could use some more use so I think I will make it profession (soldier), profession (sailor), etc for formations. Formations could probably also be used to clear forests (lumberjack), build walls (laborer) so I thought it fitting.
honestly with (soldier) I might just let that be knowledge warfare because then it is sort of a skill tax but I need to take a look at everything knowledge warfare already does to see if that would be fair (dont want to give too much bang for the buck in knowledge warfare so other skills get pail).
TOZ Kyrt Kirth and Derek: Any one point in the direction for one of these would be nice if you could.