|
By your logic, APG should have been 100% about the six playtested classes. It wasn't.No. By my logic, APG should have been 1/3 magic stuff (judging from the oracle and witch), 1/3 feats and combat stuff (judging from the cavalier and inquisitor), and 1/3 "other" (judging from the alchemist and summoner). And guess what? It was pretty close.
Bad logic, summoner and alchemist are magical.
You do realize, that the moment the book is out I am coming back to this thread with a percentage breakdown of the amount of oriental stuff? Even if I'll eat crow as result, but I expect you to pony up if I don't :)
This is a playtest. That's like saying this movie Hearts & Flowers is asking a community of special effects experts to look at some of their footage and critique it to see if they have suggestions - and then being shocked the special effects specialists aren't shown mostly close up romance scenes...Hmmm. I'll concede my analogy was imperfect, but I suspect yours may be just as far off. I should probably just drop it, though -- it's obvious the community does not share my concern to the slightest degree.
Vote with your wallet, not with your words.
-Idle
Paladins need to be kicked out of the game, you filthy westophiles.
Gee wonder why I haven't heard that argument.
Fair question. The Paladin is not much like Charlemagne's henchmen and Cavalier brings along a lot of baggage that doesn't relate to the concept of a knight.
I would have to disagree. The Paladin is heavily based on a mixtures between the stories of Charlemagne's Twelve Peers, the classic Knights of the Round Table, and the Crusader. Mind you, this is more the romanticized stories than the probable reality of any of those, but hey, its a RPG ;) But here we see a more Occidental focused class (the name Paladin itself stems from Italian) yet no one complains about the paladin (unless we are talking about people playing Lawful Stupid, but that is another arguement for another time ;) )
The Cavalier is an English term, stemming from caballarius (Latin for horseman) and was used by Shakespere as such. The term was for Royalist supporters in the English Civil War. It was a political and social style and class, not necessarily meaning a knight. This argument sound familiar? This is an argument I hear about the Samurai and how it shouldn't be a class because samurai was a social class. So I dont see how having the Cavalier is ok, but Samurai is a big no no for people.
Admittedly, I always thought the argument for having classes being setting independent was flawed given that the classes themselves are based on characters from different settings. Im sure Conan the Barbarian wouldn't feel at home with Aragorn and Gandalf.
Paladins need to be kicked out of the game, you filthy westophiles.
Gee wonder why I haven't heard that argument.
:D
Using that logic, why isn't the Paladin just called a Holy Warrior? Or the Cavalier a Cavalryman?
Before D&D, paladin would most likely be used in a conversation to mean something like "champion" or "proponent," hence, the D&D version fits the English connotation of the word. Just like Barbarian is used to describe a brutal warrior, when the word originally meant "jibberjabber" in Greek, and was used to describe people of non-Greek cultures. Cavalier has a long history associated with it from the Romances, and fits as an archetype of a high medieval to Renaissance knight, smoothing over time and history in much the same way your basic King Arthur movie smooshes together Dark Ages combat and politics with high medieval concepts of love and religion and Renaissance type plate armor and jousting.
I do think the Ninja should just be a collection of new rogue talents, personally. No reason to complicate things so much.
And I notice there is no arcane warrior (as the paladin is a holy warrior and the ranger is a nature warrior) here.
*sigh*
I'd assume that is what the Magus is for. Wouldn't be surprised if there was a more martial-focused archetype in UC
|
I'd assume that is what the Magus is for. Wouldn't be surprised if there was a more martial-focused archetype in UCI do think the Ninja should just be a collection of new rogue talents, personally. No reason to complicate things so much.
And I notice there is no arcane warrior (as the paladin is a holy warrior and the ranger is a nature warrior) here.
*sigh*
I will just say that the magus to fighter and wizard/sorceror is NOT analogous to what the ranger is to the druid or the paladin is to the cleric.
I don't think a full BaB / half caster change to the magus is really an archetype anymore...
I will just say that the magus to fighter and wizard/sorceror is NOT analogous to what the ranger is to the druid or the paladin is to the cleric. I don't think a full BaB / half caster change to the magus is really an archetype anymore...
For what it's worth, under the v. 2.0 houserules, Sheraviel works beautifully as a fighter 6/diviner 1.
BAB +6, 3 fighter talents (one of which is a multiclass substitute), and CL 4th (2nd level spells).At 20th (ftr 19/div 1), she'd be BAB +19, CL 10th, 5th level arcane spells.
|
Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
|
|
Take your argument, and swap "Gunslinger" and "Ninja" and you've summed up my feelings. I don't like guns in my fantasy, but just like anything Paizo publishes, individual GMs are not going to use 100% of it. It's a toolkit, and Paizo shouldn't deprive lots of people who want Ninjas (or Gunslingers!) just because other people don't.
Give a fighter a gun, he's a gunfighter.
Give a rogue tabi socks and throwing stars, he's a ninja.
Let's have base class creep and bloat, yay!
Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
Not entirely true. That all depends on if you are going for the historical view or the idealized view. If it is historical then I agree with you. I think however the idealized paladin would disagree.
|
|
Not entirely true. That all depends on if you are going for the historical view or the idealized view. If it is historical then I agree with you. I think however the idealized paladin would disagree.Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
You still don't need a base class to fill either concept. I'm afraid people want game companies to do all of their imagining for them these days.
|
|
Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
Yeah, and the Gunslinger is there to make all those trigger happy Texans, well, happy. Yeah, I know you're from Texas ;)
|
|
So when do we meet Cadogan's far off cousin?Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
Probably two seconds after never. I am so burned out on Japanophiles it isn't even funny.
Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
In case you didn't read the PDF, that's exactly what it says about the classes. For example
Role: The ninja spends almost all of her time honing her
skills, practicing her art, or working on her next assignment.
Even when not specifically working, the ninja is ever vigilant
and ready for the situation to turn deadly. Her line of work
earns her many enemies, but it is a list that she frequently
reduces through assassination and misdirection. The ninja
is an alternate class for the rogue core class.
Role: While typically sworn to the service of a lord, a
samurai is usually given free reign as to how he performs
that service. As such, a samurai can sometimes be found
with other adventurers, taking the fight to the enemies
of his master. Other samurai become ronin, striving to
serve an ideal without paying fealty to a lord. In either
case, the samurai makes for a powerful ally, capable of
withstanding nearly any harm while dispatching his foes
with deadly precision. The samurai is an alternate class
for the cavalier base class.
In fact, it even states that Samurai can simply take Cavalier orders. So as you can see these classes are just the original ones only a bit more fluff focused. Hope this helps.
And seriously, enough with the xenophobic remarks. It doesn't help anyone's argument.
|
|
You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
|
|
You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).
|
|
And seriously, enough with the xenophobic remarks. It doesn't help anyone's argument.
Um, disliking an annoying geek subculture =/= hating the culture they worship. I have no problem with the nation of Japan (I buy their cars and consumer electronics), the Japanese people, or their culture.
I have a huge problem when probably half the hard core Japanophiles I meet looking for gamers are 40 year old slimy looking weirdos who insist on only playing prepubescent girl ninjas. It creeps me out, sorry.
Or do you not know the difference?
And, again, a samurai is a Japanese cavalier, a ninja is a Japanese rogue. The only reason they need base classes is to appease that subculture.
|
|
About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
You're actually kind of making my point.Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
What we need is more greek flavored classes. Why don't we have a phalanx fighter base class? Then we could include some "greek themed stuff" like yelling and kicking people into pits.
Wait they did that? It's an archetype? In the APG?
Hint hint wink wink nudge nudge
-Idle
|
|
Yeah, and the Gunslinger is there to make all those trigger happy Texans, well, happy. Yeah, I know you're from Texas ;)Sigh.
Now, imagine somebody runs a game not set in Golarion - and that's quite a lot of people. Pathfinder ruleset is slowly becoming THE ruleset, and as result more and more homebrewn campaign switch over. Not to mention Greyhawk, FR, 'Lance, 'Scape, 'Jammer and whatever else D&D setting fans that slowly convert to The One And Only True Way Of Pathfinder.
Now imagine somebody has Ninjas and Samurai there. Should he really be forced to buy a Golarion Campaign Setting book for that?
Samurai = Japanese fighter with a fancy sword.
Ninja = Rogue with black pajamas, a mask and a scroll of passwall.The only reason these need a base class is so Japanophiles feel special.
Gunslinger = fighter with a gun.
And, actually, the reason I don't care for them putting these in a core type book (instead of a Golarion book) is, well, the same problem I had with WotC splat. Players get whiny when you don't let them play everything available. There are no guns in my homebrew, and, invariably, someone is going to argue that they should get to play a Gunslinger because it's Pathfinder "Official".
|
|
About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
Nope. You don't have a problem with Paladin (who, one can say, is there to appease WASP holy warrior might makes right crowd), but you do have a problem with asian inspired classes.
|
|
You're actually kind of making my point.Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
What we need is more greek flavored classes. Why don't we have a phalanx fighter base class? Then we could include some "greek themed stuff" like yelling and kicking people into pits.
Wait they did that? It's an archetype? In the APG?
Hint hint wink wink nudge nudge
-Idle
Considering the Oracle base class has zero to do with historical oracles, I don't see your point.
|
|
Nope. You don't have a problem with Paladin (who, one can say, is there to appease WASP holy warrior might makes right crowd), but you do have a problem with asian inspired classes.About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
I have all kinds of problems with the Paladin.
But, they're not in the Ultimate Combat book.
Considering the Oracle base class has zero to do with historical oracles, I don't see your point.
You're actually kind of making my point.Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
What we need is more greek flavored classes. Why don't we have a phalanx fighter base class? Then we could include some "greek themed stuff" like yelling and kicking people into pits.
Wait they did that? It's an archetype? In the APG?
Hint hint wink wink nudge nudge
-Idle
Was my sarcasm in support of your point missed; or is this sarcasm 2 layers deep?
-Idle
|
|
Considering the Oracle base class has zero to do with historical oracles, I don't see your point.
You're actually kind of making my point.Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
What we need is more greek flavored classes. Why don't we have a phalanx fighter base class? Then we could include some "greek themed stuff" like yelling and kicking people into pits.
Wait they did that? It's an archetype? In the APG?
Hint hint wink wink nudge nudge
-Idle
Was my sarcasm in support of your point missed; or is this sarcasm 2 layers deep?
-Idle
Snark not directed at you, actually. ;-)
And seriously, enough with the xenophobic remarks. It doesn't help anyone's argument.Um, disliking an annoying geek subculture =/= hating the culture they worship. I have no problem with the nation of Japan (I buy their cars and consumer electronics), the Japanese people, or their culture.
I have a huge problem when probably half the hard core Japanophiles I meet looking for gamers are 40 year old slimy looking weirdos who insist on only playing prepubescent girl ninjas. It creeps me out, sorry.
Or do you not know the difference?
And, again, a samurai is a Japanese cavalier, a ninja is a Japanese rogue. The only reason they need base classes is to appease that subculture.
I do know the difference, but again, you are making the assumption that anyone that wants to play a ninja or samurai is a "40 year old slimy looking weirdo who insists on only playing prepubescent girl ninjas". There are plenty of people that would like to see these classes because they actually enjoy the folklore behind these concepts. Just like people enjoy playing the swashbuckler or the holy warrior or the savage barbarian, some people like to play the honorable samurai or even the wandering ronin. Grouping people that like ninjas with these perverts you describe would be like saying anyone that wants to play a paladin is a hyper christian anglophile. Its untrue and doesn't really help anyone's argument for or against these classes.
For the record, I do think that the ninja and samurai should be archetypes. Thought the way the two classes are set up in the PDF keep the ninja/samurai similar to their rogue/cavalier counterparts, but add slight differences to them mechanically that fit the folklore behind them. So I like it.
About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
They already have that, it's called the Polearm Master.
|
|
They already have that, it's called the Polearm Master.About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
I thought they were kind of like "kits" or "styles" in the APG, not base classes. I don;t own the book yet, but that was my assumption.
|
|
And seriously, enough with the xenophobic remarks. It doesn't help anyone's argument.Um, disliking an annoying geek subculture =/= hating the culture they worship. I have no problem with the nation of Japan (I buy their cars and consumer electronics), the Japanese people, or their culture.
I have a huge problem when probably half the hard core Japanophiles I meet looking for gamers are 40 year old slimy looking weirdos who insist on only playing prepubescent girl ninjas. It creeps me out, sorry.
Or do you not know the difference?
And, again, a samurai is a Japanese cavalier, a ninja is a Japanese rogue. The only reason they need base classes is to appease that subculture.
I do know the difference, but again, you are making the assumption that anyone that wants to play a ninja or samurai is a "40 year old slimy looking weirdo who insists on only playing prepubescent girl ninjas". There are plenty of people that would like to see these classes because they actually enjoy the folklore behind these concepts. Just like people enjoy playing the swashbuckler or the holy warrior or the savage barbarian, some people like to play the honorable samurai or even the wandering ronin. Grouping people that like ninjas with these perverts you describe would be like saying anyone that wants to play a paladin is a hyper christian anglophile. Its untrue and doesn't really help anyone's argument for or against these classes.
For the record, I do think that the ninja and samurai should be archetypes. Thought the way the two classes are set up in the PDF keep the ninja/samurai similar to their rogue/cavalier counterparts, but add slight differences to them mechanically that fit the folklore behind them. So I like it.
Again, I have no problem with the culture or the concepts. I am just dreading the next time I have to look for players, I don't like saying "no".
Ninja can have a subsection here, but why can't Cleaves have it's own subsection in homebrew?Huh?
I yam in Ur flamewar chanting offtopic! LOL.
But seriously, if you don't know what Cleaves is it's in homebrew.This monster is more ontopic.
52. Angry Bedouins
You wander down the tunnel and out into a dust storm. Somewhere along the way you exitited into a valley. You are instantly taking fire from a group of three Desert Nomads with oddly shaped crossbows that fire repeatedly and with great noise. They keep screaming until the PCs or they are dead.
AK-47: 6 rounds per round (1d8)/Range: 20/60/120
If a game world allows oriental monsters, then yes, ninja. If it allows bad guys to have guns, then yes, allow the gunslinger.
Do you want no Oger Mages in your game? How about Gold Dragons?
I thought so.
|
|
Ninja can have a subsection here, but why can't Cleaves have it's own subsection in homebrew?Huh?I yam in Ur flamewar chanting offtopic! LOL.
But seriously, if you don't know what Cleaves is it's in homebrew.
This monster is more ontopic.
52. Angry Bedouins
You wander down the tunnel and out into a dust storm. Somewhere along the way you exitited into a valley. You are instantly taking fire from a group of three Desert Nomads with oddly shaped crossbows that fire repeatedly and with great noise. They keep screaming until the PCs or they are dead.
AK-47: 6 rounds per round (1d8)/Range: 20/60/120
If a game world allows oriental monsters, then yes, ninja. If it allows bad guys to have guns, then yes, allow the gunslinger.
Do you want no Oger Mages in your game? How about Gold Dragons?
I thought so.
Re: The AK's RoF.
You know automatic fire is solely for suppression, even .60 cal, right? If you fire on heavy auto, you take SERIOUS hits on accuracy at anything but close range. Killing is done with single shots. Heck, they took the full auto option away from U.S. soldiers and replaced the highest setting with a three round burst. Wasting ammo (which is what full auto does if used for anything but suppression) is bad. YOu can only carry so much.
Problem with gamers? They want everything to be far better than it was. Like the samurai. Any contemporary Western soldier, properly equipped with chain mail, shield and a good weapon from the era would wipe the floor with a samurai. Katanas aren't made to penetrate western style armor.
Heck, all those highly trained katana wielding guys at Guadacanal in WWII got their asses handed to them by barely trained G.I.s with bayonets.
heck; i like playing prepubescent girl ninjas. and i am not a slimy looking 40 year old. i am a scruffy looking 22 year old. and when i get the motivation to fully shave my beard, i can easily pass myself off as a high school student.
i can turn almost any character class into a Moefied little girl that either is prepubescent or looks like it. i hae done it before with a variety of casters and skill monkeys. and a few martials too.
P.S. yes, i did intentionally insert the link to tvtropes.
Spoiler:They already have that, it's called the Polearm Master.About as hard as it is to say "my guy's a Paladin" and put some ranks in Knowledge (religion). Same for Ranger and Survival and Barbarian and, erm, Craft (loincloth).You can switch Paladins to Sohei. You can Switch Elemental Wizards to Wu Jen. Cannot you switch Samurai in just another order of vanilla western cavalier, if asian theme is unneded in the setting?
Really, there is A LOT of stuff to comment and fix in the playtest. What's people reaction 'til now?
"Asian themed classes UNCONCEIVABLE!!"
"Ninja is too stroooooong compared to rogue (ORLY?)"
"Class Bloat!!!".
Yeah. I definitively do not want new and diverse options in books. I want all the splats from now to next edition being the variant of the same 2-3 things. :(
Having to have a base class for every variation of fighter and rogue isn't class bloat?
How hard is it to say "my guy's a Samurai" and put some ranks in Perform: Tea Ritual?
You're actually kind of making my point.
Next base class: The Halberder.
Because every concept needs a base class.
I thought they were kind of like "kits" or "styles" in the APG, not base classes. I don;t own the book yet, but that was my assumption.
I don't know how kits worked in 2e, but the way archetypes work is you swap out various class features for new ones. For example, with the Polearm Master, you replace Bravery and Armor and Weapon Training and Mastery with various abilities that make you better at fighting with polearms. All of the Fighter archetypes do the same thing (although some don't replace Bravery).
The Gunslinger is doing the same, albeit to a larger extent, changing the good save and bonus feats, but it's the same thing: You get Deeds instead of Armor Training/Mastery, Gun Training instead of Weapon Training, Brave and Tough replacing Bravery and half of the bonus feats, True Grit replacing Weapon Mastery, plus Grit and a free firearm(s). It's just such a larger change of abilities that it's more readable to present in the style of a Base Class.
It doesn't say their plus to hit, because there isn't any!
Probably one level of warrior per.
Female Halflings consider Moefieding a survival technique.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
I thought they were kind of like "kits" or "styles" in the APG, not base classes. I don;t own the book yet, but that was my assumption.
I don't know how kits worked in 2e, but the way archetypes work is you swap out various class features for new ones. For example, with the Polearm Master, you replace Bravery and Armor and Weapon Training and Mastery with various abilities that make you better at fighting with polearms. All of the Fighter archetypes do the same thing (although some don't replace Bravery).
The Gunslinger is doing the same, albeit to a larger extent, changing the good save and bonus feats, but it's the...
Thanks for the info.
And, actually, the reason I don't care for them putting these in a core type book (instead of a Golarion book) is, well, the same problem I had with WotC splat. Players get whiny when you don't let them play everything available. There are no guns in my homebrew, and, invariably, someone is going to argue that they should get to play a Gunslinger because it's Pathfinder "Official".
Tell them "no."
I'm running an all-drow game, and if someone wanted to run a surface dwarf, halfling, human, or whatever in my game, I would tell them "no" because it's an all-drow game. Even though all of those other races are in the Core Rulebook.
Same thing for someone wanting to play a gunslinger in a gun-less campaign setting.
Or an evil character in a good campaign.
Or a wizard in a no-magic campaign.
And so on.
If someone argues that they should be able to play a gunslinger just because that class is in an official Paizo product, tell them "that's not in my world."
And if you can't handle that, maybe you shouldn't be GMing.
Again, I have no problem with the culture or the concepts. I am just dreading the next time I have to look for players, I don't like saying "no".
And here we have the crux of it.
You're inability to grow a set of cajones...
A) ...has absolutely no bearing on my game or likes/dislikes therein.
B) ...gives you no right to post insulting remarks, one after another, on the forums, deriding anyone who likes Anime.
C) ...is your own damn problem, so quit whining to me. I have no trouble saying NO. May I suggest counseling for your issues, or perhaps a change of hobbies if you can't work up the backbone to say no in a game you are purportedly running?
EDIT: Ironically, Ninja'd by a rather more polite SKR. :)
|
|
And, actually, the reason I don't care for them putting these in a core type book (instead of a Golarion book) is, well, the same problem I had with WotC splat. Players get whiny when you don't let them play everything available. There are no guns in my homebrew, and, invariably, someone is going to argue that they should get to play a Gunslinger because it's Pathfinder "Official".Tell them "no."
I'm running an all-drow game, and if someone wanted to run a surface dwarf, halfling, human, or whatever in my game, I would tell them "no" because it's an all-drow game. Even though all of those other races are in the Core Rulebook.
Same thing for someone wanting to play a gunslinger in a gun-less campaign setting.
Or an evil character in a good campaign.
Or a wizard in a no-magic campaign.
And so on.
If someone argues that they should be able to play a gunslinger just because that class is in an official Paizo product, tell them "that's not in my world."
And if you can't handle that, maybe you shouldn't be GMing.
I can handle "no", I have a daughter. The problem is, after WotC splat hell, a lot of players these days act like a child when told "no".
As to not GMing, I didn't for a while. All of the dudes I games with for years moved away or had too many commitments to continue in the hobby, so I tried out a bunch of groups when I got out. It took me almost two years to collect enough people who could roll with whatever and not whine about restrictions. Maybe Houston gamers are whinier than others, but the sense of "I'm entitled to play anything in a book I payed $30 for in any game ever" is probably more prevalent that you think (or would like to admit).
And you have some advantages over me. You're a famous game designer, a lot of people in the hobby would play with if you told them they had to play a one armed halfling commoner with halitosis. Also, your game is probably people in or close to the industry, so they're more likely than not a lot less insistent on getting to play whatever, and are into your concept.
I'm not saying you're not right, I'm just saying it's harder in the trenches than at the top to find good players willing to try something different than the norm.
And if you can't handle that, maybe you shouldn't be GMing.
(Emphasis mine).
The key word is: Master.
You're inability to grow a set of cajones...
Uh...I'm gonna say this is not HD's problem.
|
|
And if you can't handle that, maybe you shouldn't be GMing.(Emphasis mine).
The key word is: Master.
Too bad eight years of explicitly taking that power away from GMs weakens that statement. It's a player driven game now, GMs (unless they're lucky enough to be game designers or never have to scramble for players due to circumstances) are just there to read the boxed text and roll the dice.