What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.
|
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
But you are trying to say it's a houserule which isn't accurate.
Shallow, please just stop trolling and stay on topic.
Speaking of I think certain posts have already answered OPs question such as those from Rynjin, Marthkus, and others who posted stories of Spellcasters being big problems in a game.
Can we get a thread lock please?
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
Do you agree that if the DM sets reasonable guidelines, such as "all spells from Core & APG" or even "all spells from the PRD" , then since neither of those include "Blood money" it's NOT a "houserule that the spell is thence excluded?
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
Do you agree that if the DM sets reasonable guidelines, such as "all spells from Core & APG" or even "all spells from the PRD" , then since neither of those include "Blood money" it's NOT a "houserule that the spell is thence excluded?
It is a house rule, even if a reasonable one. By definition the "pathfinder" game includes the complete body of material produced by the publisher of that game for that game.
It is a house rule, even if a reasonable one. By definition the "pathfinder" game includes the complete body of material produced by the publisher of that game for that game.Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
Do you agree that if the DM sets reasonable guidelines, such as "all spells from Core & APG" or even "all spells from the PRD" , then since neither of those include "Blood money" it's NOT a "houserule that the spell is thence excluded?
Ya, this. Which you'll note doesn't include 3.5 stuff.
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
That if you don't give them 2 new spells at a level because they can't 'research' them that's a houserule. Obviously you can't just write down whatever you want including material from sources your DM said weren't allowed, but a GM who doesn't allow you 2 at a level is definitely using a houserule and likely shortchanging you.
Edit: I feel like I just repeated my own quote....
|
|
It is a house rule, even if a reasonable one. By definition the "pathfinder" game includes the complete body of material produced by the publisher of that game for that game.Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
Do you agree that if the DM sets reasonable guidelines, such as "all spells from Core & APG" or even "all spells from the PRD" , then since neither of those include "Blood money" it's NOT a "houserule that the spell is thence excluded?
Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it's not printed in a rule-book, you can't really assume access to it when your GM says "we're playing pathfinder"
APs aren't rule-books.
|
|
Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
That if you don't give them 2 new spells at a level because they can't 'research' them that's a houserule. Obviously you can't just write down whatever you want including material from sources your DM said weren't allowed, but a GM who doesn't allow you 2 at a level is definitely using a houserule and likely shortchanging you.
Edit: I feel like I just repeated my own quote....
The problem is your interpretation of "research". Not sure if you are aware but there is no RAW for researching spells. This is going to depend entirely on the DM. For example, if you wanted a spell outside of the normal list, the DM could allow you to research and add that spell to your list. You get the 2 spells per level but you don't get to automatically say I am researching for spell X if it's not a part of the allowed selection. Also, the research part can be for creating your own custom spell.
|
|
Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
Not the same thing I'm afraid. We aren't talking about rule 0. The CRB is the default, everything else is not.
The problem is your interpretation of "research". Not sure if you are aware but there is no RAW for researching spells. This is going to depend entirely on the DM. For example, if you wanted a spell outside of the normal list, the DM could allow you to research and add that spell to your list. You get the 2 spells per level but you don't get to automatically say I am researching for spell X if it's not a part of the allowed selection. Also, the research part can be for creating your own custom spell.Who said you could pick them from any source? No one. No one did. You don't need to correct people about that.What books are used in my campaign has nothing to do with rulesOkay, but that's not what I said was a houserule, nor what Kitty said was.
Just because a spell is listed for a specific class, doesn't mean you get auto access to it. I would rule that the DM would assign the studying part as a part of the adventure. The player doesn't automatically get to handwave the research part.I said you automatically learn 2 each level, and that is RAW. Unless your houseruling, the guy gets 2 spells per level, regardless of where he is and what he can access for 'research'.Sure. You get two spells per level. From the DM approved guidelines for that campaign. If the DM sez "Core & APG only" that's not a "houserule".
If you say you can pick spells from ANY source, even if not in the DM approved guidelines, that allows all 3.5 and 3PP spells.
You seemed to be saying that if the DM limits the sources for new spells, that's a "houserule" . I disagree.
What then, are you saying?
That if you don't give them 2 new spells at a level because they can't 'research' them that's a houserule. Obviously you can't just write down whatever you want including material from sources your DM said weren't allowed, but a GM who doesn't allow you 2 at a level is definitely using a houserule and likely shortchanging you.
Edit: I feel like I just repeated my own quote....
Where did I say you should get things outside of your normal list? I didn't put down a definition of research for you to get an interpretation from. What I meant is that you always get 2 spells, from your class's spell list, which is probably going to be from the sources your DM has approved. I didn't say anything about creating new spells or taking one from the druid list so I don't know what your talking about.
Not the same thing I'm afraid. We aren't talking about rule 0. The CRB is the default, everything else is not.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
You talking about actual games or the PF general rules?
If you're talking about actual games you have to include rule 0, the rest of the rules are only valid because the GM wills them to be.
If you are talking about the PF general rules then you can't really say CRB only. The PF general rules include every rule book. Which Paizo was kind enough to give a list of
|
|
Not the same thing I'm afraid. We aren't talking about rule 0. The CRB is the default, everything else is not.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
You talking about actual games or the PF general rules?
If you're talking about actual games you have to include rule 0, the rest of the rules are only valid because the GM wills them to be.
If you are talking about the PF general rules then you can't really say CRB only. The PF general rules include every rule book. Which Paizo was kind enough to give a list of
I hope you noticed that the CRB and Beastiary are the only two books listed. The beastiary was a given so I didn't have to mention it.
I hope you noticed that the CRB and Beastiary are the only two books listed. The beastiary was a given so I didn't have to mention it.Not the same thing I'm afraid. We aren't talking about rule 0. The CRB is the default, everything else is not.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
You talking about actual games or the PF general rules?
If you're talking about actual games you have to include rule 0, the rest of the rules are only valid because the GM wills them to be.
If you are talking about the PF general rules then you can't really say CRB only. The PF general rules include every rule book. Which Paizo was kind enough to give a list of
glance at the left of the screen...
EDIT: or the center part of the screen. Actually what are you reading!?
|
|
Not the same thing I'm afraid. We aren't talking about rule 0. The CRB is the default, everything else is not.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
You talking about actual games or the PF general rules?
If you're talking about actual games you have to include rule 0, the rest of the rules are only valid because the GM wills them to be.
If you are talking about the PF general rules then you can't really say CRB only. The PF general rules include every rule book. Which Paizo was kind enough to give a list of
Second paragraph under introduction.
I hope you noticed that the CRB and Beastiary are the only two books listed. The beastiary was a given so I didn't have to mention it.glance at the left of the screen...
EDIT: or the center part of the screen. Actually what are you reading!?
Second paragraph under introduction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First paragraph:
"The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game is released under the Open Game License, meaning the core rules that drive the Pathfinder RPG system are available to anyone to use for free under the terms of the OGL. This compendium of rules, charts, and tables contains all of the open rules in the system, and is provided for the use of the community of gamers and publishers working with the system."
These are the rules for PF.
There are no official rules because no one plays official pathfinder. The part about the CRB and bestiary just says those books are user friendly. It doesn't say those are the official rules.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok can we just ignore Shallowsoul... He is serious nothing more than a troll...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ya, this. Which you'll note doesn't include 3.5 stuff.
It is a house rule, even if a reasonable one. By definition the "pathfinder" game includes the complete body of material produced by the publisher of that game for that game.
I have to disagree. A Houserule" is where you house's rule differ from the published rules. Setting up the campaign is the duty of the DM- picking the AP 9if any) what point buy or dice rolls, what books to allow, etc- these are "campaign setting", not houserules.
And then by your rules, even choosing just Paizo stuff become a "houserule" as 3PP stuff is recognized by Paizo, and PF is designed to be mostly compatible with 3.5.
|
|
First paragraph:
"The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game is released under the Open Game License, meaning the core rules that drive the Pathfinder RPG system are available to anyone to use for free under the terms of the OGL. This compendium of rules, charts, and tables contains all of the open rules in the system, and is provided for the use of the community of gamers and publishers working with the system."
These are the rules for PF.
There are no official rules because no one plays official pathfinder. The part about the CRB and bestiary just says those books are user friendly. It doesn't say those are the official rules.
No one plays official Pathfinder? How did you come to the conclusion? Also, why are quoting the OGL disclaimer for PF? That has nothing to do with what is core.
|
|
Awwww don't get mad cause I'm right.Of course you're right. Because you weren't arguing anything
"A DM can choose not to allow books if he doesn't want them" ok? So what? No one in this thread ever disagreed with that statement. You still haven't explained where you were going with this.Seriously you're arguing literally nothing then patting your back on "proving" something no one disagreed with in the first place.
*facepalm*
What is being argued is whether or not allowing specific books is considered a houserule. Some people apparently using the term "houserule" incorrectly.
If a GM decides to ban a spell that is listed in the core rule book, do you not consider that a house rule?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Awwww don't get mad cause I'm right.Of course you're right. Because you weren't arguing anything
"A DM can choose not to allow books if he doesn't want them" ok? So what? No one in this thread ever disagreed with that statement. You still haven't explained where you were going with this.Seriously you're arguing literally nothing then patting your back on "proving" something no one disagreed with in the first place.
*facepalm*
What is being argued is whether or not allowing specific books is considered a houserule. Some people apparently using the term "houserule" incorrectly.
But you were arguing it with people who didn't say otherwise.
|
|
Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
Actually, WoTc has specifically said that everything in 4th edition is core, which means all bits of material is default.
Actually, WoTc has specifically said that everything in 4th edition is core, which means all bits of material is default.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
Okay, but you mentioned fourth edition in a conversation that had nothing to do with fourth and without explaining why you mentioned it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one plays official Pathfinder? How did you come to the conclusion? Also, why are quoting the OGL disclaimer for PF? That has nothing to do with what is core.
Go try to play official Pathfinder. You can't. Even PFS is it's own special set of rules.
Core is not all of Pathfinder. If you want to talk about the pathfinder general rules that includes all the rule books. If you want to only talk about the core general pathfinder rules that is something else entirely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one plays official Pathfinder? How did you come to the conclusion? Also, why are quoting the OGL disclaimer for PF? That has nothing to do with what is core.Go try to play official Pathfinder. You can't. Even PFS is it's own special set of rules.
Core is not all of Pathfinder. If you want to talk about the pathfinder general rules that includes all the rule books. If you want to only talk about the core general pathfinder rules that is something else entirely.
Wow... I completely lost the thread of this tangent... but I believe I agree with Marthkus. I... need to go lie down I think... maybe get a bottle of... something.
If a GM decides to ban a spell that is listed in the core rule book, do you not consider that a house rule?The CRB is part of the default so banning a spell from the CRB could he described as a houserule.
Who defines the default? Paizo's official society tables allow more than what's in the core rule book. It makes more sense to me that all published content is allowed until the GM says no. Why would Paizo publish options that they assume people aren't going to use?
|
|
Okay, but you mentioned fourth edition in a conversation that had nothing to do with fourth and without explaining why you mentioned it.Actually, WoTc has specifically said that everything in 4th edition is core, which means all bits of material is default.Incorrect.
Anything outside the CRB is optional. This isn't 4th edition D&D.
Anything anywhere is optional. The whole game is optional... and nothing about 4th edition D&D changes that either. Hell, you're even wrong there because a DM could exclude the CRB if he wanted too.
Seriously I have no idea what point you're trying to make at this point.
If terms are going to get thrown around here as part of an argument then they need to be used correctly.
In 3rd edition, the big three PHB, DMG, and MM are the default. When you sit down for a game, it is assumed those three books are to he used, anything outside that is for DM approval.
Now in Pathfinder, it's the CRB and Beastiary that are considered core and part of the default. Anything outside those two are subject to DM approval.
When 4th edition came along, WoTc decided that everything published would be considered core. It didn't matter which book you showed up with, anything in that book would be considered the default and open to players.
These have nothing to do with Rule 0.
|
|
No one plays official Pathfinder? How did you come to the conclusion? Also, why are quoting the OGL disclaimer for PF? That has nothing to do with what is core.Go try to play official Pathfinder. You can't. Even PFS is it's own special set of rules.
Core is not all of Pathfinder. If you want to talk about the pathfinder general rules that includes all the rule books. If you want to only talk about the core general pathfinder rules that is something else entirely.
PFS is something all together separate.
I have 20yrs playing D&D then transitioned to Pathfinder when 4e came out.....and my group uses the standard rules while playing and we find that its very balanced. I read one post that said Wizards don't use dice and I am trying to figure that out because I role dice all the time for my wizard and the dice gods see to it that I fail a good amount of the time. I think that the debate over casters and martial comes down to house rules that throw things out of whack, to much multiclass or cherry picking as my group calls it, and everyone not following the rules. Yes the GM is the one who holds the frame work together but they need to follow the rules as written unless and I stress only if it derails the game totally or if it is a total miss use of the rules. As a GM myself there are many times in which a player out thought me and I had to make adjustment to the game. I reward the player for being creative rather than thwarting them because it mess up my plan.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stuff
You're assuming an awful lot.
The closest thing you can get to an official Pathfinder experience is probably PFS since it's sanctioned by Paizo.
There is no default assumption of the game. That's why it's argued for a base line.
I prefer that Base Line to be the PRD which Paizo provides and includes all the hardbacks. I think thats a fair baseline to discuss. It excludes splatbooks and AP material which we have developer confirmation for not being balanced as well with because they're splatbooks.
Even limited to Core, Casters still have an incredible wealth of options both narrative and non-narrative. Comparatively, Martials have even less options and the gap widens more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
