So, what do you do if you're playing in a game that does not allow archetypes and never will? It is not even up for debate. The game cannot abide archetypes on the most fundamental level (i.e. limited character sheet code).
This is not a question of altering the code. How would you go about dismantling the archetypes and turning them into feats and/or prestige classes instead? Has anyone already done this?
This is the houserules forum. I'm looking for solid houserules in this direction. Please take your unhelpful disdain elsewhere.
Your problem is that your DM flat out forbids archetypes. Presumably he knows what they are. You're looking for ways to sneak around his outright wishes. That's not a good idea. It's a good way to promote bad feelings between yourself and your DM.
The archetypes are not feats or PrC's they are alternate classes. There's no built in provision for turning them into anything else. If he's not going to approve official material, I really doubt he'll approve jacked up substitutes.
You assume too much and seem very keen to throw insults.
It's not a DM that forbids them. It's a limited computer-based code system we use to play with, that automates a lot of character sheet stuff. The code has limitations that makes archetypes impossible but allows the addition of feats and other abilities.
If you can add classes to the code, you can handle Archetypes - create a copy of (say) the Fighter class, replace the abilities with their substitutes from (say) two-weapon master, rename the class, load it up. Just make sure no one takes a multiclass with an archetype.
It's work, but archetypes are a new design space, one that's poorly understood at best (so far we have precisely two Sorcerer archetypes, not counting Wildblooded). At this point anyone having a "solid" recommendation for this kind of change is lying.
Unfortunately, that is too much of a workload for that to happen. Adding classes is an ordeal in the first place. It is a very old system that is not going to be changed. Also, even if it could be done, that would make combined archetypes even more problematic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I want to help, but it honestly sounds like you should just ditch the program. It's holding back your creativity and options within the game.
In 3.5e, the archetypes were sometimes just a feat swap here or there, but Paizo has done the awesome thing of making them feel more like alternate characters by giving them abilities that were created for this. While this is good for the game, it's bad for a limited computer program.
My suggestion: find a new program or just use paper and pen.
It looks like I'm not going to get any advice here. What I'm trying to do this for is a community of over 100 players that uses this program.
I ask: 'How do I do X given Y limitations?'.
I get: 'Play a different game/use a different system'.
Not helpful.
You can add new prestige class, but not new classes?
More easily, yes. It's complicated.
You can add new prestige class, but not new classes?
Umbral is not asking for code advice. She's asking if anyone has any ideas for, or experience with, implementing archetypes using feats/prestige classes/something clever.
The exact reasons why archetypes are unavailable seems irrelevant to the question.
What about making it a prestige class in the system that begins at level 1?
There's a whole lot of unfounded hostility going on here.
There's a whole lot of unfounded hostility going on here.
I do think Chris has a point though. Archetypes are (hopefully) more complex than just replacing one class feature with another. Feats take away one limited valuable resource to replace one class feature with another (hopefully, functionally balanced) class feature. While prestige classes are designed to add to, rather than replace, your base class.
I've been thinking long and hard on this myself, and unfortunately I haven't really been able to come up with an idea for doing this. Maybe you should just shower a certain coder in so much chocolate that he becomes too fat and bloated to leave his chair, leaving him with no reason to not just get it over with and implement those archetypes!
The "problem" with Pathfinder is that it's too flexible! Darn those choices! :)
I doubt it would be as simple as this.
Free Hand Fighter (Combat, Fighter Archtype)
Prerequisites: Fighter level 1+, No other fighter archtype feats
Benefit: Replace Bravery with Deceptive Strike; replace Armor Training (1,2,3,4) with Elusive, replace Weapon Training 1 with Singleton, replace Weapon Training 2 with Timely Tip, replace Weapon Training 3 with Interference, and replace Armor Mastery with Reversal.
My intent was not to turn all of the archetypes into feats/prestige classes but to adapt some features of some of the archetypes in a reasonable way. For example, the fighter archer powers could be adapted to a series of ranged combat maneuver feats. I was just hoping someone might have already done the work.
|
This may not be a worthwhile suggestion, depending on why there is a difference between being able to add prestige classes and base classes and other limitations of the code, but could you enter the archetypes as 20 level (if required) PrCs that have a level in the base class as a prerequisite to enter? I realise that ‘level in x class’ is not normally a legal prerequisite for a PrC, so I’m not sure if the code would handle it. Maybe the ability description for any archetype abilities that replace first level class features could have the disclaimer, ‘y class feature cannot be used’, since it appears the code doesn’t let you replace one ability with another.
Maybe archetype abilities could be done as feats with the class ability to be replaced as a prerequisite as another poster suggested. In this case, the feat description would need to include the disclaimer that the original class ability can no longer be used.
I don’t think either of these are ideal fixes, but I’m not sure that you’ll get greatly better ideas given the limitations described and the whole concept of archetypes.
That may be possible. I'm not sure if the code can remove abilities through feats but if it can, that would be useful.
Are you re-coding NWNs? Sort of sounds like it or something similar. If so... I'd happily join whatever server you had going.
Archetypes could be coded as feats more easily and yep, NWN will absolutely not allow for class features to be put in.
It's not Neverwinter Nights but the similarity in setup is close enough that the problems are comparable. I'm not the coder and I don't have access to the code so I don't know personally. I'm just interested in finding options.
Some additional information would be helpful.
Are you able to remove abilities granted from classes? (I expect this isn't possible, but you never know).
Is it possible to add additional schools/domains/bloodlines to the program?
If you aren't able to remove features granted by the base class, my suggestion would be to make them as prestige classes. While it don't work for all archetypes, you could use it for some of them, especially the martial archetypes. While it wouldn't the entire mechanic of the archetype, it could go a long way.
Are there certain archetypes, you are especially interested in? The differences between them are so vast, that I think it is extremely difficult to come up with a generel rule to convert them.
|
Or if you insist on something nice and computery there are web based character sheets which will let you output stuff and even save them.
I don't think he's insisting, I think that's all he HAS. It sounds like he's playing on a server with a community and custom character software. Using pen and paper means he can't access any of the players, or use the software he may have spent money on.
Umbral Reaver is a girl.
Anyway, have you tried emailing the creator of the software you are using?
You're being very secretive with what the software is. If we don't know what you're using, how can we be expected to help properly? There are different problems inherent with changing something for a houserule and changing something to fit within the usually limited confines of a preset piece of software. Help us help you properly.
My guess: Redblade.
Umbral Reaver is a girl.
Come now, no need to get snarky :)
I was referring to TriOmegaZero's referral of Umbral Reaver as a he.
I was referring to TriOmegaZero's referral of Umbral Reaver as a he.
I know I was just having a go.
meatrace is gender neutral. I prefer to be referred to as it.
I don't think he's insisting, I think that's all he HAS. It sounds like he's playing on a server with a community and custom character software. Using pen and paper means he can't access any of the players, or use the software he may have spent money on.
Bingo.
It's not a private community nor is there any fee to use it, but it's a persistent world with a lot of players so just throwing it out is not an option. The code is unique to this one game, created by people that play it. It's a MUSH, for those that know the term. I've been asked not to post a link to it here.
So, what do you do if you're playing in a game that does not allow archetypes and never will? It is not even up for debate. The game cannot abide archetypes on the most fundamental level (i.e. limited character sheet code).
This is not a question of altering the code. How would you go about dismantling the archetypes and turning them into feats and/or prestige classes instead? Has anyone already done this?
I am going to ask why. If a GM can't give me a why I will gladly open up my spot at the table and let a new player sit there.
"Because I said so" is not an option in that situation.edit:After reading the entire thread I retract my statement.
|
Hmm. From what I understand about MUSHes (and how they are generally text based) they're generally fairly easy to alter (of course, my definition of easy to alter is probably different than yours, given my degree in computer science.)
I've been working on altering Neverwinter Nights to play pathfinder. So far without any help, so its been kindof slow going. I've changed a bunch of data files, and started to implement class skill bonuses. There are hardcoded limits that are really hard to work around though. I'll do what I can with workarounds, but eventually I'm going to have to decompile the executable and get one of my friends to help me pick it apart and *FORCE* the damn thing to run pathfinder. Luckily, NWN is quite moddable, and many of the pathfinder things are easily done through editing the game's data files and game engine/spell and ability scripts. Editing the engine itself likely won't happen till either near the end, or until we need to implement additional caster classes.
|
|
We all have pen and paper and UR has access to the web.
Yes, because abandoning a community project and all the work put into it to completely rebuild the gaming infrastructure the community uses to game isn't a problem.
I don't see how you can keep ignoring the fact that he has 100 other players that would have to be convinced to abandon the current setup. That's a lot more work than adjusting the entries in the software.
Your generational blanket statement was also beneath you.
This would definately be a challenge. Most archetypes operate under the assumption you will be getting feats along with them. If you have to for instance burn 3 or 4 feats to get the abilities of the two weapon fighter archetype, you wont have enough feats for the actual two weapon fighting feats.
I guess prestige classes are alot more practical if as you said that is an option. Are their any limitations on creating PRCs? You could have them with almost no prerequisites, and simply include the archetype and base class abilities.
So just take the archetype, make the prereq like 1 rank in a skill or none if thats possible, and make it a prestige class that includes 1-10 of the abilities the base class would get with the archetype. Then do a 2nd version for 11-20.
I think the original question was still valid. It took a lot of persuading to get people to actually try answering it and not attack the premise.
I was hesitant to mention the MUSH as I'm not supposed to advertise it here (the people that run the game think the Paizo forum crowd is generally of the wrong demeanour to let into the game).
You're an alright sort though, TOZ! I could send you an invite if you're interested. Just give me a means to contact you privately. Limitations of the system aside, it's quite fun to play Pathfinder in a persistent world with a wide variety of others.
As mentioned previously, feats are the way to go in this case. Every ability can be converted into a feat or across several feats if the situation warrants. I've actually done this for a homebrew, albeit a very short one, where everyone picked either a base melee/ranged/skill/magic class. The players didn't have as much fun as normally, but I was told afterwards that it's only because they weren't used to the system and I sort of surprised them.
The real problem I forsee is if the coders can alter existing classes so that an archetype-seeker isn't inadvertently punished by the feat-tax required to play the archetype.
|
|
"Limitations of the system aside, it's quite fun to play Pathfinder in a persistent world with a wide variety of others."
Man do I ever agree with that statement. But I want to do it in 3d in real time like I used to with 3.0 and base NWN back in 2001 and 2002.
Persistant 64-player worlds on an RP Faerun server with 7 GMs running plots you could sign up for a week in advance on the forums and just show up at the appropriate place/time. My god was that fun. Alas. The game is getting old, and such Servers are hard to find now. Though the game is available for 10$ on GoG.com in 100% digital format.
Come to think of it, there's no reason we couldn't increase the player count beyond 64. Store it as a 16 bit integer... Nobody will want to have 32768 players online at once, but 100+ sounds doable, and if the Guy running the server can't handle that many without it crashing, there's already a section to set the maximum number of players on the server at once to a lower number. And anyone with a powerful computer to run their server on could set that number as high as they want.
... Whoops. /Thread derailment.
PrCs could work.
So could feats potentially. How hard is it to add bonus feats to a class? Can a feat grant you another feat? You could allow some 1st level only feats, that disable class features (without removing them if necessary) and granting new abilities upon gaining the appropriate level in the class, as well as granting another level 1 feat to use on something else. I've been coming up with elaborate workarounds trying to implement Pathfinder in NWN, so I'm starting to come up with elaborate ways to do things around system limits. In NWN a feat cannot grant a bonus feat, however, which stops this particular trick.
|
|
I was hesitant to mention the MUSH as I'm not supposed to advertise it here (the people that run the game think the Paizo forum crowd is generally of the wrong demeanour to let into the game).
How very judgemental of you (plural). Asking for help about the game on the message boards of the publisher, and saying it's the "wrong crowd". Shame, UR. Shame. Is this group so super secret that only certain members are allowed to invite people? Until the quoted statement, I was fine.
Don't bother responding, I'm not reading.
How very judgemental of you (plural). Asking for help about the game on the message boards of the publisher, and saying it's the "wrong crowd". Shame, UR. Shame. Is this group so super secret that only certain members are allowed to invite people? Until the quoted statement, I was fine.Don't bother responding, I'm not reading.
Not my decision. I don't run the game.
Edit: And I agree with them. I wouldn't want 90% of the posters on these boards to show up. The game works smoothly with a certain playstyle and the style most frequently espoused on these boards is completely at odds with that. I do not say that you specifically are like that, but a saddening majority are. Advertising publically could potentially be horrible.