Too Many Types of Options?

[Kalyth]

I love options!!!! The more the merrier.

But I think PF (as 3.5 did as well) is making too many TYPES of options.

We have Feats, Class Abilities with suboptions, Prestige Classes, Archetypes, Arcane discoveries, etc...

All of these are abilities that you get we just have all these different names slapped on them. Some are feats, some are class abilities, some are prestige class abilities, etc...

What is the difference between a feat that grants a +2 bonus to damage and a class abilitie that grants a +2 to damage. It's all in a name and what slot you have to spend to get it.

I know at this point it would require a complete rework to sort them all out but this is what I think would be a better format.

Each class has its basic BARE BONES FEATURES which may consist of a few options for each Bare bone feature but mostly each class is just a framework. BAB, HD, Skill points, Spell progression. From that point on as you level up you just get to select class options, much like the Rogue Talents or Oracle Revelations. You pick and choose.

Example: Wizard 1st: (Pick 3) Scribe scroll, Familiar, Arcane Bond (item), Spell Focus, Specialization School (1st ability),

When the Wizard gained 3rd level he would gain an additional class option which he could select any class option he qualified for, even one of the options he skipped at 1st level.

Feats could still exist for the very generic abilities availible to all classes. Weapon Focus, Iron Will, etc... But things like Arcane Discoveries would just be added to the Wizard list of Class options. Metamagic Feats would just be class options for any class that had spell casting.

Throw in a few feats that add class skills to your class list,

Skill Training (General Feat)
Benefit: Select 3 skills, these skills are added to your list of class skills.

Highly Skilled: You recieve 1 additional skill point each time you gain a level. This bonus is retroactive and applies to levels you currently possess when this feat is selected.

Prestige Classes wouldnt really be classes they would just list a few Class options/Feats that were availible to memebers of that group exclusively. They could list a few that were availible to different classes that belong to the order.

Prestige Class Cabalist
Requirement: Memebership in the Cabal of the Broken Circle
Skills: 5 ranks knowledge Arcana, etc...

Cabalist Class Options
(one example)
Arcane Warding (5th level general class feature)
As a full round action you can invoke mystical warding to protect you from magical effects. This grants you a +4 bonus to save vs spells and spell-like abilities. The effects of this class feature remain in effect for a number or rounds equal to your intelligence modifier.

A fighter that managed to join could take this option so could a wizard.

Some options might be gear more toward a specific class but could be useful to others based on how they selected there options.

Archetypes would just be fluff with example templates of what class options to pick.

Just a thought.

[IkeDoe]

Most PF classes are more complex than 3rd Edition versions, it's the legacy of 3.5 ("compatibility") and the original d20 philosophy.
Yet, they make some old abilities into new feats.
Changing the name of metamagic feats in order to call them class options solves nothing.
Restricting player options doesn't reduce the number of different kind of abilities.
It's also a matter of tastes, some people wants characters with a lot of special abilities (Arcane Pool points were not part of the original Magus, i.e., it was demanded by some betatesters and disliked by others).
Also, not everything works (fine) with a system that allows you to choose abilities as you wish.

[Nebelwerfer41]

Know, their awl fine.

[KaeYoss]

The free-form systems are this way: -->

Pathfinder is class-based. Very liberal for a class-based system, but still not free-form. And that won't change.

Look for True20 for a hybrid, and see if anyone else has either come up with a Pathfinderised version of that system or is willing to collaborate.

I personally think the system is fine the way it is.

[Kolokotroni]

I agree, with Kaeyoss. What the OP is talking about is a free-form talent system. Something like D20 modern or Star Wars Saga edition. I very much dont like that kind of a system as it makes character creation far more challenging, and makes system mastery dramatically more important. As a flexible class system, paizo allows players to choose a general concept (base class + potential archetype) and thus pear down their potential choices.

Free form systems, especially expanded ones mean choose a class isnt really making a descision about your character's direction. Saying I am going to be a Jedi in Saga edition isn't actually a choice, you still have half a billion option combinations to choose from with no clear line of association between those that work well together. Breaking options into 'types' helps focus player choices and makes puting together a character far easier then a free form system.

[Kalyth]

Kolokotroni wrote:

I agree, with Kaeyoss. What the OP is talking about is a free-form talent system. Something like D20 modern or Star Wars Saga edition. I very much dont like that kind of a system as it makes character creation far more challenging, and makes system mastery dramatically more important. As a flexible class system, paizo allows players to choose a general concept (base class + potential archetype) and thus pear down their potential choices.

Free form systems, especially expanded ones mean choose a class isnt really making a descision about your character's direction. Saying I am going to be a Jedi in Saga edition isn't actually a choice, you still have half a billion option combinations to choose from with no clear line of association between those that work well together. Breaking options into 'types' helps focus player choices and makes puting together a character far easier then a free form system.

I see where you all are coming from and my example actually ended up straying away from my original point.

Take Arcane Discoveries. Did they really need to be given their own name. They can be taking inplace of a feat or a wizard bonus feat. Basically they are Feats. Why didnt they just call them Feats and add a "Prereq: Wizard X Level"

Also take bards for example. They have Bardic Performance, Bard Spells and Bard Masterpeices. The Masterpeices are basically just variant Bardic performances that you take a feat or exchange a spell known to get. Why weren't they just presented as feats. I guess they couldn't be because you can't exchange a spell known to get a feat. But they could have worked around that rather than adding a whole new type of ability/option.

It just seems odd to make an entirely new category rather than just making them fit in to the current system.

[Kolokotroni]

Kalyth wrote:

Kolokotroni wrote:

I agree, with Kaeyoss. What the OP is talking about is a free-form talent system. Something like D20 modern or Star Wars Saga edition. I very much dont like that kind of a system as it makes character creation far more challenging, and makes system mastery dramatically more important. As a flexible class system, paizo allows players to choose a general concept (base class + potential archetype) and thus pear down their potential choices.

Free form systems, especially expanded ones mean choose a class isnt really making a descision about your character's direction. Saying I am going to be a Jedi in Saga edition isn't actually a choice, you still have half a billion option combinations to choose from with no clear line of association between those that work well together. Breaking options into 'types' helps focus player choices and makes puting together a character far easier then a free form system.

I see where you all are coming from and my example actually ended up straying away from my original point.

Take Arcane Discoveries. Did they really need to be given their own name. They can be taking inplace of a feat or a wizard bonus feat. Basically they are Feats. Why didnt they just call them Feats and add a "Prereq: Wizard X Level"

Also take bards for example. They have Bardic Performance, Bard Spells and Bard Masterpeices. The Masterpeices are basically just variant Bardic performances that you take a feat or exchange a spell known to get. Why weren't they just presented as feats. I guess they couldn't be because you can't exchange a spell known to get a feat. But they could have worked around that rather than adding a whole new type of ability/option.

It just seems odd to make an interly new catagory rather than just making them fit in to the current system.

Basically they do this to keep from breaking the system unintentionally. Your own examples show the problems that occur when you dont rename things. Names of things are very important in the game's mechanics. If you dont distinguish with a new name, you have to account for all the rules that apply to the old name. Making it a new thing means you can more easily control the impact it would have on the game because there are no other rules that interact with it. If you for instance only wanted bards to get masterpieces you couldn't just call it a bardic performance or a feat and call it done. Other rules are built on top of the bardic performance rules including other classes/prestige classes/3rd party products. By making it a new thing you eliminate possible unintended interactions.

[Kalyth]

I can see your point on that but putting a prereq of Bard 5th level on a feat would cover it. It just seems that all the options are just spreading all over the place and it could very quickly turn into the 3.5 Splatbook reference nightmare.

[wraithstrike]

Kalyth wrote:

I can see your point on that but putting a prereq of Bard 5th level on a feat would cover it. It just seems that all the options are just spreading all over the place and it could very quickly turn into the 3.5 Splatbook reference nightmare.

Not really. I don't want to have to go to the feat section for something that is class specific and not an option and actually a given.

That would be an issue for me. Everything that is for class X only and is a fundamental part of the class should be under the class. Things that can be taken by other classes should be in the feat section.

Most people really don't have a problem with the current classification system. I think each thing having its own section is easier to reference if I am looking for a particular type of thing.

3.5 splat book reference was due to the number of books, not the number of different option names.

[Froze_man]

It's also easier in some ways for the GM if things like Arcane Discoveries or Bardic Masterpieces are separated out. The GM can just Say "No Arcane Discoveries" instead of "You can't take the feats with the prereq of Wizard level x from UM"

[Kolokotroni]

wraithstrike wrote:

Kalyth wrote:

I can see your point on that but putting a prereq of Bard 5th level on a feat would cover it. It just seems that all the options are just spreading all over the place and it could very quickly turn into the 3.5 Splatbook reference nightmare.

Not really. I don't want to have to go to the feat section for something that is class specific and not an option and actually a given.

That would be an issue for me. Everything that is for class X only and is a fundamental part of the class should be under the class. Things that can be taken by other classes should be in the feat section.

Most people really don't have a problem with the current classification system. I think each thing having its own section is easier to reference if I am looking for a particular type of thing.

3.5 splat book reference was due to the number of books, not the number of different option names.

This is part of my point about ease of use. If they are feats, they are in the feats section, along with 100's of other feats. If I am making a bard, and I have a list of things for the bard, it makes my job of creating the character much easier then if it was parked amidst lots of other things.

[wellsmv]

I can see your point of view.....

But you have to look at the best part of all these options. If you get some crazy idea, no matter how remote, chances are you can design a character within the class, feats, prestige and such that will allow it to work. The best part of the d20 system is the flexibility.