| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By now, most of us have seen the Core Principles: Conversion in the Pathfinder ACG blog entry (and the resulting discussion) and the Conversion Guide.
One of the replies in the blog entry discussion prompted me to action:
So, awesome community folks, who wants to be in charge of making updated character sheets for all these characters? *Touches nose*
Many of us, myself included, create our own versions of the character sheets, or variants thereof (such as Parody’s excellent character tents). I have a template that looks almost like the official one. My legacy version character sheet used the standard character card greens instead of the blues on the official sheets; and my brand spanking new core version character sheet uses the old character card green for the decorations (the Curse of the Crimson Throne characters used a maroon instead of the green that the Core Set characters had). Suffice to say that I use my own character sheet for the custom characters that I like to (poorly) design.
Tyler Beck’s question was a V-8 moment for me. I hadn’t considered converting the legacy characters to the Core Set style sheets, but it seemed like a “duh” solution to create new sheets for the characters that are covered in the conversion guide, and perhaps for everyone else, too. I created my template so that I could make my homegrown characters look sexy, but updated sheets for legacy characters based on the conversion guide seemed much more useful. So I’ve begun working on these sheets (and I’m sure other players either are also doing this, or will be doing it soon). I’m starting with the APs, working backwards (almost done with the Mummy’s Mask characters, then Wrath of the Righteous, and so on), and then I’ll cover down on the class/character/add-on decks. However, I wanted some input from others before I get too deep into this. Note that I’m not “in charge” by any means.
First, of course, is whether or not Paizo/Lone Shark plan on providing official versions. I’m sure that there’s a lot more important stuff, going on, but it would be great if this were anywhere on the list of stuff to do. Regardless, I’m going to assume that this is so low on the official priority list that it’s something enterprising members of the community will have to take care in the interim.
My main question, though, is whether or not players think it would be wise to update the phrasing of characters’ powers to match the formats used in the Core Set. For example, we no longer see “a character at your location,” and see “a local character” instead. Also, we generally don’t see “a [card] with the X trait,” and see “an X [card]” instead. There are probably a bunch of other small changes to phrasing that need to be incorporated (I’m really going to have to study the cards in depth to get a better feel for these changes). I’m not talking about changing rules – just updating the phrasing to match the current templates.
Aside from that, I just have to be sure to comply with the Community Use Policy (e.g., no character images that either don’t appear in blogs or aren’t part of the Community Use Package, no logos/icons that either don’t appear in blogs or aren’t part of the Community Use Package).
My personal priority for this effort is to take care of the characters that are mentioned in the Conversion Guide, but I might extend the effort later to cover down on the rest of the legacy characters (and their cohorts, where applicable). Naturally, that’s a very time-intensive effort, extended by taking the time to convert phrasing to match the current templates. So I want to make sure that I'm not wasting time with unnecessary/imprudent actions.
Thoughts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can put together more cohesive thoughts later, but I'd at least really like to see some updated Alchemist character sheets (as you even mentioned), since they're the most significantly hit characters out there.
I'd love to modernize templating and rules (references to 'local', 'reload', etc), too, especially because it helps familiarize players with terminology that is now standard - and will continue to be in the future.
However, I think the Conversion Guide is not sufficiently cohesive to understand how to - or whether to - update some pre-existing characters beyond using the Local/Distant/"X card"/Reload terminology set. "Recovery" can basically not be injected freely into old powers because they would create functional (and not officially supported) distinctions with the original power. Take, for example, S&S Alahazra's "Tempest" Role, where she can gain the Arcane skill until the end of an encounter when casting an Arcane Attack spell. Post-Core, this means that she wouldn't have the Arcane skill or proficiency during the Recovery step, rendering such spells consigned to being banished.
That's probably not in line with the intent. A community-driven effort to bring this power to mimic* it's pre-Core functionality would have to be out-of-scope of such a change, as it would be a non-official, functional card errata. Almost any reference to the Recovery phase (or even the use of the term 'Freely', since a lot of old powers with similar modifiers on the cards you played order in which they were played) would not be able to be entered in as they represent nonsupported character changes, and I think this kind of issue will come up quite a lot. You'll find powers that don't quite work, but nor can actually be re-written and maintain perfect accuracy.
Yep. Giving her arcane skill during the encounter phase and recovery phase seems to be best solution Until we get official errata...
And, Yep errated character sheets would be very usefull. How easy it is forget some of those changes, while using old character sheet... very...
In this, I see two broad categories. The first is basic template changes (e.g., recharge, local, "X with the Y trait" to "Y X," etc.). I don't include any "freely" additions in this category. The second category is rules/powers that are more complicated and will require official decisions.
I think that the first category is within the scope of the community to implement on homegrown sheets/tents/whatever. There might be room for discussion to fine tune (e.g., if I implement these changes on the sheets I'm developing, I'll run them by the community for feedback before I finalize the sheets).
I think that rules/powers in the second category should be left alone (on homegrown sheets), but should be brought up here on the forums. The Paizo/Lone Shark team might have already identified cases and have plans for them, but there might be some that they've missed or haven't gotten around to yet, so we can help them out by calling their attention to these cases.
I agree - the only changes we should make are ones where it has no functional changes, only updated wording.
Maybe we could have a shared document/spreadsheet where we could contribute and verify the changes before you go through the work of creating your character sheets?
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I agree that we should not change ANYTHING functionally when we make these, for the sake of not confusing players. But including the basic template changes where appropriate is great, in my mind.
I'm happy to help with wording and such as much as my schedule will allow. Perhaps you could make a shared Google document where current wording of characters can be dropped in, and updates can be suggested? That would probably give the best shot of making sure that no mechanical changes are accidentally made.
Thanks for taking point on this, as always the community is stepping up where it's needed! :)
EDIT: Mark ninja'd me!! :)
Do Paizo/Lone Shark plan to released updated versions of the legacy character sheets to conform to the Core Set conversions?This is not [on the list of things to do].
With this official answer, I think that this becomes a valuable community effort.
Maybe we could have a shared document/spreadsheet where we could contribute and verify the changes before you go through the work of creating your character sheets?
Hmmm...now I'm going to have to build an Excel spreadsheet...
I'm working on the spreadsheet now. I'm trying to get an exhaustive list of these so that I can pre-populate recommended revisions before putting the file up online for review and recommendations. I'll probably organize the spreadsheet with the APs in order of release, then the CDs/AODs in alphabetical order. I've come up with four categories of powers (with regard to their wording):
- No change
- Template change
- Conversion guide change
- Complex
"No change" is self-explanatory.
"Template change" means that phrasing has to be changed to align with Core Set phrasings, but nothing functional has changed. The trick here is getting a complete list of the Core Set phrasings that have changed.
"Conversion guide change" is something that is covered in the official conversion guide. There may be some hybrids here, where the conversion guide addresses specific portions, but doesn't competely address other things that might fall in to the "template change" category.
"Complex" means that the power doesn't work with Core Set phrasings and rules, usually that it will require a functional change. Powers in this category are those that will be addressed to the developers for official resolution (i.e., we won't touch them).
Do these categories accurately capture the range?
Should the fifth (hybrid) category be added?
What are examples of template changes?
We should also consider backporting new characters to the old ruleset, noting things like "all characters have Light Armor proficiency". Not everyone is going to want to play the old sets with the new rules.
This would be more useful if new Character Decks are released.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I'm working on the spreadsheet now. I'm trying to get an exhaustive list of these so that I can pre-populate recommended revisions before putting the file up online for review and recommendations. I'll probably organize the spreadsheet with the APs in order of release, then the CDs/AODs in alphabetical order. I've come up with four categories of powers (with regard to their wording):
- No change
- Template change
- Conversion guide change
- Complex"No change" is self-explanatory.
"Template change" means that phrasing has to be changed to align with Core Set phrasings, but nothing functional has changed. The trick here is getting a complete list of the Core Set phrasings that have changed.
"Conversion guide change" is something that is covered in the official conversion guide. There may be some hybrids here, where the conversion guide addresses specific portions, but doesn't competely address other things that might fall in to the "template change" category.
"Complex" means that the power doesn't work with Core Set phrasings and rules, usually that it will require a functional change. Powers in this category are those that will be addressed to the developers for official resolution (i.e., we won't touch them).
Do these categories accurately capture the range?
Should the fifth (hybrid) category be added?
What are examples of template changes?
Excellent. If you would like to share the spreadsheet with me to edit, I'm happy to help out. I think this is definitely a worthy effort! :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
With help from cartmanbeck and others (who shall remain anonymous), the spreadsheet has been "completed" to an initial working level. I owe a great deal of gratitude to everyone that helped.
The spreadsheet shows all of the legacy (i.e., pre-Core Set) characters and their powers, including hand size and proficiencies, for the base character and associated roles. The two special roles (Ghost Mage from S&S and Spinel Sage from SoPT) are also included. All changes described in the Conversion Guide have been incorporated. I've also identified those powers that fit within 3 basic templates for updated verbiage:
- "X at your location" becomes "local X"
- "X at another location" becomes "distant X"
- "X with the T trait(s)" becomes "T X"
I haven't actually implemented those changes yet, only identifying candidates. I want to be sure that those templates are correct before adding in the revised verbiage.
Also, since I haven't fully wrapped my head around all of the changes in verbiage, there may be more template changes that we can add. I'd like to get those down.
You can see a version of the spreadsheet at:
Note that the *real* version of the spreadsheet is much more user-friendly, with drop down lists and handy conditional formatting with color coding for better recognition. Google.docs doesn't like that stuff, though, so you get the J.V. version. If anyone is interested in getting a copy of the better version via email, hit me up on PM and I'll be happy to share.
Also, if you see any mistakes, please let me know. I caught a few errors when I was going through it, and I'm certain that I missed others.
One thing I considered was including the character-based cohorts (e.g., Donahan for WotR Alain, Magus Arcana for the Magus CD characters, etc.). I didn't give them close looks, but the few I did look at are probably easy changes. I figured I'd throw the question out to the community - would there be any value in adding those cards to this spreadsheet?
Ultimately, the final revisions recorded on this spreadsheet will be used on the new format character sheets I'll be creating for the legacy characters. If nothing else, this will help players to more easily play them under the Core Set rules (especially newer players who won't be left scratching their heads at legacy wording).
So feedback I'm looking for now includes:
- mistakes (gotta fix them!)
- opinions on the templates (Are the initial 3 correct? Are there any others?)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your link isn't publicly visible. (It requires you to be logged in to a Google Account and request access.)
Well that's embarrassing.
I *think* I've fixed that little faux pas now.
I just copied and pasted from the downloadable character sheets or typed them in the order they were on the cards (for those that don't have downloadable sheets). When I create the new format character sheets, I'll put them in alphabetical order.
I can't take all the credit - it was a team effort. On behalf of the team, though, thanks.
Some more templates are for draw, recharge, and heal:
- "add X to your hand" > "draw X" or "draw" (depends upon the source - discard pile, would be banished, etc. - these might require discussion on a case-by-case basis)
- "put X on top of your deck" > "recharge X"
- "shuffle # card(s) from your discard pile into your deck" > "heal X cards"
- "put X on top of your deck" > "recharge X"
Surely you meant "reload X" here? :) I mean, it's not like these words are practically synonyms or anything...
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Some more templates are for draw, recharge, and heal:
- "add X to your hand" > "draw X" or "draw" (depends upon the source - discard pile, would be banished, etc. - these might require discussion on a case-by-case basis)
- "put X on top of your deck" > "recharge X"
- "shuffle # card(s) from your discard pile into your deck" > "heal X cards"
Don't forget "random X from the box" becomes "new X" :-D
Yes, I meant reload.
This is why this needs to be a community effort - I'll screw it up if I'm left unsupervised. ;)
Three more templates:
- "location deck" > "location"
- "box" > "vault"
- "adventure deck number" > "#"
For adventure deck number, you need to see if it's referring to the adventure deck number of the Scenario (#) or of a specific card (level).
Edit: Heh, ninja'd. :)
Chief Technical Officer
|
A lot of the terminology changes are listed on page 26 of the Core Set Rulebook under "New Game Terms" and "Replaced Game Terms."
Also:
the top card of the blessings discard pile > "the hour"
temporarily close > guard
before/after you act > before/after acting
favored card type > favored card
reset your hand > reset
reroll [the/all the] dice > reroll
I think you're asking Vic and the Lone Shark team, but just in case you're asking me, unless I'm told otherwise, I'm assuming that "reroll" without qualifiers means to reroll all of the dice; so when a power specifies a certain number of dice, that verbiage won't change. By that, S&S Jirelle's power will continue to allow her to reroll [only] 1 die (□ or 2 dice).
Two more things I've been incorporating are the "invokes" verbiage (vice "has or against a card with the X trait") and the blessings change from WotR (e.g., instead of "Blessing of Iomedae" it would say "Iomedae blessing"). I think that the former is fairly self-explanatory. The latter is based on my fuzzy recollection of a discussion/FAQ here (though I can't find it).
If I'm off base with either/both of these, please say something ASAP.
Good idea. And yep, it was a WotR FAQ.
In my experience, most people playing Organized Play in PbP with older characters aren't aware of of that FAQ. I personally think it should be in the Class Deck FAQ too for that reason, rather than expect everyone playing PACS to have read that one specific base set FAQ. I don't think it was ever physically printed in any rulebook.
When doing the tents I considered changing the older characters to say "blessing with the (diety) trait" but apparently didn't do it. I should probably put that on my list.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've completed my initial forays into updated wording and have made the changes in the Google.docs version previously linked. I learned something new today: when I paste into Google.docs from the master version that I'm editing, all of the nifty colors show up. Hopefully it's easier to understand now. What you can see now is that *every* character and role has multiple changes based on the new wording formats.
So far I've marked a bunch of powers that I *think* will be edited to the new wording based on previous discussion and the rulebook. These will mostly be marked as "Template Change" with the updated column left blank. I've made initial recommendations for updates to all of the Rise of the Runelords, Skull & Shackles, and Wrath of the Righteous characters and roles.
Meanwhile, cartmanbeck is working his way up from the bottom. When he sends me his recommendations, I'll incorporate them into my master copy and edit the Google.docs version for public consumption.
Based on that methodology, it's probably best that no one else edit the online version. If you'd like to participate in making updates, I can send you a working version and add you to the email chain in which cartmanbeck and I are coordinating our efforts (this way we don't have any duplication of effort). Alternately, you can post recommendations in this discussion (the numbers in column G facilitate quick identification of powers when cross-referenced with the AP/Deck, character, and base character/role columns, e.g., Mummy's Mask Ahmotep Eldritch Scion 7 is the power that allows that character to discard a card to reroll 1 or 2 dice).
What I'm probably going to do is create a new "Type" category for indicating updates that are considered final. These will probably have green text on a white background. The concept there is that anything with a white background, regardless of text color, does not need to be discussed [any further] and we can focus our efforts on updates that have green/yellow/red backgrounds.
Good idea. And yep, it was a WotR FAQ.
In my experience, most people playing Organized Play in PbP with older characters aren't aware of of that FAQ. I personally think it should be in the Class Deck FAQ too for that reason, rather than expect everyone playing PACS to have read that one specific base set FAQ. I don't think it was ever physically printed in any rulebook.
Thanks for finding that.
I found that the same principle affected at least two RotR characters and one S&S character. I've been marking these changes as Hybrid (yellow) on the spreadsheet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The online spreadsheet has been updated. The following APs/decks have been completed (initial recommendations):
Rise of the Runelords AP
Skull & Shackles AP
Wrath of the Righteous AP
Mummy's Mask AP
Alchemist CD
Barbarian CD
Bard CD
Cleric CD
Druid CD
Fighter CD
Goblins Burn! CD
Goblins Fight! CD
If I can still count, that makes 77 characters - a little over halfway there.
I also fixed the "Armor" and "Weapon" proficiency listings in the Updated columns (they were "Heavy Armors" and "Weapons" previously).
I've added the "Final" Type category for those updates that we deem to be finalized and not needing further discussion. None of the entries currently fall into this category, but when they do, they'll have green text on a white background (as stated previously, anything with a white background doesn't need to be discussed any further).
I'm considering a slight change to the methodology. Basically, anything that looks like a safe update into the new terminology will be marked "Template Change" (green background). Anything for which there are questions or thoughts about alternate phrasings will be marked "Hybrid" (yellow background). Anything that we think needs official guidance will be marked "Complex" (red background). I might change the category names from "Hybrid" to "Refine" and from "Complex" to "Developers" to better reflect these categories. This will allow everyone to focus their attention better.
Are we also going to change the characters to reflect templating changes that have happened in the transition to Core that aren't explicitly called out in the Transition Guide?
eg RotR Lini having
"You may discard a card to roll d10 instead of your Strength or Dexterity die for any check."
and because Core Lini's template is
"You may recharge a card to roll d10 instead of your normal Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution die."
RotR Lini's power 3 would now be:
"You may discard a card to roll d10 instead of your normal Strength or Dexterity die."
(And this example does have a bit of relevance, since substitution powers have new templating on them though the relevant part didn't change.)
Also, RotR in general retained the RotR wording templates for all the characters on the character sheet; they should be updated with new templating period, like Sajan's Dexterity die being Dexterity skill
I think the "you may play x blessings on a check" needs clarification because it's unclear how that interacts with "one card per type per party" limitation.
Characters affected are:
RotR Sajan
Meliski (Brawler)
Mother Myrtle (Preservationist)
MM Ezren (Spell Sage)
These last two should be Transition Guide questions, I think.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
That got me thinking about Jirelle (S&S) who can reroll one or two dice for Swashbuckling checks. Then the template would still be the same and no change, right?
reroll [the/all the] dice > reroll
Yes. The Core Set Rulebook has defined a "default setting" for rerolls: "If a power tells you to reroll dice without specifying which ones, reroll them all." If the requirement is anything other than that default, it needs to be explicit.
Similarly, the Core Set Rulebook has also made this a default: "You must take the new result unless the power says otherwise." This means the language we used to always have to put in about "take the new result" is no longer needed. If the requirement is anything other than that default (such as "take the highest result"), it needs to be explicit.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good idea. And yep, it was a WotR FAQ.
In my experience, most people playing Organized Play in PbP with older characters aren't aware of of that FAQ. I personally think it should be in the Class Deck FAQ too for that reason, rather than expect everyone playing PACS to have read that one specific base set FAQ. I don't think it was ever physically printed in any rulebook.
It was supposed to be in the MM rulebook, but somehow didn't get there. But we did put it into Core:
If a power blesses by a deity, or if a card used to bless has the Deity trait, add the deity’s name as a trait to the check. For example, if a check is “blessed by Sarenrae” or is blessed by a card that has the trait “Deity: Sarenrae,” add the Sarenrae trait to the check. Any card that refers to a blessing of a particular deity applies to any blessing that has that deity’s name as a trait.
Are we also going to change the characters to reflect templating changes that have happened in the transition to Core that aren't explicitly called out in the Transition Guide?
eg RotR Lini having
"You may discard a card to roll d10 instead of your Strength or Dexterity die for any check."and because Core Lini's template is
"You may recharge a card to roll d10 instead of your normal Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution die."RotR Lini's power 3 would now be:
"You may discard a card to roll d10 instead of your normal Strength or Dexterity die."(And this example does have a bit of relevance, since substitution powers have new templating on them though the relevant part didn't change.)
In the example about Lini, the suggestion appears to be removing the "for any check" verbiage. I don't see any problem with that. Unless someone disagrees, I can make those changes.
As for other templating changes, the community needs to agree upon them, at which point we'll incorporate them. I'm learning a lot just from reviewing the recommendations that cartmanbeck is making, so I'm sure I could learn a lot more from the rest of you.
Also, RotR in general retained the RotR wording templates for all the characters on the character sheet; they should be updated with new templating period, like Sajan's Dexterity die being Dexterity skill
I was under the impression that "skill" and "die" were not the same. For my example, let's say that we have a character with Dexterity d10 and that character has two skill feats (so Dex d10 +2). If a power referred to that character's Dexterity skill, that would be d10+2. On the other hand, if a power referred to that character's Dexterity die, that would be d10. If that understanding is correct, then changing "skill" to "die" would be a functional change (which we're not making as part of this effort, except if directed by Paizo/Lone Shark). If my understanding is incorrect and all instances of "skill" should be replaced with "die," let me know.
I think the "you may play x blessings on a check" needs clarification because it's unclear how that interacts with "one card per type per party" limitation.
Characters affected are:
RotR Sajan
Meliski (Brawler)
Mother Myrtle (Preservationist)
MM Ezren (Spell Sage)
Assuming that your suggestion is that the "freely" verbiage needs to be incorporated into these (and any similar) characters, then I concur. I'll go through and identify these for developer input.
These last two should be Transition Guide questions, I think.
I think that a number of questions raised here may lead to Conversion Guide guidance. That is my hope, anyways.
Thanks for all of the feedback. Cartmanbeck and I have been pushing hard on this, so I think we'll have all of the initial recommendations finished by Wednesday (or maybe tomorrow, if we're lucky). Neither of us has all of the answers, though, so feedback like this really helps us.
Ah, Vic got in there while I was composing that book. Thanks for the input - I'll make those changes (i.e., removing the verbiage about accepting the results of rerolls).
It was supposed to be in the MM rulebook, but somehow didn't get there. But we did put it into Core:
Oops, sorry I missed that! That sidebar (which I think isn't searchable if I open the Rulebook in Chrome, which is probably why I missed it) is actually very cohesive about that, which I also appreciate as a compatibility nod I missed beforehand.
Also, RotR in general retained the RotR wording templates for all the characters on the character sheet; they should be updated with new templating period, like Sajan's Dexterity die being Dexterity skillI was under the impression that "skill" and "die" were not the same.
Yes, which is why I had the clarification. It should be Dexterity skill. It's just that your sheet has "Dexterity die" because the source character sheet uses RotR era templating to be more consistent with the RotR set.
In other words, like the "with X trait" changes, it should also be modified.
Actually, with Core templating it should just be "use Dexterity"
See Core Seoni's power:
For your combat check, you may discard a card (□ or recharge a spell) to use Arcane + 2d4 plus the card’s level and add the Attack, Force, and Magic traits. This counts as playing an Arcane spell.
So RotR Sajan's power 1 would be:
"For your combat check, you may use Dexterity (□ and you may add the Magic trait) (□ and/or the Fire trait); you may not play a weapon on the check."
And RotR Seoni's power 1 would be:
"For your combat check, you may discard a card to use Arcane + 1d6 (□ +1) (□ +2) and add the Attack, Fire, and Magic traits. This counts as playing a spell."
Not sure if "Arcane" needs to be added to "spell" here.
Unlike the "X with the T trait" to "T X" format update, changing "die" to "skill" is a functional change - beyond the scope of our effort unless the developers tell us it's okay.
Unlike the "X with the T trait" to "T X" format update, changing "die" to "skill" is a functional change - beyond the scope of our effort unless the developers tell us it's okay.
Does the actual character and role cards with post-RotR wording in Hawkmoon's Sajan blog count as developer intent then?
That image might suffice for RotR Sajan, but not for anyone else.
For OP, does that image overrule the official character sheet that can be downloaded from the Paizo site?
Our best path here is to simply pose the question to the developers to get an official response. If they tell us which characters can have the "die" verbiage changed to "skill" we can implement it with no problems. If we don't do it that way, we start down the slippery slope of trying to fix perceived problems rather than simply translating the legacy formats into the core format; and without guidance, we might apply this change to powers that shouldn't be changed.
I don't have a dog in the fight with regard to the outcome, other than to ensure that the integrity of the project is upheld. There is room for recommendations to the team, and this will be included in that category (i.e., relevant powers highlighted in red with the question/recommendation in the Discussion column), but in the absence of official permission, we're going to stick with simple translations, even when we perceive problems.
Yep, if the original use die, use die unless there will be errata!
You mean like this post from Vic?
Strangely enough, I'm looking through my PDF copy of the Skulls and Shackles rulebook and I don't see the sidebar that he's referring to. The only sidebar I see that's relevant is:
"NEW: DICE VS. SKILLS
In Skull & Shackles, we’re increasing the distinction between “dice”
and “skills.” We’ve renamed the step below and added the Rules:
Skills, Dice, and Modifiers sidebar on page 7. The last paragraph of
Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check is also new."
But that doesn't say anything about the conversion he's talking about.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't mean to suggest S&S would have actual conversion notes—I was just pointing out that in RotR, there wasn't much distinction between "skill" and "die," but as of S&S, that's a thing.
It is safe to replace "roll your X die" on RotR cards with "use your X skill."
BTW, using the Pathfinder Adventures wordings is generally safe—those were created using mainly Wrath-era templates. Obsidian may have made some modifications pertaining to their user interface, but when you compare those wordings to their RotR counterparts, I think it should be fairly obvious which changes came from our style changes and which from their interface changes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks to cartmanbeck, all of the first round of recommendations for all of the legacy characters and roles has been completed.
Link (So you don't have to scroll up for it.)
I fixed all of the damage dealt > suffered instances that I had previously skipped. I also changed all of the Deity blessings updates to green since we have the official thumbs up on that one.
Three things that are pending (not counting spotting any errors I may have made ;) ):
- the "freely" thing mentioned above
- ensuring that the recovery verbiage is correct (there's some confusion, mostly with me)
- fixing the RotR die/skill verbiage (since Vic has given us the official thumbs up on that one, too)
I've changed the color coding and types to:
- Basic Change (green)
- Discussion (yellow)
- Developers (red/pink)
"Basic Changes" are anything that fits within the basic templates and which we *think* is pretty safe. Unless there is discussion, those will be changed to "Final" after a bit.
"Discussion" changes are those areas where we think verbiage might be adjusted, or which we think needs a sanity check. There is usually text in the Discussion column at the far right to explain what's in our heads and what we're looking for.
"Developers" changes are those things that we think need to be discussed/approved by the developers (community input on whether or not these are even necessary wouldn't hurt, either). A lot of them are the power feats where the Divine/Arcane skill is granted, and for which we've added text about the proficiency. Some of them are power feats that allow characters to move after closing a location (everyone can do this now, so these are useless power feats). There are a few other cats and dogs in this group, and these should have comments.
There are bound to be some mistakes/omissions, so please let us know if you see anything that we've missed or if there are things that you think we can make better.
I just went through the RotR characters and the only two for whom I found the die/skill thing being an issue were Sajan and Seoni. All of the other instances were using a die (d10, d12, etc.) instead of the normal skill, so those should probably retain the "die" phrasing. I think. Let me know if you think otherwise.
Note that these changes (Sajan & Seoni getting "skill" in place of "die") don't show up on the Google.docs version of the spreadsheet, but I have them on the master version.
I haven't looked at Pathfinder Adventures yet.
I've gone through and added notes for the "random new X from the box" conversion to "new X" (cited by cartmanbeck above).
I also have to go through and fix the below items identified by Vic above:
before/after you act > before/after acting
favored card type > favored card
reset your hand > reset
reroll [the/all the] dice > reroll (I think I may have fixed these, but just in case...)
The Find function is a wonderful thing.