@Bullette Point
Spontaneous casting is not a problem; as a GM I prefer it for design ;as a player for simplicity. With the Oracle you get some great stuff; the trade off is a curse which is like a flaw that becomes an inconvenience in game that gets old for RP. With tongues everyone learns Aklo or whatever by lvl 4. With Haunted it becomes a constant schtick of moving chairs which is old by lvl 6. Blindness is cool but it just means you suck at range; this always goes with the battle heavy armor gag which makes you a monster by lvl8.
I do agree with the problems of curses; I think they should have been extremely minor (smaller buffs for smaller negatives) OR be removed completely. However, the concepts between the oracle and the sorcerer are the same. Both are 'born' with power that was their choice, limited spell lists, and the way they cast spells. The only real difference is that of arcane and divine based spells.
Part of the problem with clerics lies with min/maxing rather than exploring the class in a roleplaying setting. You certainly have the ability to use medium armor but does that fit with the character concept? Perhaps try to find a very different and interesting concept that allows for a different experience. Try not to force yourself to always pick the same 'overpowered' spells or be forced into the 4th edition mentality of only combat matters.
I'm noticing that the people on here who don't like bards seem to have almost intentionally ridiculous perceptions of what bards are or what they do.
|
I often wonder why folks that hate ,what is a key part of the systems foundation play this system. Not a swip at anyone but I just do not understand.
Eh, I hate being dependent on foreign fuel, but I still drive my car, so I understand the concept.
My beef with Vancian magic is that it leads to 150 pages of the rulebook being devoted to a spell-list, and the proliferation of classes that use spell-lists, instead of feats and skills and other sorts of class abilities (five out of six APG classes use spells from those lists, for instance). When the spell list includes a dozen different ways to throw fire at people (throw fire at people in a cone, throw fire at people in a sphere, etc.) or 'detect foo' or do the fire thing, but with acid, cold, lightning, sound or force, I long for a magic system that better emulates what I see on TV, in movies, in fantasy novels, in anime, etc.
I often wonder why folks that hate ,what is a key part of the systems foundation play this system. Not a swip at anyone but I just do not understand.Eh, I hate being dependent on foreign fuel, but I still drive my car, so I understand the concept.
My beef with Vancian magic is that it leads to 150 pages of the rulebook being devoted to a spell-list, and the proliferation of classes that use spell-lists, instead of feats and skills and other sorts of class abilities (five out of six APG classes use spells from those lists, for instance). When the spell list includes a dozen different ways to throw fire at people (throw fire at people in a cone, throw fire at people in a sphere, etc.) or 'detect foo' or do the fire thing, but with acid, cold, lightning, sound or force, I long for a magic system that better emulates what I see on TV, in movies, in fantasy novels, in anime, etc.
+1 i would love to see something along the lines of the Eragon books and i thought words of power was it but it kinda fell flat to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+1 i would love to see something along the lines of the Eragon books and i thought words of power was it but it kinda fell flat to me.
Same here. I really, really wanted to love Words of Power, but, in the end, I think Ars Magica handled that sort of thing better.
The Trinity Players Guide had an interesting 'freeform psionic' system that also worked nicely. I was less impressed with the Mage: the Ascension system, because it seemed a little *too* freeform.
GURPS made a stab at a rune-based 'build-your-own-spell' system, but, again, I don't think they really nailed it either. Granted, the standard GURPS magic system can be designed to work really well, along 'traditional' lines, as you can fine-tune which spells you know, and how effective you are with them, without being stuck gaining arbitrary enhancements to your global spellcasting (putting points into Flame Jet, for instance, allowing you to instant-cast it and maintain a certain level of it free of mana cost, while still being basically an apprentice with Fireball).
Elements of Magic, from ENWorld Publishing, is, IMO, the gold-standard for this sort of modular magic system.
.
I was quite the fan of D&D novels, back in the day, and always found it amusing when Raistlin or some FR novel protagonist would just flat out ignore Vancian spellcasting, and act more like an Earthsea or Witch World or Midkemian mage, despite Vancian fire-and-forget mnemonic spellcasting being so fundamental to the game.
(So much so that we still have spells like Mnemonic Enhancer, despite Vancian spellcasting having moved away from talking about 'forgetting' spells a decade or so ago.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rogue is my least favourite class. The idea of a sneaky guy who climbs walls like Spider-Man and stabs people in the back is awesome, but I could do the same thing with a ranger or a bard or whatever.
What I really hate is the circular logic of: "We need rogues because there are traps that only rogues can disarm, and there are traps that only rogues can disarm because we need to give rogues something to do."
Druids used the same cleric template in 2e. It didn't work - primarily due to inflexibility in the cleric class to represent different kinds of priests. That inflexibility still exists in the cleric class.
What I think needs to be done is get rid of the cleric class, make Perform and Healing skills the primary healing methods, create a Priest feat, make the rest of the spells that are worth keeping arcanist spells. Druid becomes a Sorcerer archetype, Paladin becomes a Fighter with the Priest feat. Create a system called 'faith' which allows someone with the Priest feat to do stuff like boost will saves in believers and consecrate ground and get bonuses in social skills against believers. This faith system would grant hero points whenever a believer or a priest did something risky which reflected their divine source's tennants.
And ... yet there is the entire "specialty priests" of the FR series that would dramatically beg to differ entirely on the substance of your assessment.
"specialty priests" done "right" absolutely and 100% positively "got it right" staying within the "sphere" structure of spell accessibility and then tweaking a few properties/spells/whatever here and there to more properly align with "God of X's" dosier/domain of influence/etc.
2e FULLY got the clerics right, and especially so when they went "specialty" priest about it.
FR Adventures is the GOLD STANDARD for me, boy, on what clerics *should* be all about. Completely tied the cleric to his deity from top to toe it did.
I can back you on the alternatives you suggest above, though - solid ideas each and every one (probably good ideas for PF 2nd edition when they get around to it, honestly). I just can't let the 2e side-swipe go unanswered, or unchallenged, though.
Elements of Magic, from ENWorld Publishing, is, IMO, the gold-standard for this sort of modular magic system.
Could i get a link to that if you have one.
I'm noticing that the people on here who don't like bards seem to have almost intentionally ridiculous perceptions of what bards are or what they do.
You'll notice that's typically the case for any class/feat/ability/archetype/alternate class/weapon/anything.
Generally they come in two types of people: Those that after really looking at it with someone that can walk them through like it better after, and those that simply can't be bothered to learn at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've made a concerted effort to play classes I dislike until I figured out the build (even if it's just flavor) that I enjoyed, or: how I learned to stop worrying and love the Bard. I even found a tasty Paladin build that was crunchy and flavorful which I never thought was possible.
But I still don't really like Wizards as I just plain prefer spontaneous casting. It feels like gambling when I prep spells and the house always won.
Me: "I gots my fireballs all ready to go!"
DM: "Solve this murder mystery in a town where magic is punishable by instant castration."
Me: "DAMMIT! I like my junk!"
Me: "I prepped lots of utility spells for the bank heist."
DM: "As you reach the bank, wave after wave of low-level Goblins attack in clumped-up groups! They're holding signs that say: 'Fireball THIS!'"
Me: "!#@$#*%@!"
That's what it feels like, anyway.
I still need to try out the Witch and one of my three Ninja builds (reachy trip monkey of trickiness, poisonous smoke-bombing frog, and Backstabby McVanishalot). Paizo may say Ninja's are just an alternate Rogue class, but I do not agree so far. We'll see how they play.
I don't think I'm going to like the Witch for some reason.
|
I'm noticing that the people on here who don't like bards seem to have almost intentionally ridiculous perceptions of what bards are or what they do.
A bard is trained to use the Perform skill to create magical effects on those around him, including himself if desired.
All other abilities of the Bard I have no problem with. This bit though is just stupid. For example:
The charge was made by the Light Brigade of the British cavalry, consisting of the 4th and 13th Light Dragoons, 17th Lancers, and the 8th and 11th Hussars, under the command of Major General the Earl of Cardigan. Together with the Heavy Brigade comprising the 4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards, the 5th Dragoon Guards, the 6th Inniskilling Dragoons and the Scots Greys. They were also accompanied by 2 companies of performance artists, a full jazz orchestra and half a dozen ballet dancers to boost morale.
I stand by my point that bardic performance is stupid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm noticing that the people on here who don't like bards seem to have almost intentionally ridiculous perceptions of what bards are or what they do.A bard is trained to use the Perform skill to create magical effects on those around him, including himself if desired.All other abilities of the Bard I have no problem with. This bit though is just stupid. For example:
The charge was made by the Light Brigade of the British cavalry, consisting of the 4th and 13th Light Dragoons, 17th Lancers, and the 8th and 11th Hussars, under the command of Major General the Earl of Cardigan. Together with the Heavy Brigade comprising the 4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards, the 5th Dragoon Guards, the 6th Inniskilling Dragoons and the Scots Greys. They were also accompanied by 2 companies of performance artists, a full jazz orchestra and half a dozen ballet dancers to boost morale.I stand by my point that bardic performance is stupid.
Nope probably just some drummers a few pipers and a handful of buglers no jazz bands or ballet.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.
Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!
Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,
Have in these parts from morn till even fought
And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:
Dishonour not your mothers; now attest
That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you.
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;
For there is none of you so mean and base,
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'
|
|
1) Drummers were there to mark time for marching, Bugles were there to signal orders and bagpipes were there to act as an auditary rallying point so that soldiers would not be split up in the heat of battle. Their role was more as a primative communication device than a way of inspiring courage.
2) I seriously doubt that there were any drummers or bagpipes being played during the Charge of the Light Brigade.
3) Under the rules singing a dirty limerick or performing the dance of the sugar plum fairy has the same effect.
4) Bardic performance is stupid.
|
|
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.
Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!
Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,
Have in these parts from morn till even fought
And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:
Dishonour not your mothers; now attest
That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you.
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;
For there is none of you so mean and base,
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'
Henry V act 3 scene 1. The Siege of Harfleur.
So that means Henry V was a Bard? Don't see it somehow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Drummers were there to mark time for marching, Bugles were there to signal orders and bagpipes were there to act as an auditary rallying point so that soldiers would not be split up in the heat of battle. Their role was more as a primative communication device than a way of inspiring courage.
2) I seriously doubt that there were any drummers or bagpipes being played during the Charge of the Light Brigade.
3) Under the rules singing a dirty limerick or performing the dance of the sugar plum fairy has the same effect.
4) Bardic performance is stupid.
1. But just as seeing a flag over the horizen or the calvery on a hilltop the hearing that familar cadence of those drums could be uplifting.
2.Drummers maybe bagpipes maybe not but we do know they had trumpters.
3. Yes and that fact doesn't diminsh the ability the players who would do so do.
4. Yeah nothing is dumber than buffing the party with a swift action everyround while lively singing of your foes inevitable defeat.
|
|
1. But just as seeing a flag over the horizen or the calvery on a hilltop the hearing that familar cadence of those drums could be uplifting.1) Drummers were there to mark time for marching, Bugles were there to signal orders and bagpipes were there to act as an auditary rallying point so that soldiers would not be split up in the heat of battle. Their role was more as a primative communication device than a way of inspiring courage.
2) I seriously doubt that there were any drummers or bagpipes being played during the Charge of the Light Brigade.
3) Under the rules singing a dirty limerick or performing the dance of the sugar plum fairy has the same effect.
4) Bardic performance is stupid.
Not because of the actual drumming but more a sense that you were part of a group and you weren't on your own.
2.Drummers maybe bagpipes maybe not but we do know they had trumpters.
Which were a signal device not a method of inspiring competence.
3. Yes and that fact doesn't diminsh the ability the players who would do so do.
So you are saying that you don't think that it is rediculous that you would be able to hit harder and better because you saw your mate dance the nutcracker suite. Please.
4. Yeah nothing is dumber than buffing the party with a swift action everyround while lively singing of your foes inevitable defeat.
The bonuses are totally irellevant. I don't care what the ability does I care about the rationale for it and the rationale is dumb.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anybody who says "Bardic performance is stoopid" obviously never saw a Scottish infantry unit advance to the sound of bagpipes.
It's scary even when you're not on the wrong side of their charge.
That's because it's a group of pissed off Scotsmen. Frankly I have seen that and it's not a pretty sight...
See in my games noone would dance the nutcracker sweet or even do dance for Bardic performance. see dance is subpar if your in a dark cave or around a corner i can't benifit but if your singing a battle song i only need to here you.
And calling something stupid over aestheics is far more of a moronic statement that calling it that over mecanics. We get it you think singing/instrument playing/dance/ are dumb in combat got ya.
How do you feel about Perform Oratory as a means of inspiration?
My bards always take:
PERFORM-INSULT COMEDY 1st
So my friends feel inspired when I call the bbeg a HockeyPuck!
Perform (Oratory)So that means Henry V was a Bard? Don't see it somehow.
So once he finished his rousing speech, his troops actually got weaker (as happens with a Pathfinder bard who ends an Inspire Courage performance)?
That sucks. He should have kept going. ;-)
|
|
4) Bardic performance is stupid.No. You just don't like it. And have closed your mind to any interpretation otherwise.
No I have not. It's just that none of the interpretations I have ever heard make me think that it is anything other than a nonsensical ability that breaks the verisimilitude of the game world.
If they flavoured the ability in some other way (like words of advice barked during combat or a magical aura of hope) I would have less of an issue with it. It's the flavour of the ability I hate and I have yet to encounter a rationale I like.
|
|
See in my games noone would dance the nutcracker sweet or even do dance for Bardic performance. see dance is subpar if your in a dark cave or around a corner i can't benifit but if your singing a battle song i only need to here you.
And calling something stupid over aestheics is far more of a moronic statement that calling it that over mecanics. We get it you think singing/instrument playing/dance/ are dumb in combat got ya.
How do you feel about Perform Oratory as a means of inspiration?
Actually I think the aesthetics are far more important than the mechanics. YMMV. I would apreciate it if you would also refrain from personal attacks. I have been civil, I have not called your position moronic, I would expect the same courtesy in return.
I actually have less of an issue about using Perform Oratory. That makes sense to me.
|
|
Do you find the harpy and siren abilities to magically effect people with their songs dumb? Why not? Because they are monsters and of course humans can't do monster things?
Yeah pretty much.
I guess this story is dumb too?
It's a fairy tale. I don't have talking bears living in houses eating porridge in my games either.
Forgive me on the asine comments dealing with a troll blooded rustmonster has left me pissed today.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For what it's worth, I've never used the instrument playing version myself for much the same reason.
However, I did get to see someone play a half-orc bard with a trombone patterned off a college band member. Kept calling my cleric 'coach' and how we always need to get 'the quarterback'.
It's a fairy tale. I don't have talking bears living in houses eating porridge in my games either.
Blashphemy!! Next you'll tell us you refuse to allow gingerbread houses and the casting of animate object and haste on gingerbread men
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blashphemy!! Next you'll tell us you refuse to allow gingerbread houses and the casting of animate object and haste on gingerbread men
It's a fairy tale. I don't have talking bears living in houses eating porridge in my games either.Hmmm....
Gingerbread Golem...
*ponders*
Reminds me of the Calzone golem in a WotC adventure
Had Dr/slashing but when damaged caused 1d4 fire damage in a 15ft cone as hot melty cheese sauce sprayed out.
|
|
Oh you'd love them :)It's a fairy tale. I don't have talking bears living in houses eating porridge in my games either.Your games don't sound very fantastic then.
I bet I would. On further consideration, I think this really just comes down to taste, the same as Asian/Psionics/whatever elements are. And we all know what they say about taste. :)
As an aside, the player of the half-orc bard was the main GM, and actually included Keebler elves knockoffs in the game, and made it work. That was pretty amusing.
|
|
For the record this is just my personal view. I have let my players play Bards in my games and I don't object when they do that. Nor do I object when playing with Bards as a fellow PC.
It's not my place to tell people what they should or shouldn't play. Nor do I want to have Paizo change how the Bard works. Many people love Bards and good for them, whatever you enjoy playing.
Agree to disagree chaps?
For the record this is just my personal view. I have let my players play Bards in my games and I don't object when they do that. Nor do I object when playing with Bards as a fellow PC.
It's not my place to tell people what they should or shouldn't play. Nor do I want to have Paizo change how the Bard works. Many people love Bards and good for them, whatever you enjoy playing.
Agree to disagree chaps?
Not until I have your stance on Bardic Performance: Belly Dancing as a way to Inspire Greatness. Or at least give the rogue a distraction bonus on his stealth check.
Do you find the harpy and siren abilities to magically effect people with their songs dumb? Why not? Because they are monsters and of course humans can't do monster things?
It would be AWESOME for a bard ... IF Bards could do that through their performance.
Instead, bards can do it, sure - but through spell-casting (ie: pointedly NOT the instrument that matters).
That story is actually my key piece as to why the Bard class sucks.
It *can't* do what one of the most famous exemplars *should* be able to do IF the class was truly going with "magic in music" as the schtick.
It doesn't, and so, I find it lacking.
:shrugs:
Doesn't mean I don't let other people play 'em, though.
3. Barbarian: Come and Get Me completely ruins encounters. It's a vastly overpowered ability. To deal with the ability I have to metagame as a DM or let all my encounters get destroyed easily. By the time the creature figures out it better stay out of reach the barbarian has already almost killed them with Come and Get Me Attacks or with regular attacks. Combine that with Superstition, Invulnerable Rager DR, magic items like ring of evasion and heavy fortification armor, and a huge number of hit points, and the barbarian becomes a class that vastly overshadows all other physical damage dealers save for perhaps the archer.WAIT UNTIL BARBARIAN DISCOVER SPELL SUNDER. AM MAKE THINGS SUPERHILARIOUS AFTER THAT. THEN AM NOT EVEN ABLE TO STOP WITH MAZE.
AM OK THOUGH, BARBARIAN ALREADY BEST CLASS THERE AM.
There are still ways to stop you. I have learned so many dealing with a Come and Get Me Barbarian. But you can only toss in such means so often without it becoming massively cheesy. That's the hard part.
When a barbarian rage power is making dragons trivial, it shows you the game designers messed up badly. But I've still got your number.
Mage's Disjunction takes a lot of the bark out of your bite. So does massive negative levels. Have fun fighting a monk martial artist with punishing kick and lunge or Pushing Assault. The anti-Come and Get Me assault feat.
There are ways for dealing with barbarians. You may frighten other players,but I'm a DM. You don't frighten me. You fear me, I don't fear you. I am the ultimate power and I will find ways to make you suffer.
|
|
It would be AWESOME for a bard ... IF Bards could do that through their performance.
Instead, bards can do it, sure - but through spell-casting (ie: pointedly NOT the instrument that matters).
A bard of 6th level or higher can use his performance to make a suggestion (as per the spell) to a creature he has already fascinated (see above). Using this ability does not disrupt the fascinate effect, but it does require a standard action to activate (in addition to the free action to continue the fascinate effect). A bard can use this ability more than once against an individual creature during an individual performance.
Making a suggestion does not count against a bard's daily use of bardic performance. A Will saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 the bard's level + the bard's Cha modifier) negates the effect. This ability affects only a single creature. Suggestion is an enchantment (compulsion), mind affecting, language-dependent ability and relies on audible components.
'Follow' doesn't work?