|
None that are stickied, no. All I can do is give you my opinion:
If you're worried about banning something, I'd say the summoner from the Advanced Player's Guide is your guy.
Other than that, if balance is really a prime concern for you, I would try to somehow forget that fact.
The game's not 100% balanced. But it is fun. That's all I have.
I agree on banning Summoner. More because he slows the game down and his rules are hard to adjucate than it is that he is actually too powerful. (Note that "Summoner" is an expansion class in the APG, it does not refer to a Wizard that choses the specialty school of Conjuration.)
As far as "magic overtaking non-magic" it depends on what you mean. If each of your PCs are selfish and every-man-for-himself, then you'll really only want to play in the level 5-8 range (before that magic is too weak, and after that, magic is too powerful). However, if your party is willing to work together (for example, the Wizard is comfortable spending some of his limited spells (but not nessecarily rounds in combat) to buff the Fighter) then you can play until around level 12 or so and keep everyone contributing equally to combat.
But really, if balance is a concern, you need to clamp down hard on any expansion book. (and note that d20pfsrd will label expansion books as "core") It's not that a particular class/feat/spell is overpowered, but certain combinations and synergies are much more powerful than others. More than any edition of D&D before it, Pathfinder really relies on PC-skill and system-mastery to determine combat-effectiveness.
Good luck and have fun!!
Polymorph was a problem in 3.5, but has been fixed in Pathfinder.
Alter Self is only a problem if you give the PCs free reign of the Bestiary (or worse, all Bestiaries). If you limit it to "things you've encountered in this campaign" you'll be fine. (Really, the only problem I've seen with Alter Self is Troglodytes: you could just blame that creature and be done with it.)
Here is Golarion in wiki-form.
If you want to make it so that cantrip castings are limited to 3+castingmod times per day, that might make things easier for you, but I wouldn't restrict spells any further than that.
Casting-backlash is too hard to implement in Pathfinder. You either make it crippling, or too easy to circumvent. Leave it out.
|
I wouldn't worry about trying to dial back the spellcasters. Pathfinder does a pretty good job of making non-casters as much fun to play as casters.
The summoner *is* potentially broken, and will require a lot of dm rulings as situations come up. Not to mention pets/companions that participate in combat always tend to drag the game down a bit.
As long as you follow the wealth-by-level guidelines, you'll be fine.
The wiki will tell you the population level of each location, and location background, political situation, whatever might be relevant story-wise. The CRB can take you from there in determining what kind of stuff the players might be able to purchase.
As far as encounters go, those are going to fall more in line with the adventure paths set out by pazio. Of course, it's pretty easy to design your own, but the modules are even easier if you've got the spare cash to toss at them.
Thanks for the link! Does the wiki include mechanics for a DM?
Dunno the lingo to explain it better, the behind the scenes like how many in a city, gp value of things, encounters, etc.
Gamemastery Guide by Paizo is a good resource for all the behind-the-curtain and managing-the-players information.
|
I don't think arbitrarily banning anything is good advice.
There are so many different DMing styles out there that something that seems unbalanced in one group is not unbalanced in another group.
One of the things I learned about my own DMing about a year-and-a-half ago, for example, was that Barbarians and Wizards in my games are significantly better than Fighters and Sorcerers. Just because my sessions have fewer combats so Wizards don't run out of spells and Barbarians can Rage every fight.
I've spent a year-and-a-half trying to adjust my style to make that more balanced.
But still, just because the Summoner is seemingly unbalanced in some groups doesn't mean it will be in yours.
My advice, and the policy I use for my games, is to allow the Player to attempt what he or she wants to attempt and just let everyone know that if, after a few sessions something looks unbalanced, the PC will have to be adjusted.
I've seen the Witch as potentially unbalancing. I was prepared to create a couple Houserules to make the Witch more balanced (which we could negotiate out-of-game) but decided to try a couple adjustments to how I design the occassional encounter instead and voila, the Witch is no longer unbalanced in my games.
(Every once in a while, sure, throw a single Baddie against the PCs and their Witch with a low Will Save and let the Witch get that "unbalancing" Sleep Hex. ... But also design occassional encounters where the Witch doesn't ruin everything with a simple Sleep Hex.)
If you use the APG, there is a rogue variant called swashbuckler. Also, the mobile fighter variant, also from the APG, is very similar, depending on feats and skills taken.
If you use the APG, there is a rogue variant called swashbuckler. Also, the mobile fighter variant, also from the APG, is very similar, depending on feats and skills taken.
WOW! Mobile fighter would be a great swashbuckling hero type! Never even crossed my mind! I've only seen them with less RP and more "mechanics" in tabletops and it kinda gave me a mental block to the archtype. Jeff, thanks! I know it wasn't in a reply to me, but gosh this is a perfect fit for some ideas that had been perculatin' in the birdbrain o' mine. Thanks for the inspiration.
Greg
|
|
I strongly suggest against adding in 3.5 material. All the splat books from 3.5 ended up in a big juicy power creep orgy. And once you start allowing it in, your players will crave more and more, until they're surrounded by empty pizza boxes and your boss is calling you up to ask where you've been all week long.
Seriously, tears and wrath my friend, tears and wrath.
Also, it breaks the way skillpoints are supposed to be used. I don't think there's a decent way to convert it to pathfinder without removing a lot of the unique features.
Flaws are nice, if you tell the player that you get to pick the flaws. Otherwise, not really so balanced. Traits work well though.
The feat tax for dex fighters is something of much discussion. Two-weapon fighting is considered by some to be a suboptimal offensive choice. The tradeoff being better touch ac, better reflex saves, and more dice rolling. Adding dex stack for damage though could quickly raise the TWF above and beyond the realms of good balance.
Generally, I suggest not offering things to the players unless 1., they request them from you or 2.) You have an important storyboard reason to want to increase the number of dex fighters in your world.
As far as non-standard races, a couple suggestions: Stay AWAY from the noble drow. Just rule that out right off the bat.
The bestiary talks about monster players on page 313 and 314. In the Core rulebook, page 405-406, there's more talk about monstrous races and it lists some alternative races that are considered balanced enough to play.
In the case of drow, the crb suggests that if you allow a player to play a drow, the drow should constitute a class level. So in a party of level 3 characters, the drow character would have two class levels and be equal to a third level character.
|
|
In my games, excepting first level which is max hitpoints, we roll for hitpoints. In some campaigns, I offer hitpoint rerolls if you roll less than half.
Some people just can't roll decent numbers for HP. I kid you not, one player who was running a fighter rolled a 1 for hitpoints at every level from 2 to 5. If he hadn't statted his con up, he would have been hurting a lot more. As it was, he's actually the reason I moved away from rolling once and moving on. :p
It's very possible though to have casters with more hitpoints than the barbarian. There are many ways to stat up a character, lots of concepts which can result in odd things for classes. It's not necessarily wrong, as long as both the wizard and the barb are having fun.
|
|
For my money, I enjoy the somewhat random act of rolling elements for my character. Rolling the hitpoints of my character, even if there's a set minimum such as at least half, really feels like a visceral part of making the character my own. There might be a dozen people with similar mechanical choices, but no one will have the exact same background, or the same experiences, or the same hp rolls at each level.
I try not to remove rolling elements when possible, because the act of rolling is a significant portion of the game attraction. There are games that involve no rolling at all, or very little rolling. Other games involve rolling every little detail. I think pathfinder does an excellent job of finding the right balance between rolling for effect, and just rolling.
Similar to my earlier advice, don't tweak something until you see a real need about it, and then try to keep the change as minimalistic as you can :p
If it were my game, I'd let the players roll normally until/unless I recurring problem appeared. One bad roll for hp isn't devastating. Bad rolls for 3+ levels and it's time to help the poor guy who can't roll a 10 to save his character's life. :)
Thats very nice :)
My Rogue character wants to use something from 3.5, a resource called the Complete Scoundrel. Apparently there is something in there where you spend two skill points and gain abilities like making an opponent flatfooted when you tumble through their square and such. Was wondering if anyone knew if it was balanced or i there was a way to convert it to Pathfinder.
These are skill tricks. They are almost like mini feats that cost skill points and can only be used once a combat. They are pretty much balanced on their own, all you have to do to convert them is adjust the prereqs (your 'max ranks' of a skill is 3 fewer in pathfinder, so if a skill trick has a prereq of tumble 15, it should probably be acrobatics 12 in pathfinder).
These abilities are a lot of fun just make sure you and the player read them carefully before using them so you know what they actually do and not just what you think they will do.
I wouldn't open up all of 3.5, but skill tricks are pretty harmless flavorful fun in my opinon.
So after a few years, got 4 players and me getting back into DnD, with Pathfinder being the obvious choice for us. Now, I am trying to get rapidly back up to speed and had some questions.
I am very concerned about balance, so does anyone have any houserules, suggestions, etc for how to deal with magic vs non-magic using classes in-party, spells or classes to ban, the roles of each class, stuff I should watch out for?
My advice would be, since you are relatively new to this iteration of the game, is start off with CORE ONLY rules. There are a lot of very subtle changes from D&D 3.5 to Pathfinder, and it's good to get a strong sense of the core mechanics of the game before trying to worry about anything else.
The other problem I find with starting with a bucket of houserules is that SOMETIMES what looks like it MIGHT be broken actually works just fine due to various circumstances you didn't consider--while something that looks innocuous may turn out to be problematic. If you start by playing with the rules as intended, you have a baseline to start with to see how the mechanics were meant to be used and balanced---and THEN, after you get a good sense of the rules, you can feel confident to house rule particularly according to YOUR needs and your group's play style. Play style can be a huge factor--there are a number of house rules I would use in my own group that I might not allow in a group of complete strangers.
When you feel confident with the core rules, add on stuff as you like, be they house rules or supplementary materials. The APG is awesome, but does introduce some complex elements so it's good to get your basics down first (it's called "Advanced" for a reason).
Based on my experience, sticking to core should not cause balance problems in your average campaign. I've not had problems myself with spellcasters versus non-spellcasters--the former can do spectacular things but must manage resources constantly, the latter may not bend reality but can still accomplish amazing feats of combat prowess and are more durable for a long adventuring haul. If you find spellcasters are outshining non-spellcasters, then you possibly are letting them rest too often (such as between every encounter and hazard) or are not varying your challenges enough (throw in more monsters with SR or good saves, or who are good at engaging casters toe to toe--some monsters should be easy to dispatch with magic, some easier to dispatch in melee, so everyone has a chance to shine).
Also, any guides on making worlds, and good premade world links?
Someone mentioned the GameMastery Guide which has at least some good places to start. I wish I had more resources to my own fingers let alone to suggest! But it looks like others have also already made some good suggestions too.
If you want to run in Golarion, you should get the Inner Sea World Guide. If you want to run in Forgotten Realms, I would cautiously convert materials from the 3.5 Forgotten Realms sourcebooks of your choice.
I was also told I should ban Polymorph and perhaps Alter Self.
No you shouldn't. Pathfinder reduced both spells to a much more manageable state.
My Rogue character wants to use something from 3.5, a resource called the Complete Scoundrel. Apparently there is something in there where you spend two skill points and gain abilities like making an opponent flatfooted when you tumble through their square and such. Was wondering if anyone knew if it was balanced or i there was a way to convert it to Pathfinder.
As someone noted, adding in a lot of 3.5 splats can be where you can start having balance problems.
What I would do is point out to your rogue player that rogues now have Rogue Talents, which fills in a similarly thematic role.
Also, does anyone use the Flaws in their games? I have had that request from a couple players.
I haven't, and if you're new to GMing, I would keep it simple. If they want a little extra, it's pretty safe to use the trait system in the APG (under "Advanced New Rules" in the PRD).
Lastly, is Weapon Finesse still needed in Pathfinder? I was considering house ruling it that a combatant could choose between using strength or dexterity at character creation, not understanding why a feat was needed for dexterity based fighters. I was also considering allowing players that chose the dexterity side to let their dex modifier stack with damage rather than strength due to their ability to find an opening. How far is too much?
As noted, this can be a hugely debatable topic. My advice would be to see how it feels in your games and then determine for yourself.
I have little problem with Weapon Finesse, but I think it should be combined with Agile Maneuvers (to use Dex for Combat Maneuvers instead of Strength), as otherwise building a good Dex based combat build requires TWO feats before you can start doing anything else and IMO that's a little too much.
Also, a character of mine wants to be a drow. Is there rules for this in Pathfinder? I havnt found yet much in the way of non-core races. I also don't want anything with a level adjustment, does that kind of thing still exist in Pathfinder?
There is no level adjustment, but there are "powerful races" such as drow, which are a little higher CR than a core race (and thus a Level 1 Drow would be tougher than a Level 1 Human). I think your assessment--to allow an elf with some slight adjustments--is a good idea. I'd suggest swapping low light vision for dark vision and swapping elf weapon proficiency for drow weapon proficiency.
As to HP and leveling up, whats the typical way of doing it?
During the last game I ran, I offered the choice between medians (so a d10 HD character would go up 4,5,4,5 after the initial max 10), or to roll (1s are rerolled).
While I personally would prefer the former, my players chose the latter.
Start with just the Core Rulebook, and everything else is subject to a line-item veto.
Check your PCs requests against a forum search, that should turn up any serious issues.
So you would recommend against going with medians then?
Unless I'm throwing together a quick random encounter, I avoid using median HP for monsters, and I definitely have the PCs roll HP every level (after 1st), since they can always get an extra HP with the Favored Class bonus (I don't have many multi-classers in my group).
So you would recommend against going with medians then?Unless I'm throwing together a quick random encounter, I avoid using median HP for monsters, and I definitely have the PCs roll HP every level (after 1st), since they can always get an extra HP with the Favored Class bonus (I don't have many multi-classers in my group).
Don't do strict medians. Mathmatically speaking, that's worse that the expected value of rolling the dice. The average result of a d10 is "5.5". I always suggest my players "take average" (but give them the choice to roll if they want it). When they take average, they round up on even levels, and round down on odd levels (to account for the .5).
Is the trait system on the website SRD? Can't find it.http://www.paizo.com/traits
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits
Printed rules are in the APG.
The APG version of the traits are located in the PRD under Advanced New Rules as I noted before. Scroll down a ways (or Ctrl+F to find "Traits").
It's my understanding that the APG version supercedes the previous version (Thorkull's Paizo link)--although there are very few differences. The ones at d20pfsrd are updated, and also include the traits from various Adventure Paths and Pathfinder Chronicles, which could be useful or not, depending on whether you want to use those materials or not.
Not to 1-up ya, Thorkull, but I thought I little clarification would be useful.
|
|
I suggest limiting it to a 15 or 20 point buy. 15 pt buy or elite array is the default for APs, and 20 pt buy is the default for Pathfinder Society Play. Later on, once everyone is back in the swing of things, you can change things around some if you like.
I would echo what other posters have said so far, use core only to start. Once you are comfortable with that, I would also suggest temporarily skipping the summoner, mostly for the same reasons others have suggested. Its not an unbalanced class, but there are a lot of rules and if you skip one or miss one, the class can take over your party. If you read the boards, you will see "summoner is OP" threads a lot, but nearly all of them are not following all the rules for the eidolons correctly. Myself I never had problems with the witch class, but ymmv.
You might consider checking out Crypt of the Everflame as a good 1st level start module, and if you like that, its the 1st of a 3 part series that is a good place to start. Also, I highly recommend Rise of the Runelords, even though it is 3.5 and you will have to do a little conversion. Its just that good of a AP. We are playing through Kingmaker now, and it too is excellent.
Your best bet for questions is just posting them here in the advice section, there are a ton of regulars here, and if you post you are new, the sarcastic and useless responses are quite minimal.
For character sheets, we use HeroLab. It does have some cost, but it has completely changed how easy it is for us to generate characters and NPCs. As a GM, its one of the few things I can honestly say is a huge time saver and I would not want to do without. Before Herolab, we used 0gre's sheet which is available here in one of the threads below if you search for it in Hombrew stuff.
|
|
Attributes are gained every 4 levels, so at 4th, 8th, 12, 16th, and 20th, you can add a single point to one of your ability scores.
Feats in Pathfinder are gained every other level by all characters. Some classes get bonus feats in addition, which are discussed under their class section (fighter, wizard, etc). So feats are 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th lvl, etc.
Action or Hero Points, are covered in the back of the Advanced Player's Guide, and are a way to allow the characters a chance to save themselves from bad dicerolling or misfortune. You can use them or not as you see fit, new parties it might be helpful while everyone is learning. A more experienced party, they might give too much of an advantage. I have 9 players and when we used them, between the number of players and hero points, it was nearly impossible to die.
|
|
Knowledge rolls, inconsequential rolls, let them roll. If its a search for secret doors or traps roll, you should make it. Here's why... If they roll a natural 20 and you tell them they find nothing, they know in metagame knowledge there isnt one there. If they roll a 1, they know metagame knowledge there could be one there after all. Hence a lot of GMs roll perception checks, etc for their players.
I roll - stealth checks, search checks, perception checks when they arent searching or standing guard, and in general anytime the player's would normally be unaware of how good they rolled or that they had a need to roll. The minute you ask them to roll a perception check, they know there is something to be seen, so they will keep after it (unless of course you are a sneaky GM and ask for them randomly for no particular purpose!).
They roll - ability checks like climb, perform, etc. They also roll knowledge checks, survival checks, profession checks, and pretty much anything else not covered above. In general, the more things you let them roll, the happier most players are about the game.
As far as half-orcs vs humans, there isnt an optimal choice unless you are talking sorcerer or oracle, in which case human is the clear choice due to their level bonus of extra spells. Right now in my current game, there are 9 players, only two of which have low light and none have darkvision. Right now, my players are really wishing they had a half-orc or dwarf for just that reason (They are outdoors all the time in Kingmaker). Also, ferocity can be very good. Though its an extreme example, I had a half-orc barbarian in my game that went -43 hps at 5th level, and used that round of ferocity to cross a battlefield and get to the cleric and paladin, who held their actions till after his so they could heal him- he actually ended up surviving. I know what his answer would be if you asked him if it was worth it. On the other hand, human benefits are also very good, and that extra feat can also keep you alive sometimes at lower level.
Since you're concerned about balance, you might take a gander at the rules for Pathfinder Society Organized Play. It won't be perfect; for example, they simply don't allow crafting, so all crafting-related traits and feats and whatnot are excluded as a result. Aside from things like that, you can generally tell a lot about what they think makes for a more balanced, fun, and easy-to-run session. The new Guide is out now, and they also keep a frequently-updated webpage on their house rules for additional resources.
Also, don't forget to check the FAQ & Updates tab of any books you want to include. I've only noticed that tab on the product pages for hardcovers, but can't say for sure that there aren't any exceptions.
I strongly suggest the Core Rulebook only for starters. Starting our first PF campaign I told the players Core only and everyone was happy with that. Now that we've been playing PF for a bit over a year two other games have sprung up within the same group under different GM and they have permitted APG stuff. It feels like the right way to do it - just the basics first, then add more later on.
I also think that the classes in the CRB without any mods from the APG or other sources are better balanced against each other.
|
|
RE: Half-orcs and ferocity:
Ah well, evidently we misread the rules, its true you cant exceed your negative con score. However, while raging, thats still pretty high if you are a barbarian, just not as high as we let my player go. :)
Half-orcs make great barbarians imo, between darkvision, ferocity, option to get tusked for a bite attack, and the favored class option of extra rounds of rage is a fair trade for a few skill points and a feat.
