Permanency: A proposal for PFS


Pathfinder Society

101 to 117 of 117 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Benrislove wrote:

In addition to this, it also hurts the player's wealth by level and can leave them too far behind, actually weakening their party at higher levels.

Because of these things I think it's completely fine from a power perspective, but probably negative for the campaign as a whole, creating upset players and significantly altering wealth by level.

Let me ask: Why is the combat maneuver 'sunder' not banned in PFS play?

Sundering gear achieves the same problems, and yet has been included in organized play from campaign to campaign.

Both of these have an easy solution, along the lines of the Pathfinder change to Mage's disjunction. Traps with that spell were problematic in other organized campaigns in 3.5, as the area version of the Pathfinder spell would permanently destroy magical items. Pathfinder still allows for the targeted version of the spell to do that, but we can hopefully assume that will not be evidenced in PFS.

An easy solution for sunder, dispelled permanency, and the like would be a restoration at the end of the session. The character would still lack the item/effect until the session was over which would make the action useful in combat, but it would not be a lasting wound that could not be cured. It's already the rule that items sundered/used/destroyed in the game are available for purchase without that damage. If anything it would dovetail with existing rules.

Unlike a ban on sunder, it would allow that facet of the game to exist in organized play and have tactical use. For years and years sundering has been considered 'jerk-like' behavior on the part of the GM or author. When stock monsters have improved sunder, this places the GM in an awkward position.

In either event, attempts to have PC wealth within a reasonable line seem like a reasonable place for organized play to make special rules. It addresses the core problem, rather than unevenly treating the symptoms.

-James

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Benrislove wrote:

I am fairly amazed that Andrew has never heard that however, not a comment either way just legitimately surprised.

Let me clarify.

As a GM and player in PFS, I never hear it, because typically we don't level up our characters around each-other. And when we are at the table playing the game, its a die roll, and a "I got 27 to hit." and the GM saying, "Hit", or "Miss."

Same goes for my home game. We don't use those terms, because we just each individual level up our character. Sure, I've heard, "My guy's to hit sucks because I have three classes with bad BAB."

As a designer, I've heard the use of 1/2, 3/4, full BAB. I've read about it in Unearthed Arcana, and I've seen the mentions in the Bestiary that James Maissen talks about.

But I've never, ever heard a PFS player or my home group, refer to it as fractional BAB, or straight out say, "I've got 3/4 BAB, what have you got?" IF anyone says anything about their to hit, its, "I"ve got +21/+21/+16/+11/+6 to hit."

So it isn't like I haven't seen the terms for 1/2, 3/4, Full. And its not like I haven't dealt with them. The term "Fractional" is what threw me, and the fact he says the "Majority" of players use the term, is obviously incorrect.


Silh wrote:
Proposal

No.

1/5

What is stopping people from buying a Make Whole spell through spellcasting services to fix sundered magic items? I am confused as to why this keeps coming up as a problem. Sure you aren't able to restore some magic items, but most of the items that you would have access to as a PFS character would be able to be restored.

Let's fix a CL 10 magic item:

Make Whole at CL 20: 2*20*10 = 400 GP

Shadow Lodge

Eric Brittain wrote:
I confirm the same thing from the San Diego area. I have yet to encounter a player who refers to BAB in fractional amounts.

I was lamenting in San Diego this week about fractional BAB! It's keeping me from pulling the trigger on ninja/monk/oracle I've been flirting with, since everyone down there seems to poo-poo ninjas. Although I suppose a ninja/monk/oracle doesn't really prove anyone wrong about that. :)

"I mean, I'd really have a 1.5 BAB, even though the sheet would say 0..."

The Exchange 4/5

i'm not for having sunder in scenarios either.

1/5

DarkLightHitomi wrote:


It is so absolutely clear that bab and saves are fractional amounts, that the majority of players refer to them by the fraction.

Absolutely correct. Other than that this doesn't happen.


Robert A Matthews wrote:

What is stopping people from buying a Make Whole spell through spellcasting services to fix sundered magic items? I am confused as to why this keeps coming up as a problem. Sure you aren't able to restore some magic items, but most of the items that you would have access to as a PFS character would be able to be restored.

Let's fix a CL 10 magic item:

Make Whole at CL 20: 2*20*10 = 400 GP

You can hire a 20th level caster? What are the limitations?

I had assumed that 13th and higher wasn't available based on 7th level spells not being available.

-James

Lantern Lodge

Funky Badger wrote:
DarkLightHitomi wrote:


It is so absolutely clear that bab and saves are fractional amounts, that the majority of players refer to them by the fraction.
Absolutely correct. Other than that this doesn't happen.

We come from different circles appearently.

Lantern Lodge

Robert A Matthews wrote:

What is stopping people from buying a Make Whole spell through spellcasting services to fix sundered magic items? I am confused as to why this keeps coming up as a problem. Sure you aren't able to restore some magic items, but most of the items that you would have access to as a PFS character would be able to be restored.

Let's fix a CL 10 magic item:

Make Whole at CL 20: 2*20*10 = 400 GP

If the issue is loss of wealth, then how can spending more wealth be a fix?

It certainly reduces the effect but it doesn't solve the problem, not by a long shot.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

wakedown wrote:


I was lamenting in San Diego this week about fractional BAB! It's keeping me from pulling the trigger on ninja/monk/oracle I've been flirting with, since everyone down there seems to poo-poo ninjas.

That's because we are more pirate-focused down in Southern bit of our fair state.

;-)

Why is SD down on ninjas?:
This is more a design arguement but the reason that a lot of locals are not ninja fans is that ninjas can't find/diarm magical traps and most anything that a ninja can do a rogue can do better. Rogues can take ninja tricks to get all the suite of Ki powers but there is no way beyond multi-classing that a ninja can detect/disarm magical traps. Thus the conclusion that many have come it is that ninjas are poo-poo. Don't get me wrong I play one, I just know their limitations. ;-D

Shadow Lodge

Eric Brittain wrote:
That's because we are more pirate-focused down in Southern bit of our fair state.

I'll try to hunt you down this weekend to showboat my pirate in Bonekeep, banking on "pirate love" to keep him alive. :)

I'd start a whole thread on the ninja/rogue topic, but... this being the forums and all, I'm not sure it would be constructive.

It would inevitably just lead trolls into flames.

Although, that doesn't sound like such a bad thing...

Ninja Love:

At low-level play, particularly 3rd-6th, I like the ninja better - mechanically speaking.

Reasons:
#1) Evasion doesn't really matter at this point. Most reflex saves below 6th level are things like lightning bolts that even from a 6d6 caster, end up being 20-25 damage, so evasion is really just saving the rogue 10-12 damage over the ninja.

#2) Magic traps in this level range are rare, and usually can be eaten and then a few wand taps later, the party moves on.

#3) The use of the ki at 2nd level for a ninja is pretty tasty compared to the tricks a rogue can manage with a swift action. An extra attack and +20ft movement on demand is very nice at levels 2-6.

#4) Rogues have to pay an extra talent tax to get to the tasty ninja tricks, which puts them behind the ninja in their access, specifically...

#5) Vanishing trick in this same level range really opens up the option for scouting ahead of a party with a get out of jail free card. The ninja can be doing this at 2nd level. The rogue needs to use their 3rd level feat to get a Ki Pool, then their 4th level talent to get the trick.

#6) Further on this "advanced scout" concept at low levels, darkvision is important. The ninja can have darkvision AND invisibility at 3rd level, which really opens up the potential for sneaky halfling "tillers".

Granted a lot depends on circumstances. If the uber SD GMs have a lot of GM credit, character power between level 2 and level 4 may be moot. Also, race selection matters - ninja may be far more valuable to a level 2-4 halfling scout to get darkvision than a half-orc.

For the most part, I think I'd rather be a ninja in this range than a rogue.

If we're talking about level 9-12, it's a totally different discussion.

1/5

james maissen wrote:


You can hire a 20th level caster? What are the limitations?

I had assumed that 13th and higher wasn't available based on 7th level spells not being available.

-James

It doesn't say that higher level casters aren't available. It just says spells level 7 and higher aren't available.


Robert A Matthews wrote:
james maissen wrote:

You can hire a 20th level caster? What are the limitations?

I had assumed that 13th and higher wasn't available based on 7th level spells not being available.

-James

It doesn't say that higher level casters aren't available. It just says spells level 7 and higher aren't available.
Quote:
Spellcasters capable of casting such spells are quite rare, and as such, cannot simply be bartered with for higher-level spellcasting services

If that was the intent, then they might wish to change the reasoning here. Maybe to something that they prefer to keep such high level spells for themselves?

And finally, why stop at CL 20? Again, what are the limitations?

-James

Silver Crusade 5/5

Eric Brittain wrote:
wakedown wrote:


I was lamenting in San Diego this week about fractional BAB! It's keeping me from pulling the trigger on ninja/monk/oracle I've been flirting with, since everyone down there seems to poo-poo ninjas.

That's because we are more pirate-focused down in Southern bit of our fair state.

;-)

This is more a design arguement but the reason that a lot of locals are not ninja fans is that ninjas can't find/diarm magical traps and most anything that a ninja can do a rogue can do better. Rogues can take ninja tricks to get all the suite of Ki powers but there is no way beyond multi-classing that a ninja can detect/disarm magical traps. Thus the conclusion that many have come it is that ninjas are poo-poo. Don't get me wrong I play one, I just know their limitations. ;-D

Also: Evasion, evasion, evasion.

Oh, yeah, and evasion.

Edit: I see wakedown already addressed this, but while the ninja might (and I say might) be better at lower levels, evasion is definitely the trump card at high tier. I watched a ninja go down in a high tier game AFTER making all his reflex saving throws (the rest of us had enough hit points to stay up seeing as we weren't as MAD and had decent con scores).

Shadow Lodge

Katie Sommer wrote:

Also: Evasion, evasion, evasion.

Oh, yeah, and evasion.

Hence the ninja/monk who needs fractional BAB!

Wait... wasn't this thread about permanency?


wakedown wrote:
Wait... wasn't this thread about permanency?

It was dispelled.

But on a brighter note, the players did not raise a stink about it.. so perhaps that's not as big an obstacle as people imagine it to be.

-James

101 to 117 of 117 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Permanency: A proposal for PFS All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society