|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why wouldnt it already be legal for that scenario?
The chronicle in question only makes character options available from Mythic Adventures and Mythic Origins. I agree that the new AR adds Distant Shores as a source for this purpose.
It wasn't that well received, but to some degree the criticism was directed at the scenario rather than the option itself. We might see it repeated.
|
|
I'd like to have Mythic Weapon Finesse and Mythic Vital Strike replace the non-mythic versions, and ignore everything else in the book, but that's never going to happen.
Wait, Mythic Vital Strike be the norm? I know Vital Strike isn't all that great, but Mythic Vital Strike is pretty bonkers. I have seen games that incorporate mythic completely ban Mythic Vital Strike.
Mythic Weapon Finesse...I could see that.
|
Heh, well I am in the camp of but apparently I am in the minority. My favorite scenarios to GM and play are the ones that incorporate those rules.
I'm kinda 'meh' on mythic, don't much care either way.
But I'm all for the other stuff! And chase scenes and haunts—two other relatively unpopular features that I just adore.
|
I'd like to have Mythic Weapon Finesse and Mythic Vital Strike replace the non-mythic versions, and ignore everything else in the book, but that's never going to happen.Wait, Mythic Vital Strike be the norm? I know Vital Strike isn't all that great, but Mythic Vital Strike is pretty bonkers. I have seen games that incorporate mythic completely ban Mythic Vital Strike.
Mythic Weapon Finesse...I could see that.
Mythic vital strike is really what vital strike should have been all along. Normal vital strike requires you to invest feats to be sub-optimal to full attacking (in most situations - there are a few exceptions).
Mythic vital strike allows you to actually be mobile and do appropriate damage without requiring a pounce mechanic, and still has a significant feat cost of entry, but isn't limited to being a barbarian or using unarmed strikes.
As a balancing factor also much easier to negate a single hit than it is to negate a full round of attacks. Crane Style, Deflect Arrows, Parry, and so on can ruin a vital strike build.
|
|
I'm kinda 'meh' on mythic, don't much care either way.
But I'm all for the other stuff! And chase scenes and haunts—two other relatively unpopular features that I just adore.
I love chase scenes.
The problem I have with haunts is the same as traps usually, where the majority are you take damage, heal yourself, and then proceed like literally nothing happened. I have seen barbarians just go "Traps are boring. I walk in, take whatever damage I need, and heal myself and move on so we can get passed this." A great trap would do something more special, such as alert the bad guys which changes how the scenario can play out or split the party in some way. There are good traps and haunts out there, though.
Developer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I enjoy the occasional use of mythic rules as a change of pace. That said, three key criteria shape my approach to mythic rules:
All three of the above points are important to me, yet I think I value the third one the most. Without an engaging reason to use mythic rules, I don't want to shoehorn them in somewhere. Should those rules play into a scenario or multi-adventure arc in the future—barring perhaps the occasional use of a mythic monster or template—I want to ensure that they feel like an organic, integral, and innovative part of the narrative.
A mythic seeker arc would be pretty epic, but the combination of not everyone wanting more mythic content plus seeker arcs being a pretty infrequent release means that I'm unlikely to take that gamble.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I enjoy the occasional use of mythic rules as a change of pace. That said, three key criteria shape my approach to mythic rules:
The content in Pathfinder RPG Mythic Adventures does not have a permanent place in the organized play campaign.
Any situation in which the PCs gain mythic power should be on a temporary basis. It should only last for the duration of a scenario (approximately) and should only appear in a scenario that is written with the use of mythic power in mind.
Any use of mythic rules should be supported by the story and work to enhance the story. All three of the above points are important to me, yet I think I value the third one the most. Without an engaging reason to use mythic rules, I don't want to shoehorn them in somewhere. Should those rules play into a scenario or multi-adventure arc in the future—barring perhaps the occasional use of a mythic monster or template—I want to ensure that they feel like an organic, integral, and innovative part of the narrative.
A mythic seeker arc would be pretty epic, but the combination of not everyone wanting more mythic content plus seeker arcs being a pretty infrequent release means that I'm unlikely to take that gamble.
A mythic seeker arc would be AMAZING!! Consider this a vote to definitely consider it in the future!!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
May I ask why you feel that Mythic rules do not have a permanent place in the organized play campaign?
I obviously can't speak for John but I can guarantee that having Mythic as a permanent fixture would lose you at least some players and GMs. I think claiming that adding Mythic wouldn't make power issues far worse than they currently are is, at best, horribly naive.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
May I ask why you feel that Mythic rules do not have a permanent place in the organized play campaign? Is it from a purely power standpoint? If so, there are plenty of ways to completely tear about Pathfinder scenarios as is and have a completely unstoppable character, mythic would just provide more options for players to do so. For example, for the mythic scenario that is available, I honestly believe that it can be done by non-mythic characters pretty readily with minimal causalities.
Would certain abilities have to be banned like any other book? Of course, but I don't think that allowing mythic would be suddenly game breaking.
(Note: This is an attempt to have an open dialogue about Mythic and potentially gain some insight as to what gets allowed for...
Mythic does not mix well with non-mythic. Your have two different level each character would have - mythic tiers and level. The logistics would be more trouble that they're worth, tbh. In addition, mythic is not a system friendly to new players, and they would by its very nature have to interact with that system.
Fun for a single scenario where everyone can have the same amount of mythic power. Not so much fun for the entire campaign.
|
Developer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I obviously can't speak for John but I can guarantee that having Mythic as a permanent fixture would lose you at least some players and GMs. I think claiming that adding Mythic wouldn't make power issues far worse than they currently are is, at best, horribly naive.May I ask why you feel that Mythic rules do not have a permanent place in the organized play campaign?
How could they get any worse? It's pretty easy to completely one shot almost any creature you encounter in the game as is, add someone who only kind of knows what they're doing and they can end encounters with one spell.
If difficulty of PFS scenarios wasn't an issue enough as is, I'd agree that mythic would throw things out of whack. But if we don't feel that a sleep hex witch, dazing fireballs, and any zen archer ever ( :P ) are ok, then Mythic really doesn't change the balance of power all that much.
Mythic characters alongside non-mythic PC is not a good mix. As others have noted, the mythic system boosts the power of basically anything that it's attached to, and attaching it to an already powerful option would merely exacerbate the problem.
Sure, we could boost the difficulty of scenarios to try to keep pace with the mythic options. At that point, though, we'd be closing the door on any previously published scenarios, 99.5% of which were not written with mythic rules in mind. If you're concerned that powerful, non-mythic character options make the game too easy, powerful mythic options will negate any hint of a challenge.
Finally, widespread mythic power does not fit the campaign setting. Not every Pathfinder is a nascent demigod, and the stories we would need to tell to match the mythic status of those PCs would quickly transcend the Society's goals.
No, the content in Mythic Adventures is not a good longterm fit for the organized play campaign. We can discuss the difficulty of scenarios in a different thread, but when confronted with regular reviews (formal and informal) that cite near-TPK experiences in certain scenarios, I don't know that I'm ready to boost the effective CRs at this time.
|
|
Jessex, just because there are several genies out of their bottles, doesn't mean we should remove all bottlecaps. This thread proposes adding mythic, and we're saying why this is a bad idea in our opinions.
If you go back to the threads about why gunslinger-uzi-masters are a bad idea, I'm sure you'll find my posts in the front row. I can probably even dig up my two-page email to Mike Brock requesting he not make guns legal for PFS at all.
The point I'm trying to arrive at is this: PFS is there to sell books. You can't sell books by banning too much of them. Lots of books have options that can destroy scenarios, games, even GMs. But, there are only a few books that can destroy the campaign. Mythic is one of them.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
I guess my point is mythic feels more like fantasy than guns or lasers or robots or spaceships. All of which we have in abundance in PFS. So I don't see the harm in another scenario/arc with mythic powers.
John's first post in this thread said there is the possibility of mythic scenarios in the future, but they will be very rare, story driven, and the powers will be limited to that scenario. Most of the posters in this thread are opposed to general access to mythic material for PFS characters, and not an outright ban.
But if people really are in favor of reining in the power level of PFS I'm all in favor of that. The question is where to start? So much is grossly overpowered that restricting any of it will almost certainly miss some and will gore some people's favorite characters.
If players are really worried about power creep then they always have the option of the Core campaign.
|
|
Not that this would ever, or should ever happen, but I'm going to daydream about a third campaign option which lets people choose between Core, Normal, and Mythic PFS.
Mythic, as a normal part of the campaign, would mean that it would not be Pathfinder Society, but something different.
And, then, you have to deal with when would PCs gain their first Mythic tier? Right out of the gate, or somewhen else, so that would present serious difficulties, above-and-beyond, for tiering scenarios.
Even now, in normal Pathfinder, there are definite points where PC power jumps, and the whole game changes. With Mythic, it can go bonkers at more levels.
IIRC, my original, 4th level build of my Sorcerer PC for that scenario included the ability to fly multiple times per day for several minutes, along with what amounted to an all-day uber Mage Armor, and a lot of extra hit points. And that was without really checking the optimization boards, or doing deep reading into it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We do not have robots and spaceships "in abundance", even in the setting itself. (the limitations of the generators keep Numeria's tech inside Numeria for the most part. and the only starship on the planet is a hopeless wreck beyond repair.) There were A FEW tech oriented scenarios in Season 6, the rest getting canceled after the mammoth outcry protesting technology. Aside from those, we don't have tech at all.
And even that limited amount is too much for a number of people. YMMV.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I was really looking forward to the mythic rules, participated in the playtest (and let's be frank here a lot of the issues with mythic were called out by the playstesters, but did not seem to affect the final product all that much).
Unfortunately mythic as written has a couple of problems (legendary games did fix most a number of them in their mythic offerings though, and I would love to somehow get those fixe into the mythic used by PFS).
Wrath of the righteous is a nice campaign, but I pretty much have to rewrite every encounter (after nerving the top 10 mythic problems).
Writing challenging encounter for mythic characters is quite hard, that 5 minute adventuring day problem is significantly more prevalent with mythic rules in play (since no every character has a resource that renews every day).
That fact makes scenario design quite hard, since you need a very compelling reason that the PCs absolutely can't rest (like the recent multi table specials). I am not saying that it can't be done, but this is one situation where you might want to give the GM some options to tailor the encounters to the group, so the scenario can represent a "fair" challenge.
Adding a couple of mythic templates into regular play seems to work fine.
A new mythic scenario would be pretty nice though.
Disclaimer: I haven't played or GMed the PFS scenarios with mythic in them yet, I just had plenty of contact with mythic.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
perhaps the occasional use of a mythic monster or template
I appreciated the occasional use of foes with mythic templates against non-mythic PCs in scenarios (e.g. one of the specials) in a very controlled manner. Facing an enemy that can 'break' the rules tips the players off that this is not your usual encounter, it's something to be taken significantly more seriously...
It's something I'd like to see again, on the exceptional occasions that the situation demands it.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg
|
A mythic seeker arc would be AMAZING!! Consider this a vote to definitely consider it in the future!!I enjoy the occasional use of mythic rules as a change of pace. That said, three key criteria shape my approach to mythic rules:
The content in Pathfinder RPG Mythic Adventures does not have a permanent place in the organized play campaign.
Any situation in which the PCs gain mythic power should be on a temporary basis. It should only last for the duration of a scenario (approximately) and should only appear in a scenario that is written with the use of mythic power in mind.
Any use of mythic rules should be supported by the story and work to enhance the story. All three of the above points are important to me, yet I think I value the third one the most. Without an engaging reason to use mythic rules, I don't want to shoehorn them in somewhere. Should those rules play into a scenario or multi-adventure arc in the future—barring perhaps the occasional use of a mythic monster or template—I want to ensure that they feel like an organic, integral, and innovative part of the narrative.
A mythic seeker arc would be pretty epic, but the combination of not everyone wanting more mythic content plus seeker arcs being a pretty infrequent release means that I'm unlikely to take that gamble.
+1