|
Kirth's character sheet is reminiscent of the old 1e goldenrod sheets, mixed with the old Basic sheets. You still have to fill in the skills, but the layout is uncluttered as there isn't a lot of "white space", and fancy graphics are non-existent. They're not formatted like the standard 3.x/Pf sheet either.
It does include the most important character sheet feature of all though (at least in Kirth's and my opinion), a place to sketch your character.
|
|
Yeah... that doesn't work for some of us who SUCK at drawing of any kind lol. I have to either use a picture from something, or use my words to paint the image (is that so bad? This is an imagination based game afterall.)Kirth's character sheet is reminiscent of the old 1e goldenrod sheets, mixed with the old Basic sheets. You still have to fill in the skills, but the layout is uncluttered as there isn't a lot of "white space", and fancy graphics are non-existent. They're not formatted like the standard 3.x/Pf sheet either.
It does include the most important character sheet feature of all though (at least in Kirth's and my opinion), a place to sketch your character.
I've seen dudes put stick figures, additional equipment, mini-backgrounds, all kinds of things other than a sketch. It's a convenient bit of open space, though, so it can be used in a variety of creative ways, not simply pencil art.
1. How does using metamagic feats for things such as Eldritch Blast and Resonance work normally? (without innate metamagic)
It doesn't. Innate Metamagic allows you apply metamagic feats to spell-like abilities, which you can't otherwise do.
Do you have a character sheet for your system? If not are there plans to make them? (players dont like having to write in the new skills but love the new skills system)
My favorite sheet has blanks for the skills, so that won't be much help to you.
We will probably have another go around soon and I will inform you how it goes!
I look forward to hearing about it!
1. How does using metamagic feats for things such as Eldritch Blast and Resonance work normally? (without innate metamagic)It doesn't. Innate Metamagic allows you apply metamagic feats to spell-like abilities, which you can't otherwise do.
Do you have a character sheet for your system? If not are there plans to make them? (players dont like having to write in the new skills but love the new skills system)My favorite sheet has blanks for the skills, so that won't be much help to you.
We will probably have another go around soon and I will inform you how it goes!I look forward to hearing about it!
I will look into the write in your own skills sheets, my players just dont like having skills that dont exist on their sheet (like the ones you merged out)
I would particularly like to hear your thoughts on what a caster is supposed to do for a party. I have a player that doesn't ever want to play a buffer but loves playing casters. He doesn't feel the system is unfair he just wants to figure out exactly what you are going for as a probably the best play (really he knows there is no right and wrong as I told him). The idea is he wants to understand how magic in combat is supposed to work in your system so that way he can start to work towards being good at it. Pathfinder and 3.5 made casting in combat nearly effortless (no real planning, just point and shoot) so understanding how casting is intended for use in combat is in this player's mind important (no one is going to like a sorceror that keeps getting disrupted by a preemptive attack if he can never contribute).
Just wanted to hear your thoughts on the matter :)
On the flip side chaps.
I would particularly like to hear your thoughts on what a caster is supposed to do for a party. I have a player that doesn't ever want to play a buffer but loves playing casters. He doesn't feel the system is unfair he just wants to figure out exactly what you are going for as a probably the best play (really he knows there is no right and wrong as I told him). The idea is he wants to understand how magic in combat is supposed to work in your system so that way he can start to work towards being good at it. Pathfinder and 3.5 made casting in combat nearly effortless (no real planning, just point and shoot) so understanding how casting is intended for use in combat is in this player's mind important (no one is going to like a sorceror that keeps getting disrupted by a preemptive attack if he can never contribute).
Casters are harder to play now. They need to think about defensive tactics a lot more. Some examples follow, but overall, be aware that there will be a learning curve.
Did I mention that casters are worth a lot less without a tank blocking for them? Let me re-iterate that a few times. In 3.5, an all-caster team was maximally-efficient. In these house rules, some degree of team role synergy is expected (rogues make great advance mobile strikers, with fighters guarding caster allies, for example).
And done.
Eidetic Memory. WHY was this not in the core book?! I've been screwing around with spellbook requirements since PFRPG was released; this will solve so many issues I have with the wizard (and probably help out the players too). Is Dragon untouchable or something? This (or an equivalent) needs to be in Ultimate Magic. I honestly can not thank you enough for posting this.
Dragon is closed content, so they cannot reprint Eidetic Memory. They aren't interested in just reprinting rules under a different name for the most part. I'd like to see them put in such an option as well, but it is their call to make.
Was Eidetic Memory in the form of a feat, class feature?
Kirth, quick question about weapon damage. Do creatures of other than Medium size still have different damage dice, or do they all use the damage listed in the Weapons doc?
I'd still scale the damage up or down -- otherwise spells like enlarge person get devalued quite a bit. However, since scaling is standard, and it would be a pain to have S - M - L wielder columns, the Weapons document simply lists the damage for a Medium weapon.
Can I recommend we drop the different die for different sizes? You already get a bonus or penalty to Str for increasing/decreasing in size respectively. That changes how much damage you do already. Changing the dice as well is doubling up on it.
Interesting... and not a bad point. Lemme think about it.
I am curious about something:
This was never adressed in the Pathfinder books
For the hulking hurler, eventually you can start throwing some huge friking rocks. Like literally huge rocks.
This question also ties in with very large creatures and attacks from bigger weapons.
What about AoE damage with weapons? that Huge rock should hit a 3 by 3 square right?
Maybe damage for the larger weapons should remain the same but extremely large weapons can target larger areas, thus giving the reasonable and logical benefit for being larger while also not making the damage bigger.
just 2 cents id throw in, this may be too complicated to do.
Finished looking over the skills
Fly skill: I think you should remove the flying with wings clause from the Collision While Flying section. Even when flying without wings one should have a chance to fall if they run into something BIG.
Handle animal skill: you did not change most of the instances referring to the ride skill to the handle animal skill. Also under the subheading leap you left the jump skill reference, should be changed to Athletics.
Heal skill under the CPR heading. You reference returning the character to -9 hit points, I think you want to say negative hit points equal to their Con score + 1.
Perception skill under the check section, you repeat a paragraph twice.
Sleight of hand skill under the action, try again, and untrained sections, you still reference the escape artist skill.
Spellcraft Skill: you did not change most of the instances referring to the use magical device skill. Under Identify Construct Weaknesses and Abilities successful is misspelled. In the Special section after take 10 and aid another you will need to clarify which sections cannot be done after changing the use magical device reference.
Streetwise skill: the urban tracking and special sections still refer to the gather information skill. For the gather information subheading you changed the time required to 1d4 +1 hours but did not change this in the action section, causing an inconsistency.
I have one question on the survival skill. Would you want add a higher DC ability to allow one to resist climate extremes of cold, heat, altitude, etc similar to the altitude affinity, heat endurance, and cold endurance feats? I know you made most of these ranger abilities but it would be nice for other classes with survival (druid, bard, fighter, inquisitor) to gain some of these benefits. I would recommend making it something more like the barbarian’s endure elements ability (though I think barbarians should gain a resistance to lack of air due to high altitude only). A ranger could then benefit from the survival skill if he is placed in an extreme environment he does not yet have as a favored terrain.
Craft (fine art) skill: after the familiarity table the reference to a forgery check should be a craft (fine art) check.
Under the main knowledge skill section the word described is misspelled (under the planes reference).
Knowledge (lore) skill: in the Identify Creature Abilities and Weaknesses section successful is misspelled.
Knowledge (the planes) skill: in the Identify Ritual section approved is misspelled.
Knowledge warfare skill: under the Operate Siege Engine section requires is misspelled. Under the Identify Enemy Command comfortable is misspelled.
Linguistics skill: under the check section the craft writing check reference should be changed to a linguistics check.
Perform (acting) skill: in the disguise section references to a disguise check should be changed to a perform acting check After the familiarity table the reference to a spot modifier should be changed to a perception modifier. Under the special header change references to a disguise check to a perform (acting) check.
Perform dance skill: your examples reference the perform music categories.
Perform music, you need 10 not 9 skill ranks to be proficient in all the categories listed unless this is an exception to the needs 2 specific examples in each category.
Under the main profession heading you reference the sailing profession twice.
Profession mining skill: under the Detect Stonework Trap section the end of the paragraph should be changed from as a rogue can to as if you had equal ranks in disable device I suspect.
Profession sailing skill: under the Follow Course section the piloting check should be changed to the profession check. Also indicates should be indicate and steers should be steer.
Have you considered teaching your players how to make a basic sheet that works for them with their character's information? I've never really been that big on fancy character sheets, and typically just write things out in a relatively easy to read pattern on a sheet of notebook paper and call it good.
Makes things simple ya know.
While this is sometimes what I will do for NPCs and such as DM my players would never go for it... spoiled they are.
I will second the idea that flying shouldn't be automatic just because you don't use wings.
In fact to me it almost makes less sense that a wizard casting fly for the first time essentially flies "better" than birds who fly from birth do because they have the risk of falling easier.
just my personal opinion and I would like to hear your thoughts on this (this is the way it has always been done so maybe you just left it as is which i can understand)
|
While this is sometimes what I will do for NPCs and such as DM my players would never go for it... spoiled they are.
This is the sheet my wife made up, and I'll be using it for the foreseeable future.
This is the sheet my wife made up, and I'll be using it for the foreseeable future.
While this is sometimes what I will do for NPCs and such as DM my players would never go for it... spoiled they are.
YOU ROCK!!!!!
Finished looking over the skills
Good thing, too, as it appears the compilation was sloppy and poorly-checked on my end. I hope the classes and feats make a better showing! Thanks for your help here
1. Fly skill: I think you should remove the flying with wings clause from the Collision While Flying section. Even when flying without wings one should have a chance to fall if they run into something BIG.2. Handle animal skill: you did not change most of the instances referring to the ride skill to the handle animal skill. Also under the subheading leap you left the jump skill reference, should be changed to Athletics.
3. Heal skill under the CPR heading. You reference returning the character to -9 hit points, I think you want to say negative hit points equal to their Con score + 1.
4. Perception skill under the check section, you repeat a paragraph twice.
5. Sleight of hand skill under the action, try again, and untrained sections, you still reference the escape artist skill.
6. Spellcraft Skill: you did not change most of the instances referring to the use magical device skill. Under Identify Construct Weaknesses and Abilities successful is misspelled. In the Special section after take 10 and aid another you will need to clarify which sections cannot be done after changing the use magical device reference.
7. Streetwise skill: the urban tracking and special sections still refer to the gather information skill. For the gather information subheading you changed the time required to 1d4 +1 hours but did not change this in the action section, causing an inconsistency.
8. I have one question on the survival skill. Would you want add a higher DC ability to allow one to resist climate extremes of cold, heat, altitude, etc similar to the altitude affinity, heat endurance, and cold endurance feats? I know you made most of these ranger abilities but it would be nice for other classes with survival (druid, bard, fighter, inquisitor) to gain some of these benefits. I would recommend making it something more like the barbarian’s endure elements ability (though I think barbarians should gain a resistance to lack of air due to high altitude only). A ranger could then benefit from the survival skill if he is placed in an extreme environment he does not yet have as a favored terrain.
9. Craft (fine art) skill: after the familiarity table the reference to a forgery check should be a craft (fine art) check.
10. Under the main knowledge skill section the word described is misspelled (under the planes reference).
11. Knowledge (lore) skill: in the Identify Creature Abilities and Weaknesses section successful is misspelled.
12. Knowledge (the planes) skill: in the Identify Ritual section approved is misspelled.
13. Knowledge warfare skill: under the Operate Siege Engine section requires is misspelled. Under the Identify Enemy Command comfortable is misspelled.
14. Linguistics skill: under the check section the craft writing check reference should be changed to a linguistics check.
15. Perform (acting) skill: in the disguise section references to a disguise check should be changed to a perform acting check After the familiarity table the reference to a spot modifier should be changed to a perception modifier. Under the special header change references to a disguise check to a perform (acting) check.
16. Perform dance skill: your examples reference the perform music categories.
17. Perform music, you need 10 not 9 skill ranks to be proficient in all the categories listed unless this is an exception to the needs 2 specific examples in each category.
18. Under the main profession heading you reference the sailing profession twice.
19. Profession mining skill: under the Detect Stonework Trap section the end of the paragraph should be changed from as a rogue can to as if you had equal ranks in disable device I suspect.
20. Profession sailing skill: under the Follow Course section the piloting check should be changed to the profession check. Also indicates should be indicate and steers should be steer.
1. Done -- I totally agree.
2. Fixed. That was pure inattentiveness on my part.
3. I didn't want stronger creatures to be worse off after CPR, so I'm actually OK with -9. This also sets a minimum Con (10) to benefit from it.
4. - 7. Fixed in the master documents.
8. That's a great idea, and in general I'm in favor of granting skills additional uses. When I get a chance this weekend, I'll implement your suggestion and post it under the "Egg of Coot" avatar. Thanks!
9. - 20. Fixed.
I will second the idea that flying shouldn't be automatic just because you don't use wings. (this is the way it has always been done so maybe you just left it as is which i can understand)
I agree all around. The fact that "with wings" was left in there just means that I spent a lot more time and effort on classes and feats than I did on skills, and it shows. Thanks to everyone for catching things.
P.S. I've added a "credits" section to the main document -- Christopher, you receive primary credit for "Proofreading, v. 2.0" so far!
I'm going to work through the documents 1 at a time and give feedback here and there:
Armor Document- I like the consolidation going on in this document.
Not 100% that I like consolidating leather and padded as I think there is some room for differentiating between heavy cuir boli and heavy padded clothing.
Breastplate took a beating stat wise, I assume that you consider a breastplate alone to be something different and that Breastplate armor is a metal breastplate over brigandine or something like that. Honestly I've never been that satisfied with Breastplate's uber stats so I think it's a decent change.
One think that I've considered is going with shield breakdown as follows: Buckler +1/Light+2/Heavy+3/Tower+4 as I feel that the slight increase in AC makes Sword & Board more desirable and I don't really feel like the 3.x rules differentiate bucklers from light shield enough (absent shield bashing). Different strokes yadda yadda.
The other thing that seemed odd was the notes on movement in armor (25' move) seems to interact weirdly with your 1/2 movement full attack action. It seems like it would have movement in less than 5' increments which either requires rounding down :( or rounding up.
Overall good work although I would like to know if you differentiate special materials from the 3.x norms.
One think that I've considered is going with shield breakdown as follows: Buckler +1/Light+2/Heavy+3/Tower+4 as I feel that the slight increase in AC makes Sword & Board more desirable and I don't really feel like the 3.x rules differentiate bucklers from light shield enough (absent shield bashing). Different strokes yadda yadda.
We've merged Defensive Fighting, Combat Expertise, and Elaborate Parry into a more or less unified mechanic (see table in main Houserules document); people actively using shields get the biggest benefits. Also, the fighter's Armor Training talent applies to armor and shields both, and the benefits stack. Finally, there are a number of new shield feats. Overall, I was worried about going overboard in favor of shield use!
Skipping the Feats for now because I hate feat analysis
Houserule Document
Ability Scores-Fairly standard dice rolling mechanic
Favored Class- So basically racial favored class(es) +1. Sounds decent.
Hit Points- Fairly standard
Alignment-Hrmm, I'm okay with eliminating alignment but how does that impact spell effects? Does protection from evil get neutered or is a generic "protection" effect? etc.
Critical Failure- Since this is basically a skill use only rule how does that interact with take 20 which is essentially keep retrying until I get a maximum result?
Hero Points- Seems like it's fairly straight forward stuff although it seems like it favors PCs that can reasonably do a bunch of skill checks all the time. This seems like it could be gamed in order to accumulated quickly.
Level Advancement- Slow advancement is my preferred (actually I prefer glacial). The phantom class levels seems a bit strange though as presumably you would still collect Character level associated traits such as Ability score increases, improvements to BAB, more HD, etc. Further it would presumably factor into character experience in some manner. Short of some explanation/example I'm not really sure how this works in practice.
Opposed Checks- The bidding war seems intriguing but should probably be limited to certain types of skill checks. It seems like perception vs stealth is an inappropriate use of the bidding mechanic for example.
1. Alignment-Hrmm, I'm okay with eliminating alignment but how does that impact spell effects? Does protection from evil get neutered or is a generic "protection" effect? etc.
2. Critical Failure - Since this is basically a skill use only rule how does that interact with take 20 which is essentially keep retrying until I get a maximum result?
3. Hero Points - Seems like it's fairly straight forward stuff although it seems like it favors PCs that can reasonably do a bunch of skill checks all the time. This seems like it could be gamed in order to accumulated quickly.
4. Level Advancement - Slow advancement is my preferred (actually I prefer glacial). The phantom class levels seems a bit strange though as presumably you would still collect Character level associated traits such as Ability score increases, improvements to BAB, more HD, etc. Further it would presumably factor into character experience in some manner. Short of some explanation/example I'm not really sure how this works in practice.
5. Opposed Checks - The bidding war seems intriguing but should probably be limited to certain types of skill checks. It seems like perception vs stealth is an inappropriate use of the bidding mechanic for example.
1. All PCs except clerics/paladins/blackguards count as as "neutral."
2. Take 20 means you have no critical failure chance and also no hero point gain chance.3. I couldn't think of a slick mechanic to prevent it; thus the note about making pointless skill checks = automatic disqualification. Player & referee agreement is what limits things (I tend to only allow players at the table I trust anyway, and run a largely democratic game in terms of decisions).
4. One level in Expert, even by making you closer to a feat or whatever, doesn't make a huge impact in play. In fact, we don't even notice it except that the PC has something to reflect a back-story, for example.
5. I had an explanatory note and specific examples... did they not get into the final document? I'll go back and check.
---
Anyway, the main houserules doc is just an overview of minor stuff; the real meat of the houserules is in the classes and feats.
This is the sheet my wife made up, and I'll be using it for the foreseeable future.
While this is sometimes what I will do for NPCs and such as DM my players would never go for it... spoiled they are.
TOZ, we can be even better friends if you post or e-mail me a .doc version of this! And isn't that what you really want?
|
|
On a side note, does your gaming group host a public messageboard? It seems like it would be easier organize discussion with others by breaking it down into different categories (in much the same way that Paizo does here) that you and your group members could moderate themselves rather than having to constantly reference a constantly growing thread here.
None of us have the time or inclination to set up our own board. I think Jess Door has one for her group but I wouldn't intrude these rules on their board when they won't use them. Other than this thread, we have our Gamer Connection thread for any discussion we need to do.
TOZ, we can be even better friends if you post or e-mail me a .doc version of this! And isn't that what you really want?
How can I argue with that logic? And won't it be awesome if we come to Kirth's game with matching sheets? I'll get a blank doc version uploaded when I get home.
Kirth is Steal a combat manuever in your game?
if it was I was wondering how it would be done
I hated the fact that stealing something required a high strength and base attack when the one class that SHOULD be most likely to do it likely has neither of those.
Also with the Critical Dodge feat (which I am fond of) The reflex save seems easy at high levels and difficult at low levels.
Because I would propose that it should scale with level instead of 20 + Enhancement bonus of weapon wouldn't it be more scaling per say if it was 10 + Attacker's BAB.
I just feel like the save shouldn't be really easy for a fighter that has focused on criticals to have it so easily negated with no regard to the fighter's skills.
I would love to hear your thoughts though
Thanks Kirth, my OCD kicks in when I read word documents and I figure if I am going to edit it so I can use it I may as well share my work to benefit others.
I reviewed the Bard document today, and in doing so I noticed some inconsistencies I missed with the rogue and skills document.
The Twilight luck ability for rogues and bards is inconsistent. It is a +1 for rogues to saves and a (Su) ability while for bards it is +2 to saves and an (Ex) ability. I prefer the Bard interpretation, I thought the rogue's version was a little underwhelming. Also since bards can select a bardic lore allowing them to select a rogue talent it may be redundant, if you add a clause allowing them to select the rogue talent more than once (this similar clause could be added to the fighter talent choice also). Finally a comment to clarify that the rogue talent or fighter talent selected determines if it is an (Ex) or (Su) ability should be added if desired.
Under skills: the bluff skill’s subheading sense motive does not have “This use of the bluff skill takes 1 minute.”, one could place it instead under the action section if desired.
Back to the bard.
From the 1st page table. The 10th level special entry should have Skill tradition added. Major discord should be in italics in the 19th level special entry column.
Do you need “other” before class skills? Add (all) next to both the perform and profession skills. Question: would you like to change survival to be like endurance, a skald only class skill? I know in Monty python’s quest for the holy grail Robin’s minstrels were a great help for the knight’s survival, but I an not sure it fits here.
Under 6th level spells mass rage, what source has that spell, I cannot find it.
Under 7th level spells greater bestow curse and greater prying eyes are not in alphabetical order. I assume you wanted to add mass cure serious wounds to this level’s spell list. Discern location should be italicized.
For your example under spell theurgy, I think you example should read “For example, a 1st level wizard/9th level skald would cast spells as an 7th level wizard; spells of 0 through 3rd level would have verbal components only, whereas 4th level spells would have full verbal, somatic, and material components.” Also how would your change to allowing bards to have bonus spells with a high Int or Cha change this example if applicable?
Under Esoteric training: subheading eye for detail change reference of sense motive check to bluff check to sense motive. Subheading Heraldic Expertise, one may want to standardize the wording with the world traveler subheading, and I prefer the world traveling wording better for how often it can be used per day. Subheading rune lore. Did you really want to drop the clause “This rune lasts until dispelled but you cannot gain back your spell slot you used for this spell until it is discharged.” From your version 2 rule set? Seems it could be abused without the clause. Subheading street performer change intimidate check to bluff check
Discordant metamagic: Forceful Evocation is out of alphabetical order.
Loremaster: clarify wording “you become a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that you have ranks in if you so choose.” Then you can drop the next sentence.
Tradition keeper should be 5th and 17th level like your chart states. Subheading Metamagic song the end of paragraph 1 should read “so you cannot use this lore in conjunction with the Still Spell or Silent Spell feat or maintain a spell or inspiration while using this ability” I believe. Subheading martial prowess should likely read “At 5th level, a skald treats his class level as 1 level higher when calculating his base attack bonus (so a 5th level skald has BAB +4, rather than +3; a 7th level skald has BAB +6/+1, etc.). Starting at 17th level, you treat your class level as 2 levels higher when calculating your base attack bonus (i.e., you gain BAB +14/+9/+9 at 17th level, rather than staying at +13/+8/+8. A skald gains a 4th iterative attack (BAB +16/+11/+11/+11) at 19th level, and has a final base attack bonus of +17/+12/+12/+12 at 20th level.”
Major discord: add at 19th level
For table 3 two are out of alphabetical order, Instant daze, and I think it was inspire fatigue (cannot remember exactly now).
Page 10 Disappearing act, change himself to yourself
Note: Since the Skald and Minstrel key off of Int and Cha respectively some Cha references may want to be changed to Int or either instead. I included the ones I think may want to be changed.
Page 11 Instant daze, should the save DC be with the skald’s intelligence modifier rather than his charisma modifier? Instill fear, did you want the save DC to be casting ability modifier rather than charisma? Naturalism add a bard “of either type”, and change to “that” requires visual and audible components.
Page 12 Encourage failure, is it a mind-affecting ability? Grant move action and inspire will are not in alphabetical order.
Page 13 metered foot, change 2 references of “feat” to “inspiration”. Last paragraph remove “the” before “metered foot”. Beguiling, is it a mind affecting ability?
Page 14 Snowflake wardance. It would be a much better selection for a skald if it granted a bonus to hit based upon intelligence.
Page 15 Dishearten, doomspeak, and glorious epic, change DC to be based upon your casting ability modifier rather than always charisma? Doomspeak’s table should read 8 to 15 for targets. Impart maneuvers change yourself to himself.
Page 16 inspire excellence, wither to either.
Page 17 Bardic lore add “as” before “your bonded item”. Commanding should likely be just for a skald not both a skald and minstrel. In 2nd paragraph change references of fighter to skald and change DC to be based upon intelligence vs. Charisma.
Page 19 inspiration, lingering, based upon charisma for a minstrel and intelligence for a skald? Inspiration, masterful, should it be a +3 to fort saves also?
Page 21 Social graces and twilight luck, allow a max bonus of +5?
Hey Kirth I am just going to bring this up because I have a fey fan in my group:
The fey heritage feats seem really lackluster (other than the one with damage reduction which is dependent on other feats to be effective) Fey Blood grants a +2 to illusion and enchantment saves with a little flavor text. This pales in comparison to Iron Will which does so for all will saves, scales at 11th level and allows a reroll. While I do like the flavor text, its very very weak for a feat in comparison to just a few and the only feat that stacks from it is Fey Foundling (which is good and the other two aren't bad so that allows a decent set together) but all other feats I have read so far are pretty stand alone good per say.
Just my personal opinion (my player would scalp me otherwise... the pixie loving moron :P)
I've been enjoying the discussion, and thanks, Kirth, for your statement of design philosophy.
Just wondering, with all the talk of errata, etc. have revised documents been uploaded? If not, then when? :)
Kirth is Steal a combat manuever in your game?
It's a function of Sleight of Hand.
The fey heritage feats seem really lackluster (other than the one with damage reduction which is dependent on other feats to be effective) Fey Blood grants a +2 to illusion and enchantment saves with a little flavor text. This pales in comparison to Iron Will which does so for all will saves, scales at 11th level and allows a reroll. While I do like the flavor text, its very very weak for a feat in comparison to just a few and the only feat that stacks from it is Fey Foundling (which is good and the other two aren't bad so that allows a decent set together) but all other feats I have read so far are pretty stand alone good per say.
I agree. I almost cut them entirely, especially because they sort of step on the sorcerer's toes a bit; and I didn't consolidate them into one scaling feat for the same reason.
Your player's best bet is probably to take 1 level of sorcerer (fey bloodline), and then get the Practiced Bloodline feat. This gives you most of what the heritage feats do, only better. If he's a fighter or rogue or whatever, he can even take talents to improve his casting after that.
I like what you've done.
I also REALLY like Porpentine's Stealth Rules Rewrite
I haven't done a lot of digging into your Stealth rules - but do you have something comparable?
1. The Twilight luck ability for rogues and bards is inconsistent. It is a +1 for rogues to saves and a (Su) ability while for bards it is +2 to saves and an (Ex) ability. I prefer the Bard interpretation, I thought the rogue's version was a little underwhelming.
2. Under skills: the bluff skill’s subheading sense motive does not have “This use of the bluff skill takes 1 minute.”, one could place it instead under the action section if desired.
3. Back to the bard. From the 1st page table. The 10th level special entry should have Skill tradition added. Major discord should be in italics in the 19th level special entry column.
4. Do you need “other” before class skills? Add (all) next to both the perform and profession skills. Question: would you like to change survival to be like endurance, a skald only class skill? I know in Monty python’s quest for the holy grail Robin’s minstrels were a great help for the knight’s survival, but I an not sure it fits here.
5. Under 6th level spells mass rage, what source has that spell, I cannot find it.
6. Under 7th level spells greater bestow curse and greater prying eyes are not in alphabetical order. I assume you wanted to add mass cure serious wounds to this level’s spell list. Discern location should be italicized.
7. For your example under spell theurgy, I think you example should read “For example, a 1st level wizard/9th level skald would cast spells as an 7th level wizard; spells of 0 through 3rd level would have verbal components only, whereas 4th level spells would have full verbal, somatic, and material components.” Also how would your change to allowing bards to have bonus spells with a high Int or Cha change this example if applicable?
8. Under Esoteric training: subheading eye for detail change reference of sense motive check to bluff check to sense motive. Subheading Heraldic Expertise, one may want to standardize the wording with the world traveler subheading, and I prefer the world traveling wording better for how often it can be used per day. Subheading rune lore. Did you really want to drop the clause “This rune lasts until dispelled but you cannot gain back your spell slot you used for this spell until it is discharged.” From your version 2 rule set? Seems it could be abused without the clause. Subheading street performer change intimidate check to bluff check
9. Discordant metamagic: Forceful Evocation is out of alphabetical order.
10. Loremaster: clarify wording “you become a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that you have ranks in if you so choose.” Then you can drop the next sentence.
11. Tradition keeper should be 5th and 17th level like your chart states. Subheading Metamagic song the end of paragraph 1 should read “so you cannot use this lore in conjunction with the Still Spell or Silent Spell feat or maintain a spell or inspiration while using this ability” I believe. Subheading martial prowess should likely read “At 5th level, a skald treats his class level as 1 level higher when calculating his base attack bonus (so a 5th level skald has BAB +4, rather than +3; a 7th level skald has BAB +6/+1, etc.). Starting at 17th level, you treat your class level as 2 levels higher when calculating your base attack bonus (i.e., you gain BAB +14/+9/+9 at 17th level, rather than staying at +13/+8/+8. A skald gains a 4th iterative attack (BAB +16/+11/+11/+11) at 19th level, and has a final base attack bonus of +17/+12/+12/+12 at 20th level.”
12. Major discord: add at 19th level
13. For table 3 two are out of alphabetical order, Instant daze, and I think it was inspire fatigue (cannot remember exactly now).
14. Page 10 Disappearing act, change himself to yourself
15. Note: Since the Skald and Minstrel key off of Int and Cha respectively some Cha references may want to be changed to Int or either instead. I included the ones I think may want to be changed.
16. Naturalism add a bard “of either type”, and change to “that” requires visual and audible components.
17. Page 12 Encourage failure, is it a mind-affecting ability? Grant move action and inspire will are not in alphabetical order.
18. Page 13 metered foot, change 2 references of “feat” to “inspiration”. Last paragraph remove “the” before “metered foot”. Beguiling, is it a mind affecting ability?
19. Page 14 Snowflake wardance. It would be a much better selection for a skald if it granted a bonus to hit based upon intelligence.
20. Page 15 Doomspeak’s table should read 8 to 15 for targets. Impart maneuvers change yourself to himself.
21. Page 16 inspire excellence, wither to either.
22. (a) Page 17 Bardic lore add “as” before “your bonded item”. (b) Commanding should likely be just for a skald not both a skald and minstrel. (c) In 2nd paragraph change references of fighter to skald and change DC to be based upon intelligence vs. Charisma.
23. Page 19 inspiration, lingering, based upon charisma for a minstrel and intelligence for a skald? Inspiration, masterful, should it be a +3 to fort saves also?
24. Page 21 Social graces and twilight luck, allow a max bonus of +5?
1. The rogue version should be updated to match the bard one. As like-named bonuses, they do not stack if a bard/rogue takes them both.
2. I sort of wanted the time period for Sense Motive to depend on context -- will elaborate when I get a chance to write up revised Diplomacy and social interaction rules. Until then, use referee discretion.
3. Fixed on master document.
4. I sort of imagined a traveling minstrel as spending a lot of time walking from town to town (they get sick of him in one place at low levels); he'd have to camp out overnight at times. Survival is fine as a minstrel class skill.
5. 2nd level rage spell + Mass Effect Spell metamagic feat = 6th level mass rage.
6. Fixed. And, oddly, discern location was already italicized.
7. 8th level is correct. 1st level wizard + "+1 caster level" at bard 2,4,5,6,8,9,10 (7 levels) = 8th level.
8. Corrections made as advised, except under "street performer," you already get a bonus with Bluff checks, so eliminate the Intimidate reference with crowds entirely (redundant).
9. Fixed.
10. Should read, "At 4th level, you become a master of lore and can choose to take 10 on any Knowledge skill check (as long as you have ranks in the appropriate Knowledge skill)."
11. Yes! The table is correct; the text should match. Martial Prowess should read: "At 5th level, a skald’s base attack bonus increases by +1 (from +3 to +4). This means that a single-classed skald reaches BAB +6 (and gains an iterative attack) at 7th level instead of 8th. Starting at 17th level, your base attack bonus increases by an additional +1. A single-classed skald therefore gains a 4th iterative attack (BAB +16/+11/+11/+11) at 19th level, and has a final base attack bonus of +17/+12/+12/+12 at 20th level." In other words, it works consistently with multiclassing rules.
12. Qualifier added.
13. - 14. Fixed.
15. Let's simply add a note before the descriptions as follows: "Saving Throws: Unless otherwise noted, the save DC for all bardic inspiration effects is equal to 10 + half your bard class level + your Charisma modifier (for minstrels) or your Intelligence modifier (for skalds)." Then all save DC calculations in the individual descriptions can be deleted.
16. Add "of either type." Adding "that" is grammatically incorrect in this case (ignore the parentheses and you'll see).
17. – 18. Yes; fixed.
19. Change it to read, "Activating a snowflake wardance is a free action, and once activated, you add your Intelligence modifier as an insight bonus to attack rolls with any melee weapon you wield (to a maximum bonus equal to your bard level)."
20. – 21. Fixed.
22. (a) My doc already shows it correctly. (b) I prefer both; simply change flavor text to “bark an order or make a cajoling request.”
23. Fixed.
24. Fixed.
Also with the Critical Dodge feat (which I am fond of) The reflex save seems easy at high levels and difficult at low levels.
That's a thought... hmmm. What about, "In addition, once per day you can make a Reflex saving throw (DC 10 + attacker’s BAB) to turn a critical hit against you into a normal hit. The bonus you receive from the Dodge Critical feat applies as a circumstance bonus to this save. You must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed, and you must declare the attempt before damage is rolled."
Dunno; if it's a 1/day deal, maybe it should just be automatic. Or we could get rid of the 1/day thing entirely (Derek HATES them) and do something else. Opinions?
I'm all for removing 1/day limitations and balancing them with action costs or appropriate DCs.
I'm coming around to that point of view as well -- Derek tends to forget all his 1/day abilities anyway, and they just add one more thing to keep track of. I'll go through the feats and fighter talents and see if I can come up with solutions.
BTW, I'm unable to keep up with all of Christopher's excellent errata under this avatar, in addition to the master documents and the thread. The latter two I'll still do, but errata specifically discussed in this thread will not appear under the "About the EGG of Coot" heading. Any additions/corrections made outside of this thread will still appear under the avatar.
I know this is a pain in the neck, having to look in two different places, but on the flip side, upon request I'll be happy to email any of my players specific documents with the corrections already made.
|
|
BTW, I'm unable to keep up with all of Christopher's excellent errata under this avatar, in addition to the master documents and the thread. The latter two I'll still do, but errata specifically discussed in this thread will not appear under the "About the EGG of Coot" heading. Any additions/corrections made outside of this thread will still appear under the avatar.
I know this is a pain in the neck, having to look in two different places, but on the flip side, upon request I'll be happy to email any of my players specific documents with the corrections already made.
I'll hold off on any more corrections to the hosted files for now then, just so we don't have two slightly different versions floating around.
Not sure how much merit an opinion outside of the group holds, but I generally find 1/day abilities the least interesting of anything. I'd much rather have a smaller passive or at least 3/day than having something that I can use only once.
I'm very much of a 'balance abilities to be refreshed after every encounter' point of view person. I understand wanting there to be resource management through the day, but I would rather you have nearly all of your abilities every fight, so that you can have as many or as few encounters in the day as the story demands.
Not sure how much merit an opinion outside of the group holds, but I generally find 1/day abilities the least interesting of anything. I'd much rather have a smaller passive or at least 3/day than having something that I can use only once.
Added to the consensus, that helps. My gripe with 3/day is that it's even harder to keep track of than 1/day.
"Haven't you already done that 3 times?"
"I only counted twice."
"Let's see... once when the ogres attacked; then..."
(Play grinds to a halt).
So I'll look for automatic/"at will" functions preferentially.
EDIT: Or "per encounter." I like TOZ's logic on that one.
I'll hold off on any more corrections to the hosted files for now then, just so we don't have two slightly different versions floating around.
That's probably best. When you get back, we can reboot hosted docs with full errata.
P.S. If I don't see you before you ship out, be safe. We'll see you when you get back, amigo.|
|
I'll hold off on any more corrections to the hosted files for now then, just so we don't have two slightly different versions floating around.That's probably best. When you get back, we can reboot hosted docs with full errata.
P.S. If I don't see you before you ship out, be safe. We'll see you when you get back, amigo.
You still free the 16th? I'll let you know if they change anything on me.
You still free the 16th? I'll let you know if they change anything on me.
I hope so. My West Texas work shouldn't kick in again until late February, and last I heard there's some delay with the Louisiana job as well.