The problem with permanent wealth loss is that it essentially causes the player group to become weaker as you get further in the game which causes you to die more which causes you to get weaker and so forth.
It also causes newly created characters to be of higher value than say resurrecting existing ones. The new character hasn't had his wealth nickel and dimed at up to that point and doesn't require the resurrection which will put them 6,000 gold further down.
I still hold the belief that without recompensating expenditures at a later time not even immediately, you can hardly say a 6th level character is functioning full power when he's short 6,000 gold or more.
I really like your example. The Rogue in this instance benefits heavily when WBL(in my opinion) is done properly. He'll have the buffs he needs and options when his sub par class features fail him.
No-no... I completely understand your point now, and, phrased in this way, I can't help but agree. It's just in the nobody I've gamed with has run it this way. I think since we've been using wealth by level as a guideline rather than a hard rule, and DMs have always had non-power options upon which we had to spend money, there were arbitrary reasons why a direct increase in money rarely resulted in a direct increase in power.
But from a rules perspective, I can see why it would be important to iron that out.
there is enough unique to the class that sharing spontaneous casting with all casters will not detract from it.I don't see a reason to have separate classes with those distinctions. You could combine them without much trouble.
fair enough.
I prefer that there be multiple caster types not just one with variations.
|
there is enough unique to the class that sharing spontaneous casting with all casters will not detract from it.I don't see a reason to have separate classes with those distinctions. You could combine them without much trouble.fair enough.
I prefer that there be multiple caster types not just one with variations.
exactly, More options and systems is better than 1. To build a straw man, it is better to have different weapons instead of one (ranged, reach, melee, light, one handed, exotic..).
the soon to be released Arcanist class will combine wizard and sorcerer classes in an unique way. Which is also fun.
|
I would have the wizard prepare spells, but cast any prepared spell as a "known" spell like the current Sorcerer, keeping the spells per day to how many slots he has prepared. (including bonus slots from INT and and feated addition slots gained)
The Wizard would still have the spellbook, preperation and choices, just not the amnisia.
Look out for the Advanced Class Guide, this summer, because that idea will be covered by the Arcanist, assuming it remains close to the playtest version.
Wa-hey! Ninja'ed by everybody!
What I want to see in 2E Pathfinder?
Items rusted by the rust monster will unrust themselves (ooops...that is D&D IP....).
I would have the wizard prepare spells, but cast any prepared spell as a "known" spell like the current Sorcerer, keeping the spells per day to how many slots he has prepared. (including bonus slots from INT and and feated addition slots gained)
The Wizard would still have the spellbook, preperation and choices, just not the amnisia.
Look out for the Advanced Class Guide, this summer, because that idea will be covered by the Arcanist, assuming it remains close to the playtest version.
Wa-hey! Ninja'ed by everybody!
It's not really a ninja if you're late by about 6 hours.
|
|
The problem with permanent wealth loss is that it essentially causes the player group to become weaker as you get further in the game which causes you to die more which causes you to get weaker and so forth.
It also causes newly created characters to be of higher value than say resurrecting existing ones. The new character hasn't had his wealth nickel and dimed at up to that point and doesn't require the resurrection which will put them 6,000 gold further down.
Maybe the problem is less about how WBL is handled, and more that resurrections shouldn't cost money?
They shouldn't be 'spells', but rituals, which only work if the PCs have earned enough divine favour to be owed a second chance, or a deity sees them as having future potential?
And if there is a price to be paid, it should not be in filthy mortal gold?
I'd like to see a better 1st-level experience that you don't need a great GM, a lucky set of rolls, or a robust set of house rules to have, so:
Every class can heal in a flavor-appropriate way. Healing surges were probably the best idea in the whole 4E ruleset, and I think the biggest reason people hated them is because they worked identically for everyone and turned the game into Everyone's A Cleric. A system where Barbarians slowly accrue hit points by murdering things and Bards slowly accrue hit points by buffing the party (etc.) would make more sense, I think.
Have armor class be a measurement of whether or not you get hit on attack rolls, but have different kinds of armor mitigate damage in addition. Give each weapon an armor penetration value to compensate, but have the armor penetration value only apply to characters wearing armor so casters aren't even more vulnerable than they already are.*
I'd also like to see more at-will and per-encounter spells, and to see some lower-level spells go from per-day to per-encounter and maybe even to at-will as the caster goes up in level.
Less spells overall, with more variety in metamagic feats and descriptive possibilities to make up the difference.
The GM can award players mechanically for being more creative with their descriptions, characters, etc. The game is more fun for everyone when creative solutions to problems are encouraged.
Faster combat with more emphasis on improvisation and creativity.
I dunno, just some ideas.
* - Example: If Leather Armor has a damage mitigation value of 4, and an arrow's damage roll does (let's say) 6 damage with no armor penetration, the damage would be 2 HP plus the arrow's armor penetration value, which we'll say is 2. Ergo, overall damage is 4 HP. If an arrow with the same damage roll hit a mage who's just wearing street clothes, it would hit for 6 damage.
What I want to see in 2E Pathfinder?
Items rusted by the rust monster will unrust themselves (ooops...that is D&D IP....).
I see what you did there!
This limits the poor Wizard even moreI think I can safely ignore the rest of the post.
I had to read the rest to make sure he wasn't using sarcasm!
|
I would have the wizard prepare spells, but cast any prepared spell as a "known" spell like the current Sorcerer, keeping the spells per day to how many slots he has prepared. (including bonus slots from INT and and feated addition slots gained)
The Wizard would still have the spellbook, preperation and choices, just not the amnisia.
Look out for the Advanced Class Guide, this summer, because that idea will be covered by the Arcanist, assuming it remains close to the playtest version.
Wa-hey! Ninja'ed by everybody!
I would make the Ninja Class a seperate class with some Assassin skills, have it be the sneaky death type and do away completely with alternate classes. (no more "well, this is a rogue with Ki" stuff)
To your point, the Arcanist is very limited by known spells (more so than the Sorcerer) and has a mechanic that sucks items and (as been talked about in this thread) scews the WBL for the class by a significant amount. Just working with the points in the Arcane pool normally there, it equals to about the extra spells that the Wizard would normally get anyway.
To clarify, it is balanced with the old guy using the walker in mind. I like the class, don't get me wrong, but it is only a step in the direction, not the whole solution.