| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mr. "... and Guest "
I would think you would better achieve your stated aim by actually expanding upon and further discussing your points, instead of the pointless meta-derailing going on now.
As to your points:
Before Paizo expends resources working on more/generic PrCs, I would instead rather they work on fixing the foundations: real multi-classing under Pathfinder/3.x. The fact that they have instead offered alternate means to achieve the results -- archetypes and the upcoming hybrid classes -- would seem to indicate that fixing multiclassing is too unworkable under the current system mechanics. So I accept archetypes as the best fix for now. And that, coupled with the recent retraining rules in UltCamp, also addresses any issues I had with prestige classes. If anyone else, 3pp or messageboard developer, comes up with something that works better, I'll be one of the first to sign up to playtest.
As for your example, having the Master Spy require Iron Will as a prerequisite makes sound logical sense to me, even if you disagree. High resistance to mind-affecting effects should require some kind of pre-PrC effort and training on the (N)PCs part, and the feat fits the bill nicely.
For the Guild Thief I'd do abilities that would make fencing stolen goods easier, I'd give him benefits in his local enviroment akin to the Ranger, but focus on stealing, staking out a mark and maybe assassination.
For the Dragon Slayer I'd give them some benefits against dragons, obviously, but with increased benefits to attack, damage and AC against true dragons and lesser benefits against all other draconic creatures.
The Demon Hunter shouldn't depend on magic abilities at all, it could add caster levels, to make it more acceptable to casters - both arcane and divine, but it's abilities should be open to every class, like the dragon slayer.
The point of having prestige classes like these would be to build concepts. You are right that it's easy to make a good fighter or ranger dragon slayer, but making a rogue or cleric is a different matter. Prestige classes like these would make it easier for the less obvious classes to be something that fits the campaign better, a fighter could become a guild thief - classic bruiser, while a magus could go demon hunting, or a rogue could become a dragon slayer.
And seen from the GM perspective - which is most often my position - it would be easy to design a group of slick thieves operating within a city where their power grants them benefits no...
In my opinion the ease of selling stolen goods should be dependent on the location the game takes place in. The GM should be the one deciding how hard it is to sell stolen goods, based on the type of game he’s running, the campaign setting, even the town the item is being sold in.
To me, what you describe as a Guild Thief, is an Urban Ranger. It seems to offer everything you mention, unless by stealing you actually mean picking some ones pocket, it doesn’t seem to offer sleight of hand. Also in my opinion being a thief does not make you an assassin. I feel these two character concepts are very different and should not fall under the same Prestige Class. Though I could see an Assassin archetype that switches out your favored enemy for an ability that lets you assign those bonuses to a specific target.
Your Dragon Slayer also seems like a Ranger to me, with favored enemy Dragons.
Your Demon Hunter confuses me a little. I’m not sure if I’m misunderstanding what you want or what. You say the demon hunter shouldn’t depend on magic, but it will increase caster level.
1. Should the class use magic or not?
2. When you say “increase caster level” do you mean the PC’s caster level, or the typical +1 level of existing spell casting class, we see so often in PrC’s?
I get your point about it being easy to play a Ranger that is a Dragon Slayer, but wanting to play a Rogue that enters a Dragon Slayer PrC, but this confuses me also. Why play class A then go into a prestige class that mimics class B, instead of just playing class B?
Also the more generic the prestige class the less synergy there will be with the base class that you were before you entered that class. One of the things that I seem to remember about the 3.5 PrC’s was that the improved some of the abilities from your base class. A generic PrC can make no assumptions as to what class you were before entering it, so that class could not affect any preexisting class abilities. If it does add levels to existing spell casting, then it’s not suited for classes that don’t cast, and therefore is not a generic PrC. Maybe I’m being too specific regarding what you mean by specific though.
But yes, I don't care for too many PrCs and multi-PrC dipping into a super broken munchkin combo was one of the things that ruined 3.5 there at the end. I hope they never bring that back.
And I think this is where the division lies. Those that miss Prestige classes never had an issue with this. Either their group didn't mind combining lots of prestige classes... or they had a DM that simply limited the number of classes you could take... or just said no to certain combos. Those that are so anti-prestige class seem to have been the victim of others bringing crazy combo's to the table.
My points on Prestige classes...
1. Archtypes are a poor substitute for prestige classes. They are designed for 1 class. They require you to give up some other core ability of the class. For instance "Whip Guy" as a rogue would give up Trapfinding... but what if your group really needed a trapfinder... no whip for you!
2. Nothing says you have to allow all content. Its not like you have to have one or the other. But for many of us, we enjoyed prestige classes. Unless your worried it will break something then why be against it. Especially if they released one book of prestige classes... its one book. Just dont buy it or allow it at your table. Its that simple.
3. I dont care if they are specific or not. Make them as specific as you want. I can always reword the fluff. I just miss prestige classes. Why they have to be "generic" for the OP is a mistery to me.
- My 2 copper
If release schedules are still being discussed;
While I'm quite happy with the rate of products being released I would like to know why release dates are not specific until very close to shipping. Knowing the specific date would give me a greater ability to plan events, budgets and shopping trips. For example I am planning a Halloween session for a campaign I'm running but I am unsure as to whether or not I will have Blood of the Moon in my hands in time to incorporate some crunch into that session. I have a patch for the hole that Blood of the Moon fills just in case but it is relatively poor and not reflective of how I will handle Werewolf descendants in the future. Same goes for Bestiary 4.
I am particularly unsure as to whether or not they come out on the same week. This information is relevant because other hobbies have upcoming events (magic the gathering PTQ) that make weekly budgeting more useful when I can do it in advance.
In terms of changes I'd like to see In products, I'd like to see the Pathfinder Player Companion series become less Golarian specific and more generic as Pathfinder Campaign Setting is already focused on Golarian. It generally makes me have to very carefully cherry pick what I want.
Ideally I'd like the Player Companions to expand on small themes in the hardcovers but also expand on situations that Pathfinder doesn't really have many rules for such as hygiene, nutrition, fashion, culture specific item restrictions, example fantasy social class systems, premade shops by price range and technology ranges.
But yes, I don't care for too many PrCs and multi-PrC dipping into a super broken munchkin combo was one of the things that ruined 3.5 there at the end. I hope they never bring that back.
And I think this is where the division lies. Those that miss Prestige classes never had an issue with this. Either their group didn't mind combining lots of prestige classes... or they had a DM that simply limited the number of classes you could take... or just said no to certain combos. Those that are so anti-prestige class seem to have been the victim of others bringing crazy combo's to the table.
My points on Prestige classes...
1. Archtypes are a poor substitute for prestige classes. They are designed for 1 class. They require you to give up some other core ability of the class. For instance "Whip Guy" as a rogue would give up Trapfinding... but what if your group really needed a trapfinder... no whip for you!
2. Nothing says you have to allow all content. Its not like you have to have one or the other. But for many of us, we enjoyed prestige classes. Unless your worried it will break something then why be against it. Especially if they released one book of prestige classes... its one book. Just dont buy it or allow it at your table. Its that simple.
3. I dont care if they are specific or not. Make them as specific as you want. I can always reword the fluff. I just miss prestige classes. Why they have to be "generic" for the OP is a mistery to me.
- My 2 copper
I think that the OP is stating that some of the campaign specific PrC's go beyond fluff, but actually have the crunch effected for world specific reasons. I don't know that I agree with that. I do know that when I read Paths of Prestige I was very underwhelmed so I can't say if that was the case in that book. One example the OP did make in his other thread was about the JuJu Oracle which had crunch changes made (read: gimped) because of in-world fluff.
One example the OP did make in his other thread was about the JuJu Oracle which had crunch changes made (read: gimped) because of in-world fluff.
Just to be clear: the complaint is that an option in a campaign setting book was changed ("gimped") because of flavor ("fluff") reasons already established in the campaign setting (i.e., undead are evil, so the juju oracle shouldn't be able to create non-evil undead).
To reiterate: It wasn't an option in the (setting-neutral) core books that includes a restriction that suits the campaign world, it was an option in the campaign book changed to better suit the campaign.
Also: at no point did the new version say it replaced the old version, so anyone who wants to continue using the original version (say, in a different campaign setting that doesn't follow the flavor rules for Golarion) is still free to do so.
If release schedules are still being discussed;
While I'm quite happy with the rate of products being released I would like to know why release dates are not specific until very close to shipping.
The short answer is: once we send the files off to the printer (in China), it is not under our control. The printing company gives us an estimate as to how long it'll take to print and ship the materials to us here in the USA, but (given that we're talking about boat traffic across the Pacific Ocean) it is just an estimate. Sometimes they estimate 4 weeks and it only takes 3, sometimes it takes 8. :(
So we build a buffer into our schedule for that (so, frex, we expect it to arrive sometime between Sept 1 and Oct 15, and therefore we plan its release date to be Oct 31), but if there's a delay on their end, there's not much we can do about it. (We've even had this impact a GenCon release... ouch!)
I mean, sure, we can do everything earlier, but we're already operating WAY out in the future (freelancers are working on the August 2014 hardback right now), and the earlier we are, the harder it is to make use of other material being designed for that same release period.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4
|
I just want to take a moment to +1 what SKR said here about how far out the freelancing team is working. I just finished a turnover for a Paizo product that won't be in print until June of next year. The distance out on projects isn't a one-off, it's across the board.
Paizo works so far into the future that you need to drive about 88 miles per hour to catch up sometimes, and even then it's still tight scheduling.
tl;dr - we're all doing our best/this stuff is bananas sometimes
The short answer is: once we send the files off to the printer (in China), it is not under our control. The printing company gives us an estimate as to how long it'll take to print and ship the materials to us here in the USA, but (given that we're talking about boat traffic across the Pacific Ocean) it is just an estimate. Sometimes they estimate 4 weeks and it only takes 3, sometimes it takes 8. :(
The only thing I can say is :sadface:. I should probably just subscribe and let the mail surprise me.
Right, time for me to step off my own high horse and actually enter into the spirit of this thread.
One thing I really, really, really want to see is more Medium or smaller high-CR monsters. I GM almost all of the time, and I love the facility to be able to pull a monster out of the Bestiary and just use it as written. Once you start getting into CR 15+, almost everything is Large or bigger. I don't have the time (unfortunately) to learn every single ability high-level NPCs have, which is the staple for Medium-minus High-CR creatures, and I know that I don't manage to do them justice in combat encounters. I have a similar problem with dragons, actually - option overload. But my point is that while I love a truly legendary fight as much as the next guy (and believe me, five ancient or older blue dragons dropping in on a city is a pretty damned legendary fight), sometimes I want something smaller. More "indoor-friendly", but without a complete NPC stat block - for the record, the NPC Codex has seen a lot of use at my table since it came out, but one spellcaster can mean the difference between a 30 minute battle and a 2 hour battle.
So, Medium-minus, high CR, non-class-levels. That's my "thing I'd like to change".
The only thing I can say is :sadface:. I should probably just subscribe and let the mail surprise me.
The short answer is: once we send the files off to the printer (in China), it is not under our control. The printing company gives us an estimate as to how long it'll take to print and ship the materials to us here in the USA, but (given that we're talking about boat traffic across the Pacific Ocean) it is just an estimate. Sometimes they estimate 4 weeks and it only takes 3, sometimes it takes 8. :(
You should definitely subscribe. Whatever line you're interested in, a subscription means you generally get access to the material quickly and cheaply (especially if you want both PDF and book formats).
.You wont actually get surprised - paizo telegraph the monthly shipment a few weeks in advance and then you get a warning email a week or so before you get your actual "it's on it's way!" email (at which point you can download the PDF before receiving the hardcopy).
.
Nonetheless, subscribing is a no-brainer in my view unless you're patient enough to wait for Amazon (and dont value the PDF). Or unless you have an FLGS you wish to support.