|
You can request right here. What would you like reconsidered? Also, since you have no PFS sessions recorded, are you asking for an adjustment to a PFS FAQ or the overall game itself? If asking for PFS, I would respectfully request you have some reported experience in participating in PFS before requesting a change be made that would affect the 60,000+ players with at least one recorded session in PFS organized play.Sigh...
How can a request for a reconsideration of a decision regarding character adjustments be considered for FAQ?
Does anybody even know what a FAQ is anymore or has demanding one every time somebody scratches a mole on their butt just become a knee-jerk reaction?
Mike, I think you might have misread his post. I think what Bruunwald was stating is that he thinks its ridiculous that someone would mark Tristan's original post as an FAQ. He is saying 'this kind of thing doesnt belong in an FAQ. Why do people keep marking stuff that doesnt belong in an FAQ as needing to be FAQed?'. He doesnt appear (at least in this post) to be saying he thinks rebuild should be allowed at the end of the playtest.
|
|
Would you consider allowing rebuilds (not Prestige-spending retrains, but outright rebuilds) of existing characters to bring them into one of these classes, provided the character can demonstrate a clear link to the new 'hybrid' class?
Arbitrated by ... ?
The campaign isn't designed to put that decision in the hands of anyone but the campaign coordinator--which is to say, that would be well outside a VO's job description--and Mike and John don't have time to review every individual request.
|
|
Sigh...
How can a request for a reconsideration of a decision regarding character adjustments be considered for FAQ?
Does anybody even know what a FAQ is anymore or has demanding one every time somebody scratches a mole on their butt just become a knee-jerk reaction?
Clicking the FAQ button is equivalent to saying "Please give us an official answer," especially in PFS, especially since messageboard clarifications became binding.
|
Arbitrated by rules. 'Clear link' could, for example, consist of having levels in either or both component classes, or levels in a similar class.
An example of classes allowed such a rebuild might be...
Warpriest: Existing PCs may convert to this if they have levels in Fighter, Cleric, Paladin, or Inquisitor. Attributes may be modified if necessary. Items that directly impact attributes (for example, let us say you bought a +Str item but now want a +Wis one for spellcasting) may be swapped out for another item of equal or lesser cost.
Those classes would be ones where the character had already displayed some or all of the Warpriest's noteworthy abilities, so it would not be storyline-jarring for them to now be doing Warpriest things.
I agree that "Paladin to Arcanist" as was cited earlier in the thread is not something the campaign wants. That's going from 'armored melee (or longbow) warrior' to 'scholarly robes and spells' and rightly hurts immersion. Going only to component classes/similar classes would make it far less an issue, I believe.
|
|
Thanks for the clarification, Chris. I have to be honest that I haven't read much of the play test feedback yet as I've been at JimCon in Winnipeg and Ucon in Detroit, and have been on the road for 12 days.
If something drastically changes about a class, such as a primary stat changing from INT to CHA or some such, then we will certainly address it. Additionally, almost every situation can be covered under the current guidelines. However, giving a carte Blanche and allowing full rebuilds after the play test is completed would do more harm than good. If someone buys a wand and has used 34 charges, do you allow a full refund since they wouldn't be able to use the wand due to changes to the class? There are a good many problems I can foresee arising by just allowing a free, full rebuild.
When I am back in the office next week, I will be able to sit down and chat with some folks at work to get a better idea of what changes are forecasted or what might be coming down the pipe. However, I've got to be honest and let the player base know that I am leaning to letting this play test follow the same course as the previous play tests. People forecasted doom and gloom then and the system worked relatively well.
Awesome, great answer.
|
If something drastically changes about a class, such as a primary stat changing from INT to CHA or some such, then we will certainly address it. Additionally, almost every situation can be covered under the current guidelines. However, giving a carte Blanche and allowing full rebuilds after the play test is completed would do more harm than good. If someone buys a wand and has used 34 charges, do you allow a full refund since they wouldn't be able to use the wand due to changes to the class? There are a good many problems I can foresee arising by just allowing a free, full rebuild.
We already get full rebuilds after every adventure with a level 1 character. The question you posed about whether you get a refund on a partially-used wand when you rebuild - that should already have an answer, because that situation already exists in the campaign.
|
I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting or expecting that your situation applies here - you're stuck as a standard cleric.I personally have a semi retired Character from a year ago ... (Sitrting at level 8) and have had no working concept for her since the Undead Lord got banned ... Im anxiously awaiting the official release of this .. this may actually allow me to scrape the Dust off of her
Excuse me? If he hasn't played his character since the Undead Lord archetype was banned, then he can certainly rebuild that character into anything he wants, including one of the playtest classes. He's most certainly not "stuck as a standard cleric". Mike was very reasonable (I would say generous) with the rebuilds he allowed when those archetypes were banned. What leads you to believe he will be anything but when the playtest ends? Why don't you just play the classes, see how you like them, and see what happens if changes are made. I'm sure you won't be disappointed.
|
|
I personally have a semi retired Character from a year ago ... (Sitrting at level 8) and have had no working concept for her since the Undead Lord got banned ... Im anxiously awaiting the official release of this .. this may actually allow me to scrape the Dust off of her
I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting or expecting that your situation applies here - you're stuck as a standard cleric.
This is about the very real possibility that an entire class is currently undergoing a rewrite of its' core mechanics or (at the most remote) being banned altogether for not playing nice with PFS wealth rules. Not an archetype being removed with an obvious path to compensation. A cleric can do just fine as an undead-herder without the Undead Lord archetype anyway, just roll with the punches.
Actually, no, he is not stuck as a vanilla cleric. When the Undead Lord, Master Summoner, and Synthesist Summoner were banned, the PCs got a free rebuild, since the whole thing qualified for that under the rebuild rules.
I don't know about Wraith's Undead Lord, but mine was built a bit differently, and the Undead Lord thing was fairly central to his build. I haven't really looked at him, much, but I also had the benefit of having him just at 2.0 when the banhammer hit, so he qualified for an even more thorough rebuild. Main thing is that, as presently written, the next time I play him, good, bad or indifferent, he is stuck with whatever I do with him. And he is one of my few race boon PCs...
|
|
IIRC ...race had to stay ...and any levels not affected by the undead lord ban hammer had to stay ....of course with the advent of ultimate campaign even that is changeable ...
and that is correct ....the character has not been played since the ban hammer landed ...I have had a concept or 2 bounce around in my head but being an 8th level character I wanted.to test said concept before commiting to it
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mike and John,
The playtest versions of the new classes are, by their nature, in flux. After they get nailed down, they may not be what a player thought she was signing up for.
I would suggest that it's reasonable to allow a partial "rebuild", into either the hybrid class or either of its parent classes. (So after the playtest, I could take "Mama Vikya," my 4th-level Shaman, and settle her down into either the eventual Shaman class, Oracle, or Witch.) No change in attributes, no change in race or bloodlines, no full-price refunds for equipment. But a settling out of class / archetype, feats, skill ranks, traits.
I think that a policy such as this would encourage players to try out one of the hybrid classes, knowing that he can shift over to a related class if it ends up not working to his satisfaction.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are retraining and rebuilding rules already in place in PFS, and there isn't any real need to expand them for this playtest.
If players are looking to get PFS credit for participating in the playtest they can use any of the sanctioned material that allows a home game mode - APs and Dragon's Demand. Then assign the credit to a PFS character. The character getting the credit could be an existing character or a brand new character that would use a new hybrid class.
Players can play Pathfinder without playing Pathfinder Society. If they want to playtest the new hybrid classes at higher levels then they can play a home game if they feel that they might end up throwing away or wasting precious PFS credit on a concept that might get changed in the next couple of months.
If the local PFS gameday is the only venue for them to play Pathfinder try to organize an extra day or slot set aside specifically for playtesting the new Hybrid classes. Just don't expect to earn PFS credit for it outside of what I previously mentioned.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Brian, I agree with you; there are retraining rules. They require the player to buy a hardcover book that is used in PFS only for about six pages covering retraining. If three players help the playtest by turning GM-credit shadow characters into, say, a Swashbuckler, Warpriest, and Bloodrager, then turning the characters into more conventional classes after the playtest requires each of them to buy a copy of the book or PDF, and drains their PCs dry of prestige.
Playing through "Dragon's Demand" or enough of an Adventure Path to earn a module takes a lot of time. In Pathfinder Society, I can build and playtest three different classes in one day, reporting on how they work in an authentic gaming context. One of the feedback poll questions asks "Was this class more powerful or less powerful than other hybrid classes you tested?" To answer that question, we need to test-drive more than one. And we have to do so before the playtest window closes in a couple of weeks. I don't think playing a "long-form" adventure is the right answer for everybody.
|
|
Along with the retraining rules the campaign does currently have rules to cover rebuilding characters because of adjustments to the rules. The rebuilding rules can be found on pg 27 of the Campaign Guide v5.0 under the Playtests and Errata heading.
The methods you describe for accurate playtesting is to play the same adventure multiple times with different combinations of new and old classes to determine how balanced the new classes are. This does not fit in with how the PFS campaign is played, and is best suited in a home game enviroment.
Like I said in my previous post. People can play Pathfinder without playing Pathfinder Society, so creating special rules for this playtest isn't necessary.
|
|
The playtest version is legal until the real version comes out right?
In the past playtests have been legal until the book is published for every other playtest allowed for PFS, and I haven't seen any posts from Mike or John to the contrary. You just have to make sure you're using the most up to date version.
|
|
Brian, I agree with you; there are retraining rules. They require the player to buy a hardcover book that is used in PFS only for about six pages covering retraining.
I agree with everything in the rest of your post, but for this part--you forget that there are also the ridiculously overpowered traits that are normally balanced by the fact that you can't select them without having randomly rolled a particular background on a d100 chart but in PFS you can just take whichever you want carte blanche. We're seeing lots of people up here with Ultimate Campaign for those.
|
|
Brian, I agree with you; there are retraining rules. They require the player to buy a hardcover book that is used in PFS only for about six pages covering retraining.I agree with everything in the rest of your post, but for this part--you forget that there are also the ridiculously overpowered traits that are normally balanced by the fact that you can't select them without having randomly rolled a particular background on a d100 chart but in PFS you can just take whichever you want carte blanche. We're seeing lots of people up here with Ultimate Campaign for those.
Ooh. Which ones are those? I scanned through the list but none popped out at me--I haven't spent enough time with the book, apparently.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Ooh. Which ones are those? I scanned through the list but none popped out at me--I haven't spent enough time with the book, apparently.Brian, I agree with you; there are retraining rules. They require the player to buy a hardcover book that is used in PFS only for about six pages covering retraining.I agree with everything in the rest of your post, but for this part--you forget that there are also the ridiculously overpowered traits that are normally balanced by the fact that you can't select them without having randomly rolled a particular background on a d100 chart but in PFS you can just take whichever you want carte blanche. We're seeing lots of people up here with Ultimate Campaign for those.
Fate's Favored x100 bajillion
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
isn't the halfling lucky saves a luck bonus? so a halfling with fate's favored just gets an automatic +2 to saves instead of +1? bajezuz.
Nah, they are racial bonuses.
BUT, a half-orc with the sacred tattoo racial trait DOES get a +1 luck bonus to all saves. Or a halfing with the adaptable luck trait (and its booster feats).
The combo has been explored many other places. Your main boosters:
Half-orc Sacred Tatoo (+1 all saves)
Halfling Adaptable luck (+2, 3/day on one attack, save, skill, ability check)
Archeologist Bard song (+1 attack, weapon damage, saves, skills)
spell prayer (+1 attack, weapon damage, saves, skills)
Luckstone (+1 saves, ability checks, skills)
Jingasa of the fortunate soldier (+1 AC)
Luckblade (+1 saves)
Symbol of Luck (+1 saves)
Destined Bloodline Arcana (+x saves)
Mysterious Stranger Class Feature (+x reflex saves)
Luck-heal Variant Channel (+x attack, CMB, save or skill)
I'm sure there are others.