|
As long as we're resurrecting the topic, I'm largely against the idea of giving individual characters access to multiple class decks. Whole decks would be insanely unbalancing (I agree that many characters are difficult to use in OP, but this idea gives a HUGE swing in the opposite direction) and the idea of "sacrificing" cards to add cards from another deck is pointless, because the very impetus of this thread is that many characters' own class decks contain gobs of useless cards, and thus, it's no sacrifice at all to get rid of them.
Also, the "pay real money for power" aspect seems unfair.
Flat's idea seems the most fair as it costs feats to get more power, however, it feels overly complicated for an otherwise relatively simple character progression system. (If it came down to a single role-like card for each class with core class abilities available as feats, it might not seem as intimidating as the wall of text...)
I feel the concept of prestige classes are already built into the role cards.
An individualized "booster" for each character available on DriveThruCards for a fairly low price could be helpful. As it stands, Paladins and Monks have access to 100 Boons and everyone else has access to 97. Do people think that three carefully chosen cards per character could make enough of a difference, perhaps? If they were available by class for the first 7 classes (12 cards per booster) and the "set" area were labelled with the character's name, that would feel fairly manageable.
For those of you playing "difficult" characters, what three already-existing cards from other decks would you pick to ease the pain?
Melindra, for example, could have a Light Crossbow (B), maybe one of the deck 3 or 4 magic daggers (Giantbane +1, Venomous +2), and a Call Weapon spell?
|
|
As long as we're resurrecting the topic, I'm largely against the idea of giving individual characters access to multiple class decks. Whole decks would be insanely unbalancing (I agree that many characters are difficult to use in OP, but this idea gives a HUGE swing in the opposite direction) and the idea of "sacrificing" cards to add cards from another deck is pointless, because the very impetus of this thread is that many characters' own class decks contain gobs of useless cards, and thus, it's no sacrifice at all to get rid of them.
Also, the "pay real money for power" aspect seems unfair.
Flat's idea seems the most fair as it costs feats to get more power, however, it feels overly complicated for an otherwise relatively simple character progression system. (If it came down to a single role-like card for each class with core class abilities available as feats, it might not seem as intimidating as the wall of text...)
I feel the concept of prestige classes are already built into the role cards.
An individualized "booster" for each character available on DriveThruCards for a fairly low price could be helpful. As it stands, Paladins and Monks have access to 100 Boons and everyone else has access to 97. Do people think that three carefully chosen cards per character could make enough of a difference, perhaps? If they were available by class for the first 7 classes (12 cards per booster) and the "set" area were labelled with the character's name, that would feel fairly manageable.
For those of you playing "difficult" characters, what three already-existing cards from other decks would you pick to ease the pain?
Melindra, for example, could have a Light Crossbow (B), maybe one of the deck 3 or 4 magic daggers (Giantbane +1, Venomous +2), and a Call Weapon spell?
Problem is that it's not three extra cards difference. When working with three characters versus four, you get a different mix of boon in the box (covering only three characters).
I'm also against the idea of multiclass mechanics described here and elsewhere. Don't want to see classes have access to other class decks. It would be a nightmare to bookkeep and to adjudicate. I'm not in the mood to audit class decks. I have in the past when people made errors. But this would be a nightmare. I do like the idea of a DriveThru solution, though.
|
|
Problem is that it's not three extra cards difference. When working with three characters versus four, you get a different mix of boon in the box (covering only three characters).
I agree. However, since we happen to have a situation where the Paladins and Monks have 100 card class decks while the original 7 classes have 97, that gives us a handy guideline that will generate fewer complaints of unfairness and lack-o-balance. I'm wondering if the character-specificness of the hypothetical booster would sufficiently redress the problem you've outlined above.
I'm also interested in the conversation. What three cards would you pick to make your character less difficult to play? Bonus points if they're not all the same card type...
The non-class-deck-versions of the iconics are their own problems, I guess, since (for example) Class Deck Kyra is VERY different from WotR Kyra...
I'm also against the idea of multiclass mechanics described here and elsewhere. Don't want to see classes have access to other class decks. It would be a nightmare to bookkeep and to adjudicate. I'm not in the mood to audit class decks. I have in the past when people made errors. But this would be a nightmare. I do like the idea of a DriveThru solution, though.
Totally agree.
|
|
I've played exactly three characters in OP... The first three picks off the top of my head (since I've not been past Deck 2 yet):
CD-Lem: Giantbane Dagger +1 (4), Force Missile (B), and maybe a Blessing of Sivanah at whatever deck-number is appropriate.
Vika: Magic Shield (B), Morning Star +1 (2)... I dunno. Maybe an Amulet of Fortitude (B)?
CD-Sajan's got pretty much everything he needs...
I originally posted this in a separate thread, because I couldn't find this one, but Rebel Song helpful pointed me back in the right direction.
I really hope that the second wave class-decks will have far fewer of these problems, and I don't really envisage an official Paizo response to round out the first-wave decks for reported OP, but for home games, I wanted to share the version we tried.
In this article I've gone into some details about exactly how it worked, and how we play-tested it, but I think this feels like we've managed to strike a good balance between filling in some of the gaping holes, and ensuring that there are enough restrictions to stop characters going crazy.
I'd be interested to know the thoughts of others.
|
|
I'd be interested to know the thoughts of others.
Well, to start, I'd re-word this statement:
When taking a deck upgrade from an unlocked deck, treat the acquired card as if its adventure deck number was 1 lower than printed.
To me, this would imply (counter to the example which clears things up nicely) that if I'm a Tier-2 Monk, and I've sacrificed my deck upgrade for Rogue Item access, then gotten an Item 2 during the following scenario, I'd be allowed to use an Item 3 from the Rogue deck and treat is as an Item 2 (one lower than printed on the card).
Beyond that, the balance seems decent. It's not overly complicated (though record-keeping on your Chronicle Sheet seems like it'd be troublesome).
And once again, this can't be done without a second investment of $20, which point has been hashed to death in this thread.
I'd be interested to know the thoughts of others.Well, to start, I'd re-word this statement:
When taking a deck upgrade from an unlocked deck, treat the acquired card as if its adventure deck number was 1 lower than printed.To me, this would imply (counter to the example which clears things up nicely) that if I'm a Tier-2 Monk, and I've sacrificed my deck upgrade for Rogue Item access, then gotten an Item 2 during the following scenario, I'd be allowed to use an Item 3 from the Rogue deck and treat is as an Item 2 (one lower than printed on the card).
I'll have a think about how best to re-word. I think the key thing is it's that the acquired card is treated as one lower - i.e. that Item 2 that you picked up during the scenario, is treated as a 1. Clealry i need to find another way of phrasing that.
Beyond that, the balance seems decent. It's not overly complicated (though record-keeping on your Chronicle Sheet seems like it'd be troublesome).And once again, this can't be done without a second investment of $20, which point has been hashed to death in this thread.
True - part of the reason i originally posted in Homebrew rather than OP, is that I see this more as a fix for the people who own and play everything.
I think for the people coming in new to the game, the fixes are take wave-2 class decks, or hope the person running the game can give you sensible advice on your choice of character...
MightyJim, it's probably easier to just say that the Class Deck cards from your subclass are 1 AD higher for deck upgrade purposes. That should make it work and be simple.
I should publish some of my "sensible advice on the choice of character..."
The second wave class decks seem to be balanced - I have the Paladin deck and my playgroup has some Monks, but there doesn't seem to be any issues like Rangers not having enough ranged weapons, or Zarlova running out of deck upgrades really quickly.