The balance of costs assumes that you will fail sometimes, and be afraid to go for a critical success other times, and the point of the quirks, perks, and flaws is for there to be uncertainty. You pretty much can't completely destroy the item unless you go for a critical success on one of the dangerous challenges (with the exception of the final challenge, which has no check if you have the prereqs), so it's not like you're sunk if you fail a few times.Ah. Perhaps I misunderstood the rules, because by my understanding not participating in a check is akin to a failure.
You fail that challenge, sure, but assuming you have the prereqs (for the complete the item challenge), you could fail every other challenge along the way and still craft the item. Now, it might have flaws or cost a lot, but you can still fail them all and succeed at crafting.
In particular, the ones with high DCs tend to also have low failure penalties. For example, you can remove Knowledge (geography) from your list entirely in exchange for a 4% chance of encountering a challenge that you will always fail, but that will simply add 3 days to the craft time and a quirk. You can remove Linguistics 20 and you'll just wind up taking 3 extra days (not even any quirks) whenever you hit the 4% chance of a rare reference (and probably somebody has +10 or more Perception in your party anyway, so you'll still have some chance of saving 1 day instead). Etc.The problem I have with that is that by my understanding, those three days leads to three more challenges.
Nope. Page 180 says you generally add 1 random challenge per 5,000 GP, so the handy haversack example would have only 1 random challenge (the GM is free to add less or more). Either way, extra days do not generate more, nor do fewer days subtract them (see adjustments on 181).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'm going to use the new crafting rules, I like how they make crafting a more engaging endeavour, rather than just a background activity that gameplay-wise feels more like the crafter pc occasionally excreting new items. But I'll eliminate special material costs from the crafting time calculation, because it doesn't make any sense that a gold ring takes ten times the time to make that a silver ring requires.
I'm not a massive fan of the dynamic item crafting rules so far, but I do love the new Craft/Profession stuff, as well as background skills and the new Rogue.
The automatic bonuses, altered spell-casting, worse diseases/poisons and suchlike I'll have to save up, rather than springing on the party all at once. :)
The alternative Crafting rules... not that every campaign even HAS a crafter, but how can these even be considered 'optional' when compared to the rules in the CRB?
All this talk of Dynamic Magic Item Creation has me confused. Isn't Fuzzy talking about the Alternate Crafting rules? It seems applying his statement to Magic Item creation would make it rather tongue-in-cheek...
...or else, he's a bit touched.
I thought he was talking about Alternate Crafting too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty danged sure the new poison rules are going to be the new thing.
I had my first encounter with the new poison system on Sunday. Level 2 party fighting an advanced Doru Div. Failed three three saves in a row (fort is my strongest save, go natural 1s!) against a low-DC wisdom poison.
In the old system I would have taken a total of 3-6 wisdom damage, which has essentially no impact on my character apart from penalizing my will save and my skill checks. I'd need to fail another ~5 poison saves before the wisdom damage had a chance of knocking me unconscious.
In the new system, after failing three saves I spent the rest of the day Confused. My friends had to grapple me to the ground, pin me, and tie me up before I quite literally stabbed myself to death with my own spiked armor. All of this took place while the rest of the fight raged on, so the div was having a field day flying around (unrelated but wth is up with low-level APs and flying High-DR boss monsters?) and being generally annoying. Several other people were also poisoned, but luckily their dice weren't as frigid as mine.
My initial but obviously somewhat subjective first impression is that poisons may actually be a little bit too lethal at low levels now, since low level characters don't have the means to counter it. Swashbucklers in particular are definitely going to have a hard time with the new poisons. Suffice to say that my next purchase will be potions of Delay Poison.
Here's my "new normal", post-Pathfinder Unchained...
Chapter 1:
All the Unchained classes, are the official version in my campaign. I discussed with my players, and they are on board. Our Rogue had a lot of fun adapting her character!
Chapter 2:
Background skills are a welcome new addition. I love anything that reaffirms that this is a "Roleplaying Game", and not just a combat game!
Alternate crafting and profession Rules are on, for the same reason background skills are.
Skill Unlocks, are still in the testing phase. I think they have much to offer, especially for Rogues, whom are thematically perfect for it.
Variant Multiclassing: It's an option for any player who want to use it. The original system, is also an option.
Chapter 3:
Revised Action Economy is our new system. A lot of the discussion on it, has focused on how it affects specific examples, and the initial adaptation of those- along with some butt hurt over it all- but, in the big picture, I think it makes for some much smoother gameplay, and cinematic action. It does favor martials, but, so what. I'm over that.
Wound Thresholds are in. Though it has everyone in my group nervous, but in a fun way. I think this also favors martials, but it's honestly, very realistic to how combat would payout. "Ouch, you ass, that really hurt!"
Chapter 4:
Esoteric Material Components are optional. They're a good alternative in a treasure hordes. A buff to casters who make the effort to search them out.
We'll use Overclocked Spell as a little bit of throwing a bone to spell casters, after all the buffs martials have been getting.
Scaling Items are really fun. There are some really cool examples in the book.
I have not had the time to take a long look at the alternate monster creation system yet, but if it is like most of the book, it should be great.
When I stated "Alternate Crafting Rules", I was referring to the section in the table of contents called "Alternate Crafting Rules" in Chapter 3, which deal with mundane (normal, masterwork, special material) crafting. You guys are mostly talking about the "Dynamic Magic Item Creation" section in Chapter 4.
Of course, that said - this confusion is still a sitcking point with me. The two systems really SHOULD be connected together. Why is the task of making a mundane item a completely different process than the task of enchanting that mundane item. In rewriting both systems mostly from scratch, they really should have been combined together.
The really sad thing is, I actually have most of a complete replacement system for both written, and was thinking of publishing it - but with this book, it may not be worth it, as the major 'problems' are fixed, just not in what I would deem the ideal way.
|
I'm definitely going to be allowing the unchained classes, with Summoner being Unchained or not at all, and the others being options.
Thanks to this thread, I've started looking through some of the other systems in more detail to see what to keep "always on." So far I've only ruled out the Alternate Profession Rules, because they are very very bad as written. (8,000 gp/month income? Sure, I'll take that.) They are, I believe, something you can houserule into effectiveness, though that doesn't really count at that point since it's not the Unchained ruleset.
I have a new player playing a fighter in my Kingmaker campaign. I'm so far undecided on whether I'm going to open up the Stamina rules to her. I think I will, because she's playing an archer and there are other archers in the party using slightly more archery-friendly builds, so she can probably use all the help she can get. Overall, the stamina stuff seems like a good set of rules to keep, though I haven't sat down to analyze it yet.
I have done things like background skills in the past and don't see any reason not to standardize on the Unchained implementation. It seems to be as good as anything else.
|
|
My players just reached a new level, so I took advantage of the level-up to implement some Unchained rules. These are all new players, so I'm picking pretty sparingly to avoid overwhelming them with alterations. I went with:
* Automatic Bonus Progression with "capacity" rules. (I did my own writeup of the capacity rules since I found the language in the blog rather unclear and difficult to understand at first.)
* Background Skills. Obvious choice. No expanded skill usage rules text, since that can all be covered by GM call in-the-moment so I didn't want to burden them with another few pages of rules and charts.
* Staggered Advancement. We have relatively short sessions and move pretty slowly, so this looks like a great way to give the players a few nice things more often.
I would use the classes if any of my players were playing them, but that's not the case here.
There are other systems in Unchained that I'd love to try out with a more-experienced party but chose not to implement for this game. (Stamina, skill unlocks, wound thresholds come to mind.)
I have a new player playing a fighter in my Kingmaker campaign. I'm so far undecided on whether I'm going to open up the Stamina rules to her. {. . .}I would recommend them. They give you a lot more tactical options to play with.
I did tweak it a bit, really just front-loading it because its uses are expensive and my party is still low leveled:
-Full BAB classes: get Combat Stamina automatically. Stamina is 10+Con+1/2 level
-3/4ths BAB classes: Need to take the feat. Stamina is 5+Con+1/2 level
-1/2 BAB classes: Need to take the feat. Stamina is Con+1/2 level
{. . .}
What about multiclassed characters, especially if they have a mix of different BAB classes?
* * * * * * * *
Question about Unchained and Summoners (originally posted in Unchained Summoner guide thread, but seems to have gotten lost): Is anything broken if you use a partially Unchained Summoner, for instance, the Unchained Summoner spell list but with everything else staying original?
I have a new player playing a fighter in my Kingmaker campaign. I'm so far undecided on whether I'm going to open up the Stamina rules to her. {. . .}I would recommend them. They give you a lot more tactical options to play with.
I did tweak it a bit, really just front-loading it because its uses are expensive and my party is still low leveled:
-Full BAB classes: get Combat Stamina automatically. Stamina is 10+Con+1/2 level
-3/4ths BAB classes: Need to take the feat. Stamina is 5+Con+1/2 level
-1/2 BAB classes: Need to take the feat. Stamina is Con+1/2 level
{. . .}What about multiclassed characters, especially if they have a mix of different BAB classes?
* * * * * * * *
Question about Unchained and Summoners (originally posted in Unchained Summoner guide thread, but seems to have gotten lost): Is anything broken if you use a partially Unchained Summoner, for instance, the Unchained Summoner spell list but with everything else staying original?
No, the classic summoner would work just fine with the unchained summoner's spell list.
With the old Eidolon it will probably still be firmly on the higher end of the power spectrum though.
I always did say that skills should be able to emulate spells and be made more useful. Hopefully this decreases the martial-caster disparity.
|
|
I have a new player playing a fighter in my Kingmaker campaign. I'm so far undecided on whether I'm going to open up the Stamina rules to her. I think I will, because she's playing an archer and there are other archers in the party using slightly more archery-friendly builds, so she can probably use all the help she can get. Overall, the stamina stuff seems like a good set of rules to keep, though I haven't sat down to analyze it yet.I would recommend them. They give you a lot more tactical options to play with.
(...)
That's actually my concern. She doesn't have the book, and it's not online yet, so there are accessibility problems; and she's new, so I don't know that she fully groks her feats yet, let alone a stamina pool. :) But I will probably throw her in the deep end (of the stamina pool) and see how she does, because she'll probably have more fun in the long term with it than without it. It's a good system.
After getting mine last week, I met up with several local GMs (two played in my old 3.5 game) and we pooled our impressions and thoughts. There will be a lot of feat reworking to fit the Stamina rules.
Already in play, often for years:
Fractional BAB, etc: their text is much cleaner
Esoteric components: I use the HypertextD20 special component rules, so there will be cross pollenization. Most of the rest see it as a new treasure option
Wound thresholds: theirs is better, at least three others want to use it
Skill unlocks: had a similar system before 3.0, but this is much more refined and laid out for real use. Another with interest from more than just me
In, regardless of player objections:
Barbarian and Rogue: simplifies Barb, brings a weak Rogue up to viability
Disease and Poison: I argued against it, but everyone at the table said they like it and I often find they are more insightful on mechanics. Similar to one's system, but with more steps and details. The others have all played or run his and praise it.
Players decide:
Background Skills,staggered advancement and iterative attacks, with most of us liking, but wanting player input
Variant Multiclass: similar to a crappy system some have used before and rejected. This seems to have a cleaner crunchy bits and points the way to some campaign specific hybrid classes we each have. Only one hold out
Monster creation: a step by step how to build or modify? Count me in! But this might get too deranged so I want player input first. Only two of us ever modify monsters
Combat stamina: might just get people to play Fighters, all agree, though two have thi as a 'must'
Interested, but:
Alternate crafting: only if a player promises to master them in mine, 3-3 at the table to even think about it
Summoner: I like the concept, but every local group I've played with bans them, everyone agreeing to consider with about two dozen fears, warnings and conditionals.
Magic: I use the HypertextD20 system with mods and thefts from RRG's spell point rules (must get 2nd book!), so this could be useful with a better understanding. Also like automatic bonuses and a few other ideas as thought starters. Most are wary of modifying any magic rules, although one insists her game will use most of them. The rest called her the canary (in the coal mine) but are interested in what happens.
Unchained from here on out for my groups:
-Classes
-Skill Unlocks
-Stamina
-Action Economy System
I know it's technically unfinished, but I was impressed by Stephen with the new Action System for getting in as much detail as he did. Can we nominate him for an award of some sort?
I always did say that skills should be able to emulate spells and be made more useful. Hopefully this decreases the martial-caster disparity.
In general, I don't like the idea of skills becoming spell-like.
But,I don't mind skills reaching spell-like power, WITH the requirement of the Signature Spell Feat, and a heady level of that skill. I think Unchained handled it well.
So far I've only ruled out the Alternate Profession Rules, because they are very very bad as written. (8,000 gp/month income? Sure, I'll take that.)
I find that rule pairs rather well with the taxation rules. XD
Just wanted to throw my hat in the ring.
Always on
1) Unchained monk
2) Unchained rogue
3) revised poisons and diseases
4) stamina
5) background skills
If the player wants to
1) Unchained barbarian. I basically don't see an important balance difference so it just comes down to book keeping preference. I'd also let my players mix and match unchained and non-unchained rage powers.
Currently playtesting
1) Simplified magic. This seems to really take away a lot of higher level spellcaster's staying power which is in my opinion a good thing. It keeps their spell pool from outstripping the other classes hp pool and keeps party rest times about the same between classes. Also reduces book keeping for high level casters.
|
Always On:
*Unchained Rogue, Summoner, Barbarian, and Monk – The first two will be always on, with U' Barbarian and U' Monk an option along side C' Barbarian and C' Monk though I may be using someone's homebrew that combines the two Monks. I have never banned the C' Summoner though the U' Summoner will preferred.
*Unchained Background Skills – I am very much in support of rules that allow more options when it comes to using skills.
*Unchained Alternate Crafting and Profession Rules – Same as above.
*Unchained Skill Unlocks – Always on, free for Rogue but requires a feat for every other class, and for reasons above.
I will still have normal multiclassing be in effect, I don't want to remove that as an option..
*Unchained Fractional Bonuses – I feel this has benefit, especially since it can be said to encourage mutliclassing a bit more.
*Unchained Stamina and Combat Tricks – Though limited to non-casters only I feel is best, since such classes are in the most need for such benefits.
Possibly On
*Unchained Action Economy – May use, though since I have a Magus player I have consideration for them since it seems this set of rules hurts the class badly.
*Wound Thresholds – May use, though it seems to add additional danger for the players.
*Diseases and Poisons – May use, though for now I have it put aside as a non-concern.
*Esoteric Material Components – Seems interesting and flavorful, may use.
*Innate Item Bonuses and Scaling Items – I need to do some reading and thinking for considering these.
*Dynamic Magic Item Creation – Will wait in considering such
*Unchained Variant Multiclassing – Might allow if enough players wish to use the rules... though as one who sees merit/benefit in actually multiclassing and taking PrCs, I am leery of using these alternate rules.
Never On:
*Remove Alignment – I like alignment, and have always felt they work just fine when it comes to D&D and Pathfinder. I will never remove the alignment system and have no interest in any rules that would so such. Also I would feel it a betrayal of sorts since my favorite setting of D&D is Planescape, which by its nature made heavy use of the alignment system.
*Consolidated Skills – I want there to be more, not less choices when it comes to skills, and I feel that Pathfinder has already done enough in consolidating the skills as they have. So I'm not interested in doing any more consolidating of skills.
So I've decided to allow UNC barbs to use stance rage powers outside of rage, but they use half their barb level to determine the effects when doing so.
|
Ok, so I read "Diseases and Poisons" last night, a couple times over actually, and I can't bloody understand how this will work or interact with existing spells and stuff; there's hit point damage now... and as far as I know they don't even mention how lesser restoration would interact with this, if at all...
They have a "Constitution poison path" for instance, but when you read individual poisons on the next page, the path is different for each, and there's no mention of what happens if you fail a fort save with a poison without onset time. I'm guessing they also left out the multiple dose rule or we just have to assume it's the same (just ups the DC for each dose you failed a fort save on? technically should increase the hit points damage per round too???? --> all unclear!)
So, I'm putting this one back on the shelf.... caaaaaaaarefully......... nothing to see here... ;)
|
|
Ok, so I read "Diseases and Poisons" last night, a couple times over actually, and I can't bloody understand how this will work or interact with existing spells and stuff; there's hit point damage now... and as far as I know they don't even mention how lesser restoration would interact with this, if at all...
They have a "Constitution poison path" for instance, but when you read individual poisons on the next page, the path is different for each, and there's no mention of what happens if you fail a fort save with a poison without onset time. I'm guessing they also left out the multiple dose rule or we just have to assume it's the same (just ups the DC for each dose you failed a fort save on? technically should increase the hit points damage per round too???? --> all unclear!)
So, I'm putting this one back on the shelf.... caaaaaaaarefully......... nothing to see here... ;)
I believe the answers to all of your questions are there in the rules, they're just dense rules-text. Here's one:
If a victim is exposed to additional doses of the same poison, a failed save progresses the poison track by one step and increases the duration by 50%, but doesn’t increase the DC.
|
|
thanks Joe... I'm just so used to ability score damage now; I just wouldn't remember off-hand what to do with a comatose PC without looking constantly at the Unchained book; plus Neutralize Poison and Delay Poison... I finally understand how these work in the game... I don't want to muddle my clear pond...
Edit: this last sentence is the one giving me the greatest pause... i'm probably forgetting something from the original CRB text, but wish or miracle??? really?
==> Usually, neutralize poison or remove disease immediately moves the victim to a healthy state on the respective track, and a heal spell will work for both. However, once the disease or poison has reached its end state, only a more powerful spell such as miracle or wish can remove its effects.
So I've decided to allow UNC barbs to use stance rage powers outside of rage, but they use half their barb level to determine the effects when doing so.... Do you routinely have Barbarians fight with their rage off?At low levels you sometimes need to conserve rage rounds.
More importantly, if your stance ends when you end a rage, you have to restart it if you're rage cycling.
pretty much this and I'm not afraid to have some pretty lengthy game days, sometimes multiple sessions pass just to cover one day. Also I've actually seen barbs fail a save or two once in a while against stuff like a ray of exhaustion. Thinking back I think level minus 2 is sufficient since it has diminishing returns.
Edit: this last sentence is the one giving me the greatest pause... i'm probably forgetting something from the original CRB text, but wish or miracle??? really?
Well, a non-lethal end state seems to indicate major debilitating conditions, such as leprosy, and it strains verisimilitude less that there are some conditions resistant to all but the most powerful magic, but yes, wish or miracle only does seem to be a bit excessive.
Edit: this last sentence is the one giving me the greatest pause... i'm probably forgetting something from the original CRB text, but wish or miracle??? really?Well, a non-lethal end state seems to indicate major debilitating conditions, such as leprosy, and it strains verisimilitude less that there are some conditions resistant to all but the most powerful magic, but yes, wish or miracle only does seem to be a bit excessive.
It's not wish or miracle only; it's "a more powerful spell, such as wish or miracle," so at your discretion depending on the end state, other really powerful spells can work. But that may vary, whereas the big ones should always work.
Ah yes. As I recall, the other big healing spell is greater restoration, but that's generally for mental conditions.
Ah yes. As I recall, the other big healing spell is greater restoration, but that's generally for mental conditions.
It also restores all ability damage and drain. Which would completely restore a character from the "end state" in the CRB afflictions system.
Ah yes. As I recall, the other big healing spell is greater restoration, but that's generally for mental conditions.
Depending on your group, Heal may be a reasonable spell as well.
...(Heal) immediately ends any and all of the following adverse conditions affecting the target: ability damage, blinded, confused, dazed, dazzled, deafened, diseased, exhausted, fatigued, feebleminded, insanity, nauseated, poisoned, sickened, and stunned.
For me:
Chapter 1:
All the unchained classes. (Old classes are still an option, though I will need to heavily audit old summoners).
Chapter 2:
Background skills. I really like the addition of Lore.
Alternate Crafting and Profession. Harder to keep track of, but more beneficial overall.
Skill Unlocks. I can't say yes to this enough.
Variant Multiclassing. Optional, but always available if the players want it.
Chapter 3:
Partial BAB/Saves. I used these in 3.5, and they are great.
Stamina System and Combat Tricks. Again, I can't say yes to this enough.
Chapter 4:
(Optional) Simplified Spellcasting. I won't force it on anyone who doesn't want to take it.
I am very uncomfortable with the Revised Action Economy. It's not the nerfing of casters as much as how it interacts with swift actions and thus change the core features of several pathfinder classes. I'll probably test out a modified version of this that keeps swift actions the same (except Quickened spells) - something like 3.5 actions per round, swift actions costing 0.5 actions once per round, and quickened spells costing 1 action.
I am very uncomfortable with the Revised Action Economy. It's not the nerfing of casters as much as how it interacts with swift actions and thus change the core features of several pathfinder classes. I'll probably test out a modified version of this that keeps swift actions the same (except Quickened spells) - something like 3.5 actions per round, swift actions costing 0.5 actions once per round, and quickened spells costing 1 action.
I noticed you posted in the (very) long thread discussing the potential of the revised action system earlier, but I'm not sure if you saw Pena'chong's house rules for the system? So far he's only covered the core classes, but I think he's off to a good start. :)
|
|
Ah yes. As I recall, the other big healing spell is greater restoration, but that's generally for mental conditions.It also restores all ability damage and drain. Which would completely restore a character from the "end state" in the CRB afflictions system.
Sounds reasonable that in the new system restoration should completely clean out a poison that's on an ability score track (like a constitution track poison would be all taken care of by restoration, since the spells states "Restoration cures all temporary ability damage, and it restores all points permanently drained from a single ability score (your choice if more than one is drained). It also eliminates any fatigue or exhaustion suffered by the target.")
I am very uncomfortable with the Revised Action Economy. It's not the nerfing of casters as much as how it interacts with swift actions and thus change the core features of several pathfinder classes. I'll probably test out a modified version of this that keeps swift actions the same (except Quickened spells) - something like 3.5 actions per round, swift actions costing 0.5 actions once per round, and quickened spells costing 1 action.I noticed you posted in the (very) long thread discussing the potential of the revised action system earlier, but I'm not sure if you saw Pena'chong's house rules for the system? So far he's only covered the core classes, but I think he's off to a good start. :)
Thanks for showing me this. I didn't actually see it until now.
I generally like Puma's changes to the classes. I really like what he did with the two classes I'm most concerned about (bard and paladin), and the changes do a good job of putting these classes back in line with what they are currently. I still don't quite understand the rider system with smite evil, though - mainly, how to apply the daily limits with an on-attack rider system.
Free actions always worry me, though. One of the major balancing points to the old swift action is that you only get one of these per turn. For instance, you can't activate smite evil and bardic performance 7+ (sorry for the silly example) on the same action because they would interfere with each other. While this is less of a problem with core, once we start getting to things like Oracle Revelations and Warpriest swift action buffs, I feel that turning them into free actions will create some truly spectacular multiclass combinations that activates multiple former-swift buffs in a single round. On the other hand, keeping these as one-action will really affect the balance of these classes for the worse.
I also feel that there are some swift action spells that should remain that way. A paladin's litany spells, for instance, are made swift for a good reason; changing them to 1 action would render most of them pretty ineffective
It also requires individual changes for each class, and when you add feats it becomes even more difficult. This compounds exceptionally for groups that use third party. Personally, I have no idea how to balance Path of War with this new system - maneuvers costing two actions would be a pretty severe nerf (especially when you consider boosts), while costing one action would be too powerful.
I feel that splitting swift actions out and making them a separate 1/round "mini action" in addition to the three you get is the easiest and cleanest way to reconcile the new system with the old. That way, swift actions retain their utility, and martials still get the mobility advantage that they sorely needed. It also keeps the 1/round swift action limit that balances out multi-classing, so you can't activate multiple different now-free buffs in one round.
Quicken spells can remain 1 action. There are some swift action spells that I would change to 1 action as well, such as Cold Ice Strike. There are also other effects that need to be sorted out (like Shadows becoming a non-threat), and those will probably take lots of thinking and testing to sort out.
This may be a leap, but could you use Stamina Points to boost Combat Maneuvers? Since they add to your attack rolls, I figured you would be able to apply them to CMB
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This may be a leap, but could you use Stamina Points to boost Combat Maneuvers? Since they add to your attack rolls, I figured you would be able to apply them to CMB
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects.
Yep :).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Excellent! That will probably encourage me to do something I normally wouldn't try otherwise. You know, for a heroic sake and such.
'Always on" is tough.
I use the "mostly on" list.
Most of the new barbarian powers, but still the old barbarian rage, unless someone just prefers to use the new version.
New rogue
new monk with tweeks
Some version of the new summoner/eidolon
Scaling feats
Built in bonuses and scaling magic items.
The new affliction rules will be for a special ones, not all of them.
Skill Unlocks, but I plan to give the rogue an advantage compared to other class.
I might use dynamic item creation, but if so it would only be for a low magic campaigns.
The new mundane crafting rule so it does not take forever to craft things.
I feel like I am forgetting something.
Scaling feats
I don't remember these in the book. Do you mean the stamina feats?
|
|
Here's the summary of rules for my upcoming campaign:
Character Creation Parameters:
Race: Core Races Only (upcoming Inner Sea Races book: I "may" allow content but only content that can modify or provide options to Core Races)
Traits: Two Traits or Three Traits and a Drawback
Alignment: Any Good. The PCs are heroic and kind and generous: people look up to them and are honored to help them. The PCs treat commoners with respect and dignity and professionalism. They are good: compassion and empathy always.
Ability Scores: 25 pt. build
Hit Points: Full at 1st and 2nd; 75% at level 3+
Classes: Anything from Pathfinder is ok, except upcoming Occult book
Classes: Unchained versions of barbarian, monk, rogue and summoner are mandatory.
Classes: Unchained rogues - for the purposes of which skill unlocks the rogue has, calculate the unchained rogue's effective ranks as follows: rogue level + actual skill ranks = effective ranks (example: a 5th level rogue with 5 ranks in stealth can use the 10 ranks skill unlocks power for stealth, if he picked stealth as part of his rogue's edge class feature)
Classes: Unchained fighter - fighters and fighters only get a Stamina Pool. For Free. Eldritch Knights and Ulfen Guards can count their levels as fighter levels for the purposes of Stamina Pool (more details available upon demand, if applicable to your character).
Skills: Unchained Background Skills in effect - 2 additional skill points per level but they must be used on one of the following skills:
Appraise
Artistry (NEW)
Craft
Handle Animal
Knowledge (engineering)
Knowledge (geography)
Knowledge (history)
Knowledge (nobility)
Linguistics
Lore (NEW)
Perform
Profession
Sleight of Hand
Skills: Expanded skill uses in effect (see unchained p.51-53; new uses/options for Craft, Perform and Profession)
Skills: Alternate Crafting Rules in effect (see unchained p.72-76) with the following modification - craft roll determines progress per day not item complexity (only thing you use complexity for is to figure out min DC). Also, masterwork items now cost less or more, depending on their complexity, as follows: (examples provided below; please consult unchained book for specific items)
Extremely simple (no MW component available)
Simple - 75gp (MW Sling)
Normal - 150gp (MW Dagger)
Complex - 300gp (MW Longsword)
Intricate - 600gp (MW Bastard Sword)
Very intricate - 1200gp (MW Siege Weapons)
Extremely intricate - 2400gp (MW Cannon)