So I love playing construct builders. I love making fun little sidekicks that are specialized to the point of hilarity. However with this I have noticed that the rules for construct building are full of inconsistency and contradiction. These points have only become exaggerated since I started playing Wyrwood characters.
What would it take to get Pazio to make a construct building splat book? Preferably one with a race entry for Wyrwoods and maybe other construct races. I heard that this idea was part of the original Construct Builders Guidebook but has since been dropped in favor of a construct centric bestiary.
Do you mean like the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Construct Builder's Guidebook that is coming out in March?
sorry, I mean November/December
Do you mean like the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Construct Builder's Guidebook that is coming out in March?
Yes the one that I say in the post will have 0 player content. Its just a bestiary. The author has told me that in his own words. It will not talk about players making constructs.
Are you trying to use construct crafting rules on your wyrwood or something?
That said, you can make a thread like this, hope people are interested, and hope it gets attention for next year’s planning.
It’s not something I’m really all that interested in, personally. We got poppets, and that was enough for me.
|
Do you mean like the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Construct Builder's Guidebook that is coming out in March?Yes the one that I say in the post will have 0 player content. Its just a bestiary. The author has told me that in his own words. It will not talk about players making constructs.
Could you direct me to a post stating that it will have 0 player content?
Do you mean like the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Construct Builder's Guidebook that is coming out in March?Yes the one that I say in the post will have 0 player content. Its just a bestiary. The author has told me that in his own words. It will not talk about players making constructs.Could you direct me to a post stating that it will have 0 player content?
0 player content? Maybe, maybe not. But it likely mostly a GM book, not one oriented to players.
Hi folks! Just as a heads up... this IS in the Campaign Setting line, not the Player Companion line. As such, I suspect this book will be geared far more toward GM use than player use, perhaps with several new constructs as monsters to use in games. Not sure yet if there actually WILL be archetypes in here, since that's not really as appropriate for what I'm envisioning this book to be... There'll be more information, perhaps, on how to adjust constructs in your game as well as maybe an exploration of the roles constructs play in various parts of the world. We'll likely be looking at updating the text for the book listed above to be more accurate about its contents soon!
(And of course, if you as the GM are fine with having your players build constructs, the rules here will help there as well... but again, this is not likely at all to be a player-facing book when all is said and done. The core assumption of the game is that constructs are monsters you fight, after all, not really player options...)
As it stands now, about two-thirds of this book is going to be focused on presenting new constructs and new templates for use on constructs for GMs to use in their games (of course, if you allow players to build constructs, you can as the GM allow them access to building these constructs as well). The remaining third of the book spends a little time talking about building constructs, famous construct builders in the Inner Sea Region, and then has 4 pages of construct-themed magic items and 4 construct-themed archetypes.
There will be a little player-focused content in the book (those four archetypes and some of the magic items, I guess), but the bulk is GM facing.
And another later post saying about 75% new monsters, 25% "mostly focused on a few magic items, 4 construct-adjacent archetypes, and then a few pages talking about how constructs are built." So some player content, but mostly a construct-themed bestiary.
That I knew, but given the fact that I recalled James state that there will be archetypes and magic items, the "0 player content, author told me that" comment made me somewhat curious.
Alchemist 23, care to elaborate?
Best guess, it is this:
Hey why cant this book have some Wyrwood stuff in it? I mean the Legacy of Dragons had stuff for Wyvarans.
Because I made the decision to refocus the book on new constructs and not on player options.
Which he took to mean 0 player options, despite that not being what was said.
That I knew, but given the fact that I recalled James state that there will be archetypes and magic items, the "0 player content, author told me that" comment made me somewhat curious.
Alchemist 23, care to elaborate?
The comment is directly above one of yours dude.
James Jacobs
"Because I made the decision to refocus the book on new constructs and not on player options."
I don't know how to link the page but YOUR comment is right below it.
Took me a while to respond because I was in class.
Alternatively, write your own splat book.
Paizo is just one publisher out of many.
I have great interest in BOTH GM and Player aspects, so... I may be about half-satisfied (lol.)
It seems that every time I get with a group where the possibility of making constructs is viable, I start up a PC that can take advantage of that and the game falls apart or players can suddenly no longer make it by around 3rd or 4th level (not their own fault, life, job, etc., I get it...)
But I am left with a thirst for the lost possibilities...
I have great interest in BOTH GM and Player aspects, so... I may be about half-satisfied (lol.)
It seems that every time I get with a group where the possibility of making constructs is viable, I start up a PC that can take advantage of that and the game falls apart or players can suddenly no longer make it by around 3rd or 4th level (not their own fault, life, job, etc., I get it...)
But I am left with a thirst for the lost possibilities...
Yeah I can feel you here. I love clockwork but you need to be freaking CL 12 to make even the little ones.
I have great interest in BOTH GM and Player aspects
Myself, I have little interest in DM aspects. As such, 7/8th of the book [4 for items, 4 for archetypes] isn't going to be used by me. :(
This disappoints me as the description of the book made it seem MUCH more player oriented IMO. If a bestiary/background fluff book is someone's thing, that great, but for me I'm passing on this.
I have great interest in BOTH GM and Player aspects, so... I may be about half-satisfied (lol.)
It seems that every time I get with a group where the possibility of making constructs is viable, I start up a PC that can take advantage of that and the game falls apart or players can suddenly no longer make it by around 3rd or 4th level (not their own fault, life, job, etc., I get it...)
But I am left with a thirst for the lost possibilities...
Check out the trait Protector of the People. For a bit of money, you get Craft Construct at a very low level.
Getting the cash, is a different problem. :-)
/cevah
I have great interest in BOTH GM and Player aspects, so... I may be about half-satisfied (lol.)
It seems that every time I get with a group where the possibility of making constructs is viable, I start up a PC that can take advantage of that and the game falls apart or players can suddenly no longer make it by around 3rd or 4th level (not their own fault, life, job, etc., I get it...)
But I am left with a thirst for the lost possibilities...
Check out the trait Protector of the People. For a bit of money, you get Craft Construct at a very low level.
Getting the cash, is a different problem. :-)
/cevah
Story feat, not trait.
Story feat, not trait.
My bad. Misread.
Still, one feat, not three means if you luck into a lot of cash at 1st level, you can start making constructs.
/cevah
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
That I knew, but given the fact that I recalled James state that there will be archetypes and magic items, the "0 player content, author told me that" comment made me somewhat curious.
Alchemist 23, care to elaborate?
The comment is directly above one of yours dude.
James Jacobs
"Because I made the decision to refocus the book on new constructs and not on player options."
I don't know how to link the page but YOUR comment is right below it.Took me a while to respond because I was in class.
"0 player content" =/= "the book isn't focused on player options"
"author told me that in his own words" =/= "there's a public forum post which I misinterpreted to reinforce my argument"