| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or are we not supposed to use melee characters in any of these modules? Because as written, these rules overwhelmingly favor casters.
Sanity points are calculated using the sum of all mental stats.
Sanity threshold is the modifier of your highest mental stat.
Sanity edge is half your sanity points.
You start off making a will save, which of course has a better progression for casters.
Sanity point recovery is based on charisma.
I understand wanting the system having some verisimilitude by using mental stats, but really?
I haven't looked at the rules myself but if what you say is true then this is extremely bad game design, did the sanity rules not get any critical attention?
Off the cuff, doing level+wisdom would of been better, more flavorful, and much fairer, even keep the Cha for sanity Regen.
There's reason the common criticism of Pathfinder is: 3.5, caster edition. Indeed.
Oh boo hoo, just don't play melee? That's great advice. Plus, CoC is a completely different game. It doesn't have a zero sum game going on between stats, like PF does. Pick mental stats, and you get lower physical stats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I....yeah. I don't think anyone's saying don't play melee. Even Mark only said to "alter your playstyle from hack and slash games". That's not even close to "don't play melee".
I think the general message is closer to "don't dump all of your stats to 7's and/or 5's".
I can think of several melee builds that would have decent mental scores, and benefit from it greatly (alchemist, inquisitor, warpriest, cleric, monk, paladins, etc.).
And several of them even have good Will saves! Whoo!
I....yeah. I don't think anyone's saying don't play melee. Even Mark only said to "alter your playstyle from hack and slash games". That's not even close to "don't play melee".
I think the general message is closer to "don't dump all of your stats to 7's and/or 5's".I can think of several melee builds that would have decent mental scores, and benefit from it greatly (alchemist, inquisitor, warpriest, cleric, monk, paladins, etc.).
And several of them even have good Will saves! Whoo!
That's not the point. Even if you don't dump your mental stats, it is still greatly unbalancing. Yes, that monk or warpriest is going to have a 16 wis or whatever, but the characters that have a prime mental stat are still going to be greatly advantaged. Plus, any system that makes people change what class they are playing, like choosing warpriest over warrior, is obviously unbalanced.
I wasn't being facetious when i asked if these adventures were not supposed to use melee characters. However, I somehow doubt Aeons is going to be written that way.
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whaaaaat? Sanity is based of mental resilience? Get outta here...
Maybe in games using the sanity rules martial characters just need to worry a little bit more about their mental attributes? Most casters only focus on a single score, anyways. It's not like it's much less punishing on them, and Paladins just laugh all the way to the bank.
And, as for those characters who are rough-and-tumble without magic, I'm pretty sure there also exist options for bumping up their will saves and mental attributes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tammy remembers everything.
Come on, guys. This can't be a total surprise. We've known for years how will saves work, how charm and dominate works. I'm sure the vast majority of us have heard Wes talk about his philosophy on horror: losing control, aka a loss of one's will. How did you think that would be mechanically represented? Add in other mechanics to round out a system so it's more robust than "you literally pee your pants," and we get what we got.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Sanity rules disappointed me for a lot of reasons (not least the gamers' steadfast dedication to using what they think mental illness is instead of something more fantastical). Personally, I would like there to be a trait that allows you to use your Constitution in place of the mental ability score for your Threshold, and perhaps a feat that lets you add your BAB to the score.
All the talk about "Uh maybe just don't be a dumpstatting munchkin???" is absurd. Even if Point Buy didn't force martials to leave most of their mental scores fairly low, it's a basic fact that these rules favor classes that use mental scores over classes that use physical scores. That's math.
This is especially rough on the Threshold, since a martial is unlikely to have a single mental ability above a +2.
I'm assuming it's also a very optional system, used only by groups that want that kind of feel.
Like Buri said, it's not like mental attributes being somewhat required by martials is a huge surprise to anyone that's even read the Core Rulebook.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Come on, guys. This can't be a total surprise. We've known for years how will saves work, how charm and dominate works. I'm sure the vast majority of us have heard Wes talk about his philosophy on horror: losing control, aka a loss of one's will. How did you think that would be mechanically represented? Add in other mechanics to round out a system so it's more robust than "you literally pee your pants," and we get what we got.
Well no, it's not a surprise. It's still a shame to see more rules that double down on Pathfinder's 'you must be this magical to ride' problem though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I will say that the thread title is an overreaction. It's a fairly minor lapse in judgement for what's already an optional, easy-to-modify ruleset. I would allow Constitution for the Threshold, is all, and maybe allow martials a special dispensation to use their BAB in the Score.
But guys, try to think about how embarrassing it is when your character is rendered useless or worse-than-useless due to their low Will save. That already happens to martials a lot. Now think about the tone it sets when the martials of the party are slipping further and further into "madness" while the casters shrug their shoulders and wonder what the big deal is.
Martials already tend to be sidekicks and Watsons. This isn't helping.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see it, based on the usual PF philosophy, being all based on Wisdom and Will saves, which would still leave casters (and especially Wisdom casters) at and advantage, but making Int & Cha nearly as effective? Neither of those really are "mental resilience".
I can see an argument for Cha. Half the time charisma is described as force of will (but somehow doesn't benefit your willpower? For reasons).
Certainly not weirder than your ability to resist mental effects also being intrinsically linked to your ability to find the remote when you lose it.
That said, Int feels like it should almost be a detriment. The first person to go insane in horror fiction where that's a thing is usually the scholar who 'digs too deep' and finds the horrible truth that unravels their reality or something.
Yeah, actually, I would cut Int and replace it with Con, or at least give the option of doing so. For the calculation of Sanity Points, at least. Classically speaking, Int has very little to do with overcoming stress, whereas physical health and mental health do tend to be closely connected.
That said, Int feels like it should almost be a detriment. The first people to go insane in horror fiction where that's a thing is usually the scholar who 'digs too deep' and finds the horrible truth that unravels their reality or something.
^This. The character that is "simple" compared to the rest of the cast tends to be nearly immune to the horror from beyond while the genius scholar folds like wet paper. The wizard like character is actually the only one I can't think of a good example of them not losing against the mental attacks. The Goodly Priest, Captain BAMF, the Worldly Scoundrel, and even the Loveable Idiot have all made it out at some point, but the All Knowing Genius always dies (normally right after the Funny Guy).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to assume that writers made an intentional design decision to favor casters over martials when writing the insanity rules. Benefit of the doubt and all that.
Ideally sanity is not tied to any specific ability score. Maybe certain feats get tied into it (strong willed just sounds like the sort of thing to help), or maybe there's a disadvantage that makes retaining sanity harder. But that's just not how Pathfinder works.
Yes, tieing Sanity to mental stats is unbalancing toward casters. It has been since the concept was introduced back in the game mastery guide. To be fair, the new method is somewhat more extreme...
If we take a more reality based approach, Intelligence has nothing to do with sanity, and in fact studies indicate that the opposite might be true (there again the field of psychology is ever evolving as our understanding of the human condition adapts, changes, evolves, and hopefully increases). Wisdom would imply the avoiding of situations that might challenge the sanity in the first place, and Charisma could be the source of strength against insanity, or the cause thereof in the cases of certain manias, egotisms, and megalomanias.
In fact, one could argue that the best defense against insanity is stupidity and ignorance.
Bottom line: if you don't like a system, don't use it (unaltered).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the record, the "don't like, don't read, please only comment if you have useful feedback, NO HATERS ALLOWED!!!" attitude some people take regarding threads like this doesn't generally contribute much, though it can be justified when people turn feedback on a bad game mechanic into a bigger deal than it has to be.
Paizo made a dumb game mechanic. It's not the end of the world, and there are potentially plenty of ways around it. As long as we can all agree that the idea here did not live up to its potential, we can dedicate our energies towards thinking of constructive solutions. But complaint threads rarely engender that sort of positive action.
EDIT: Seriously, can somebody just make a Pathfinder-based Stress mechanic already?
Do they die because of their abilities themselves, or do they die so that a known fear can become a much worse unknown fear?That said, Int feels like it should almost be a detriment. The first people to go insane in horror fiction where that's a thing is usually the scholar who 'digs too deep' and finds the horrible truth that unravels their reality or something.^This. The character that is "simple" compared to the rest of the cast tends to be nearly immune to the horror from beyond while the genius scholar folds like wet paper. The wizard like character is actually the only one I can't think of a good example of them not losing against the mental attacks. The Goodly Priest, Captain BAMF, the Worldly Scoundrel, and even the Loveable Idiot have all made it out at some point, but the All Knowing Genius always dies (normally right after the Funny Guy).
Normally because they either A) won't kill/destroy/stop the Horrible Thing because of "the knowledge that could be found", or B) took off their plot armor by being an @$$ when another character died (lack of empathy tends to be tied to the high Int score).
As long as we can all agree that the idea here did not live up to its potential
You're setting yourself up for failure if you think there will really be some kind of consensus over this or really anything especially on an internet forum.
Yes.
The book in general really doesn't have a lot of support for straight martial classes, when compared to other classes. I would guess that the devs probably think straight martials are less appropriate for straight up horror type campaigns.
Or that straight martials already fit fine without modification. ;P
The book in general really doesn't have a lot of support for straight martial classes, when compared to other classes. I would guess that the devs probably think straight martials are less appropriate for straight up horror type campaigns.
Which is funny because most horror fiction heroes are rogues or something similar. :/
The Sanity rules disappointed me for a lot of reasons (not least the gamers' steadfast dedication to using what they think mental illness is instead of something more fantastical). Personally, I would like there to be a trait that allows you to use your Constitution in place of the mental ability score for your Threshold, and perhaps a feat that lets you add your BAB to the score.
All the talk about "Uh maybe just don't be a dumpstatting munchkin???" is absurd. Even if Point Buy didn't force martials to leave most of their mental scores fairly low, it's a basic fact that these rules favor classes that use mental scores over classes that use physical scores. That's math.
This is especially rough on the Threshold, since a martial is unlikely to have a single mental ability above a +2.
Con makes more sense for threshold.
I think Constitution and Charisma are both lovely ideas. Constitution is already desired by everyone, so there's no favoritism, while Charisma is a fairly oft-dumped stat for everyone except bards and sorcerers. And I'm 100% fine giving bards an advantage against this stuff. That is How It Should Be.
I must admit, I'm not expecting much from either this or Strange Aeons, and so far I haven't been disappointed. It's the first time I've skipped a hardcover release and adventure path. The mindset with the leading developers is just...not right for horror, especially mental horror. It's a simple fact of horror - if you can rocket punch it in the balls so hard it's not only killed but erased from the last three minutes of existence as something you prepare when making your morning coffee, you're the scarier thing here, regardless of whether the badguy's got a hockey mask.
Again, I'm not shocked that it's set up so a dumpstat Wizard is a mental fortress and martials are left in the gutter. Are there at least traits and feats that are more in tune with martials, or is this one of those scenarios where no one wants to play the fighter because they're screwed at the first Haunt?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a very good book. I have enjoyed it immensely so far, and look forward to implementing its concepts in my game. Pathfinder might not be the most horror-friendly system, but anyone who thinks that horror and Pathfinder are incompatible is just being flat-out uncreative. :)
So far, I've found the Madness rules to be the exception to the rule in this book. The haunts are actually excellent, and finally give martials something they can contribute—for instance, there's a haunt that's basically a couple of ghosts having a scaring contest that can be driven off by an Intimidate check. And while most of the haunts' weaknesses are sadly magic-related (like, wow, Paizo, there really aren't many nonmagical solutions here), those weaknesses are all temporary. The only permanent means of dispelling a haunt is through a story challenge like finding and burying a body, which martials can absolutely contribute to.
I like the haunts and that's kind of surprising to me because I normally despise haunts since most of them are just traps that you need a cleric instead of a rogue to disarm.