|
Acceptableloss posted:Oracle's Burden(with the Clouded Vision oracle curse) basically lets me duplicate the blindness part of Blindness/Deafness but as a Level 2 spell, so I'm def going to use that. Acceptableloss posted:I like the look of Fleshworm Infestation and Contagion, though I'll have to check with my DM about my CG oracle using them. Acceptableloss posted:Also, some of the cleric only spells, like Righteous Might, Dispel Evil and Holy Smite might be good options since I am the only player in our group with access to the cleric spell list. Our other casters are a Druid, Witch, Bard and Paladin. I don't know how the Bard and Druid are at healing but if they've grabbed a few heals that would ease the burden on you, especially with a Paladin in the party.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 07:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
J. Alfred Prufrock posted:Oh wow, that's really good. Yeah the plan is for the druid to be the primary healer with me as support healer since the druid took the option to add the healing domain to his spell list. I'm much better in melee than either the druid or the bard. The druid has reincarnate, but yeah I will be the primary resurrect monkey at high level. Other than Cha boosting gear, what good options do I have for raising the save DCs on my spells? It looks like most of my good combat spells will be single target stat-damaging spells with either a Will or Fort save. That should work well since the Druid and Witch can handle the AoEs and crowd control spells.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
Karandras posted:Doesn't that mean if you're making a game that starts at level 8 then there is no reason to not play a drow or aasimar or whatever? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
The Paizo developers have expressed a few times that they mostly develop for the same levels at which their adventure packs are intended to run, which not accidentally turn out to be the levels at which the game runs the most smoothly. [Edit: This means like, levels 1 - 10, 1-15 at most] A game that starts at 8th level is fairly far outside the scope of what Paizo considers when building most of its systems. For what it's worth, I typically start games I run at 5th and play up til 20th, and while it is a lot of work to keep things balanced (balanced enough that no character is totally worthless or unnecessary at least) and interesting and moving, I really enjoy it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 16:37
|
|
|
GaryLeeLoveBuckets posted:I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. Isn't the problem really two-fold: 1.) That these races would be too good on par with standard races at low levels 2.) That the perks that make these races good disappear after a certain point, as in levitate 2/day is cool at level 3 but pretty well forgettable by level 15. Level adjustment buy-off solves 2 but breaks 1 at higher levels, where having even very modest perks over standard races makes for a better choice. No hit dice level adjusted races were always the ones the system fell apart for--the guys who have hit dice are usually much easier to balance out correctly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:08
|
|
|
J. Alfred Prufrock posted:The big point of advise here is: take Heighten Spell. Heighten Spell essentially only raises the DC, correct? If I remember it from 3.5, you could always put a Color Spray in a 9th level slot, it just still had the save of a 1st level spell. That right? Different topic: So I was looking at the Bladebound Magus archetype and read the whole 'one-handed slashing weapon' thing and was thinking of using a scorpion whip as my intelligent weapon. Is it possible to use Magus, take Pain Tester, and take the awesome Whip feats without being absolutely useless? I figured 1d4+str+2d6+2d6(elemental)+spell wouldn't be too bad, but I don't really know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
Swags posted:Heighten Spell essentially only raises the DC, correct? If I remember it from 3.5, you could always put a Color Spray in a 9th level slot, it just still had the save of a 1st level spell. That right? The problem I find with a Magus is that it tends to rely on a lot of different ability scores. With only a 3/4 BAB you need strength to keep your to-hit and damage respectable, and Weapon Finesse only solves half of this. You need Dex for your AC if you're mixing it up in melee, especially while you're only rocking light or medium armor, which is probably most of the game most of the time. You need Constitution because your hit dice aren't great, and everyone needs CON, especially if you plan on skirmishing in melee, or possibly even frontlining time to time. And your casting stat is Intelligence. It leaves you spread pretty thin. the Dervish Dance feat can pretty much take Strength out of the equation for you, and is almost tailor made for a Magus since you have to have a free hand anyway (though I've heard of DMs arguing that you can't Spell Combat with Dervish Dance because of language in Spell Combat about how it works "like two-weapon fighting"). Unfortunately Dervish Dance forces you onto a scimitar. You're going to end up spending an awful lot of feats to make this work. Unless you take the half-elf alternate racial ability, you aren't even starting with proficiency, since you won't see a +1 BAB at first level. Then you've got to burn your level 3 feat for Whip Mastery, level 7 for Improved, and 11th for Greater. None of these feats seem that great. With a Magus' bonus feats, this might be a feasible build, but I don't think it works out terribly well. Unless there is some other 'Awesome Whip Feat' you're referring to that I'm missing I think you're going to be very feat poor in exchange for a small amount of flexibility with disarms and grapples. These are feats you could be using to grab Weapon Finesse or Weapon Focus, Spell Focus, Extra Arcana, Craft Feats, or possibly even Combat Casting, and at level 11 Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Focus. It doesn't strike me as a very good trade, but I've been wrong before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 17:39
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Isn't the problem really two-fold: You're right, LA wearing off after a few levels does make sense when you're talking about added spell like and supernatural abilities which will be overlapped by your caster at higher levels. My main concern with LA wearing off is with a race that would give higher stat bonuses to a single score or a static ability that is unique and inherent. Those are just objectively better and irreplaceable, and if the LA wears off before the starting level of the campaign, there's no reason not to pick them from a min-max perspective.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
Acceptableloss posted:Other than Cha boosting gear, what good options do I have for raising the save DCs on my spells? It looks like most of my good combat spells will be single target stat-damaging spells with either a Will or Fort save. That should work well since the Druid and Witch can handle the AoEs and crowd control spells. Well, Oracle's Burden, Bestow Curse, and Contagion/Poison are all necromancy spells, so Spell Focus (Necromancy) and Greater Spell Focus (Necromancy) should be well worth the feat slots. Looking ahead, you've also got Boneshatter, Harm, Plague Storm, Orb of the Void, and eventually Energy Drain. If you're not going to be AoEing, then Necromancy is your go-to school. Persistent Spell is also stupidly good once you have high enough spell slots to use it, even better than Heightening a spell to your highest level. +2 level increase is nowhere near enough for doubling your chance to stick a save-or-suck; that poo poo should be at least a +4. But it's not, so go hog wild throwing out Heightened Persistent Oracle's Burdens and Bestow Curses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2011 22:53
|
|
|
What does everyone think of Dreamscarred Press's version of psionics? I know the psion is still effectively god, and the psychic warrior is still a solid tier 3, but do you think the soulknife and wilder have been improved any? Unlike Paizo, DSP looks like it pays attention to its playtests.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 08:11
|
|
|
Good news: The soulknife has improved over its previous 3.5e version! Bad new: The 3.5e soulknife was very close to being at the bottom of the barrel in 3.5e classes. Almost anything would count as an improvement, so the question is if it improved enough. The Good -Consolidated skill lists and changes to class skill rules means your 4+Int skill points go further. -Full BAB, a fix that was used as a houserule since the original class was released. -The enhancement bonus to attack and damage now scales competitively with the kind of weapons the fighter can wield. Manifester PrCs also boost this scaling. -A couple of the blade skills are nice. -You aren't boned if you face the terrible DR X/Bludgeoning or Piercing monsters. The Bad -EVERYTHING ELSE This is only a slight exaggeration, as I'm pretty sure a few of the 3.5e's abilities actually got worse in the transition. Now, the 3.5e soulknife's biggest problem was that it was compared to the fighter, and every time the class got something that the fighter didn't get, it was usually subjected to a penalty of some sort, because they wouldn't want the class to be better than a fighter, right? You couldn't just allow the class to express itself differently in battle, and no one was really going to acknowledge the fact that the fighter wasn't really that great anyways. So it leads to things like "the soulknife gets a free weapon that they can't lose! Fighters have to buy weapons and can have their weapons eaten by rust monsters! We can't give the class full BAB on top of that!" (ignore the fact that casters have all the free weapons they could ever want and spells on top of that to boot) This new soulknife has way too much of that same design philosophy for comfort. Which is strange, because in the descriptive blurb the designers wrote: DSP's Soulknife posted:Versatile and varied, the soulknife can be found in all shapes and sizes, wielding blades unique to the wielder and customized to fit the needs of the soulknife. Fluid in function, the soulknife has mastered how to alter her mind blade to fit the situation, bringing power and versatility into any combat. Hey, a unique and interesting combat niche for the class to fill! One little problem though... the class doesn't do this! Everything that gives you flexibility is something you have to pay out the nose for in the form of Blade Skills, and when you're being nickled and dimed into using your Blade Skills to buy flexibility, you're using not using them to buy things that help you murder people faster. To top it off, many of the blade skills seem to actively resent you for taking them, so not only are you paying the opportunity cost of not being able to buy something else that you'd find interesting, but using the one skill you did buy comes with its own penalty. Fluid Form is hilarious about this. You can change the properties of your mind blade in the middle of combat, so you can do things like change to fire damage when fighting trolls or whatever... except for the fact that each time you use this ability, your mind blade's total enhancement bonus goes down by 1 until you rest for 8 hours. And you have to expend your psychic strike to use it. You can spend another Blade Skill on Improved Fluid Form to be able to change even more... but it won't get rid of the penalty. What, you wanted flexibility and fluidity as promised by product description? Play a caster! This class also has serious problems with actions. A good chunk of the blade skills that could be interesting are only usable as standard action, which means you can't make full attacks to get your damage on (even as flawed as iterative attacks are as sources of damage). In theory Psychic strike is supposed to help with this, but it takes a move action to activate (or a swift action if you expend your psionic focus... which takes a full-round action to activate... or a move action with a feat) and you only get it on one attack, while a rogue can ATATATATATATA from a flank and do some decent sneak attack damage that can sort of make it competitive with other big full attacking classes like the barbarian. And when you are making full attacks, you're pretty much just a lower damage fighter with a free sword, in a game where "free sword" was never really a particularly stunning feature unless your DM was a power-tripping sadist. And I couldn't mention the soulknife without referring to its unique relationship with thrown weapons. See, the soulknife has the ability to throw its mind blade as an attack... except the weapon then dissipates. Now, at 5th level you can form your blade as a free action once per round, so you might be able to make two attacks, if you were willing to give up your ability to make AoOs. But fortunately, the designers have heard your pleas, and created a Blade Skill that give the soulknife the ability to make a full attack with thrown weapons... that you need to be at least level 14 to take. This is an improvement from the 3.5e soulknife, who got this ability at level 17, putting it in the running for the weakest high level ability of any 3.5e class. This ties back into the whole "we can't allow soulknives to gain an edge over fighters" design ethos, because thrown weapons were literally the worst way to deal damage in the entire game. Terribly short ranges, they relied on your dexterity for the attack roll, but your strength for the damage roll, and had small weapon dice combined with low critical threat ranges and critical multipliers. To top it off, unless you spend another full +1 enhancement bonus, they wouldn't come back, so you needed to be either holding multiple weapons or have quick draw if you wanted to full attack (and if you were spamming unenchanted weapons, good luck hitting and doing damage!), and if you decided that a returning weapon was worth it, that weapon would return to your hand... just before the start of the your next turn. Provided you hadn't moved. And had a free hand ready to catch it (assuming, of course, that you didn't throw more weapons than you had hands). The soulknife couldn't be better than this pathetic joke of a subsystem without being high level. And of course, Dreamscarred couldn't possibly mar the utter perfection that was 3.5e, so they kept it pretty much as-is. Enjoy spending five blade skills, sixteen levels and two ability scores to be mediocre in every way! Or just ignore all of your class features and use a bow! Who cares if you're not even proficient with them? Conclusion: The Dreamscarred Press Soulknife is an unambiguous improvement over its 3.5e predecessor. And that is some faint praise indeed. As utterly lackluster as the old soulknife was, it had its fans solely because of the traction the concept had, regardless of the execution. Those old fans will see that their favorite class is less lovely and they'll be overjoyed. Mission accomplished. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
J. Alfred Prufrock posted:The big point of advise here is: take Heighten Spell. Swags posted:Heighten Spell essentially only raises the DC, correct? If I remember it from 3.5, you could always put a Color Spray in a 9th level slot, it just still had the save of a 1st level spell. That right? As far as I know, this is correct. You can always put a lower-level spell in a higher slot, it just acts the same as if it were slotted normally. All Heighten Spell does is raise the DC to make it harder for higher-level baddies to resist. It might be useful for stuff like Poison, where you'd want a higer DC, but by and large I don't see the point in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 21:21
|
|
|
Yeah, the PF third-party soulknife is just as terribly bad relative to all of the other classes as the 3.5 soulknife was.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
I always liked BlaineTog's old Soulknife fix from the old 3.5 optimization boards. Grah: This doesn't even count the lackluster feats you need to get into Pain Taster. However, I'm fine with being subpar in combat so long as the character is neat, and if feats are the only reason not to do this, my DM allows us to use 3.5 materials as well, so I can buy a wand of Heroics and get all the feats I need.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 23:11
|
|
|
As someone involved in the playtesting of the Soulknife, it's almost hilariously a perfect example of when you want to ignore playtesters. The original alpha of the Soulknife was significantly more powerful...and the Paizo fans despised it. There were a lot more non-standard-action abilities, better ways of gaining your psychic strike, etc. There were a lot of complaints almost non-stop that went exactly along the lines you said - that the Soulknife could not be more powerful then the Fighter. The logic at the time went "The fighter is the base fighting class and ergo it must be what everything is balanced around!" It was one of the more depressing things I've seen because Dreamscarred essentially had to choose between making the good class they were working on, and appeasing the Paizo fanbase who demanded an awful class.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2011 23:52
|
|
|
grah posted:the Dervish Dance feat can pretty much take Strength out of the equation for you, and is almost tailor made for a Magus since you have to have a free hand anyway (though I've heard of DMs arguing that you can't Spell Combat with Dervish Dance because of language in Spell Combat about how it works "like two-weapon fighting"). Unfortunately Dervish Dance forces you onto a scimitar. Scimitar isn't that bad, since it hasn't been changed much from 3.5e. In 3rd edition/pathfinder, your weapon choice is largely irrelevant if you're not going for any specific special attack builds (like trip or reach builds). Aside from DR X/Bludgeoning or whatever, there are only a few things that are important in a weapon. 1) Its handedness (light/one-handed/two-handed) 2) Its threat range 3) Its crit multiplier Handedness is important depending on if you're going for Weapon Finesse, TWF, sword-and-board or power attack tricks (though the latter is less important with the nerfing power attack got, but stacking strength is still good if you're not using a shield), while the threat range and critical multiplier are important as a source of damage (barring the usual crit-immune critters). In the long run you will not notice the difference between 1d6+15 and 1d8+15 (18.5 average damage compared to 19.5 average damage, since the average roll of a d6 is 3.5 while the average roll of a d8 is 4.5), but you will notice the difference when one doubles your damage twice as often. Thus, assuming equal access to a source of threat boosting (Improved Critical feat, Keen weapons or the equivalent, etc), you can basically figure out what type of weapon you need, then go for your favorite: 18-20/x2 ->15-20/x2, a 30% chance for +100% damage, a net gain of 30% damage against crit-vulnerable foes -Light: Kukri -One-Handed: Rapier, Scimitar -Two-Handed: Falchion 20/x4-> ->19-20/x4, a 10% chance for +300% damage, a net gain of 30% damage against crit-vulnerable foes -Light: N/A -One-Handed: Heavy Pick -Two-Handed: Pickaxe, Scythe 20/x3 and 19-20/x2 are both inferior in terms of options if you're not using an other property of the weapon, while 20/x2 just isn't worth your time. Unlike damage dice, critical hits multiply flat damage bonuses, making them even more powerful, so a thing that grants +5 to damage is +10 on a 2x critical hit, or +20 on a 4x critical hit. And there are many ways to stack flat damage (stat increases, spells, bard song, enhancement bonuses, Weapon of Collision). Incidentally, this is why most Exotic Weapons aren't worth the feat, since it's usually just an increase in damage die compared to a similar martial weapon, which is a net gain of about a point of damage on average, and will continue to be a difference of about a point of damage even at the highest of levels, whereas critical hit damage has no limit save for the number of bonuses you can sniff out. The Exotic Weapon exception is made for the Falcata: 19-20/x3-> 17-20/x3, a 20% chance for +200% damage, a net gain of 40% damage against crit-vulnerable foes Behold, the magical wonder of 3e weaponry. Damage in 3e is all about multiplication, with critical hits being one of the three major components (the other two being attack-spamming and charge-stacking). Personally, I prefer the 18-20/x2 weapons, since against most opponents an x4 critical hit multiplier can be overkill, while the reliability of a 15-20 can mean things die that much faster, especially if you have abilities that trigger on a critical hit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2011 00:09
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure he meant "forces you onto a scimitar instead of your (i.e. Swags') preference for a whip." That said, that is a cogent analysis of critical hits. One (small) mark in favor of high multipliers rather than high threat ranges is the chance that you may not hit through your entire 15-20 range against some opponents (typically with your lovely iteratives; if you miss on a 15 with your best attack, you should probably go home). That means that the damage scaling trails off a little faster on full attacks for a high-threat weapon than for a high-multiplier weapon. That's a pretty minor issue, though. I still prefer high-threat weapons, largely because of the new crop of crit-triggered non-hit-point-damage abilities. Blinding Critical will, let's face it, never bring you up to castertown, but at least you have a way to hinder enemies besides flat-out killing them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:I'm pretty sure he meant "forces you onto a scimitar instead of your (i.e. Swags') preference for a whip." Pathfinder still uses confirmation rolls though, despite them being terrible mechanics ("Something exciting has happened! Roll to see if it doesn't happen!"). So if you can't even hit on a 15, you probably can't confirm either. If you don't have to confirm, then swinging for the fences can be pretty awesome. ProfessorCirno posted:As someone involved in the playtesting of the Soulknife, it's almost hilariously a perfect example of when you want to ignore playtesters. Oh man, you weren't kidding, it had encounter powers and everything  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
LightWarden posted:Pathfinder still uses confirmation rolls though, despite them being terrible mechanics ("Something exciting has happened! Roll to see if it doesn't happen!"). So if you can't even hit on a 15, you probably can't confirm either. If you don't have to confirm, then swinging for the fences can be pretty awesome. Right, but the difficulty of confirming will reduce expected damage output at the same rate for both types. Not hitting means not threatening, reducing the effective threat range for your iterative attacks. High-threat weapons feel this sooner than high-multiplier weapons. As I said, though, this is truly minor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2011 00:55
|
|
|
I made a new fighter class thing. http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/houseRules/alternateFighterPrototype I think it's cool but its probably horribly broken in a variety of ways. SerCypher fucked around with this message at 04:04 on Nov 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 04:02
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:I think it's cool but its probably horribly broken in a variety of ways. Your variable cost maneuvers seem somewhat distasteful given that they can be maintained indefinitely. That means that a single level dip gives you the damage reduction of a tenth level barbarian(along with even more fort), or an extra +1 attack and damage inside of a class that already has full BAB progression. And by level 5 its possible that you could have enough con(via items) to access the broken 10 cost abilities(once per encounter)... heck someone could start stacking up on 10s before they could even use them. Given that the class gets better as con increases, what is to dissuade someone from dipping it... And, while I know that the 5th level mark isn't as firmly targeted in PF as it was in 3.x, is it really good to have the bulk of the classes power available before people start jumping into their PRCs My suggestions(and this is before even considering balance issues) Reduce regen/increase cost enough to prevent continuous use of most maneuvers Strictly require that costs be met before allowing a maneuver to be learned or, better yet, divide them into multiple list like Martial Maneuvers and Greater Martial Maneuvers Possibly institute some sort of penalty for using more than half of your stamina in a single round(to prevent people progressing by loading up on con)
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
Reicere posted:I know I'm going to get called out as "Not wanting fighters to be good", but I don't like it. Only one maneuver can be maintained indefinitely if you dip in that way. I guess the 2/- DR is pretty high though, should probably change it to 1/-. I get what you are saying about the implementation, but what about the concept? I am trying to find a way to allow a fighter to do a wide range of heroic things, while introducing a level of resource management that currently fighter's lack. I was going for maneuvers to be closer to spells rather than rage powers or rogue abilities. I want fighters to have a wide range of situational options that they can use in a fight, rather then have them be increasingly shoehorned into a specific strategy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:I made a new fighter class thing. It's...okay, and hardly broken. It does accomplish one of the awful problems with Fighters (they're boring as poo poo) which is good. They're still horribly underpowered, though a couple of the Maneuvers do help them out on the "you failed your save vs. the dragon's fear aura, go get everyone drink" front.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 07:17
|
|
|
To me, the "scaling" armor abilities going from medium to heavy at like 5th and then 7th is always so weird, because what fighter hasn't already invested in a decent suit of magical armor by 7th level?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
Ignoring my whip magus idea for the moment: I've been thinking about a Spellthief. Yeah, I know, out of one crappy concept and into another. Basic build (we're level 9), would be somewhere along the lines of: Spellthief 1/Hexblade 2/Spellthief 6 (Level 9). The reason to include the Hexblade levels is because 1) both are cha-based classes, 2) Hexblades get a bonus to vs. spells equal to their Cha, and 3) Any time a spellthief saves against a spell/SLA he absorbs it and can use it himself next round. Feats: H Combat Reflexes F Pursuit (allows you to take an enemy's five foot step with them) 1 Dreadful Wrath 3 TWF 5 Mage Slayer 7 Pierce Magical Protection 9 Telling Blow If I can find a way to toss in Pierce Magical Concealment, I'm doing it. This gives me: Mages can't cast near me without provoking. If they five-foot step away, I can follow them. If I make a full attack, enemies have to make a will save or flee in terror. Every attack dispels all AC boosting spells automatically (unless I want otherwise, such as to steal them). Crits give sneak damage, meaning I steal spells. I sneak up to a guy to stab him, steal a spell, cast it, everyone has to make a will save or flee in terror. I figured I'd go with kukris and make them Sudden Stunning and Magebane/Godbane (houseruled enchantment that is like Magebane for clerics/oracles). DM is open to 3.5 stuff in Pathfinder and altering it if it sounds need, so I'm wondering if he'll let me grab the Skirmisher archetype from Ranger for some neat tricks and then I could set about stabbing things to death. I think it sounds pretty viable. Any flaring issues?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2011 13:15
|
|
|
Pathfinder to make MMO: http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lcut Will this kill the 4E/MMO argument? Probably not!
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:01
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:Pathfinder to make MMO: http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lcut LOL, more like WoWfinder, amirite.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:Pathfinder to make MMO: http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lcut EDIT: Outside of Ultima.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:13
|
|
|
Yeah, the only real question here is how catastrophically this thing will fail before they pull the plug, and at what stage in the development that will be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
LightWarden posted:Yeah, the only real question here is how catastrophically this thing will fail before they pull the plug, and at what stage in the development that will be. And how much the failure will cost the Paizo line (in money and quality if writers waste time on it)
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
I don't know why they are wasting their time with this. If they got a developer to make an actual supported good VTT program, I would buy it in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 00:39
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:I don't know why they are wasting their time with this. If they got a developer to make an actual supported good VTT program, I would buy it in a heartbeat. Agreed, a good (and supported) virtual table top with a character builder and all the PF rules built in would probably make Paizo a mint and actually be worthwhile. Hell they could probably get away with packaging rules modules for it, for an extra few bucks with the accompanying books or subscription plans, and get lots of people to pay to keep their program nice and up to date. I hope for Paizo's sake this doesn't turn into a total mess but it really just seems like a bad idea all around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:01
|
|
|
I eagerly await the hilarious clusterfuck that, in the extremely unlikely event it even makes it to production, will inevitably get canceled two months after launch. I'm also looking forward to PF fans calling it a 'WoW-killer'.
J. Alfred Prufrock fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Nov 23, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:14
|
|
|
I like that the FAQ already states that they're not using Pathfinder's actual mechanics. Obviously, that's a smart move if they want to make an enjoyable game, but I found it amusing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:17
|
|
|
Looks like the setting is Birthright but without any of the good Birthright stuff, is that right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:26
|
|
|
I love how they're describing this as a sandbox game driven by player generated content instead of a 'themepark' story-driven play style. Paizo certainly knows its audience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:51
|
|
|
I am in awe. I think I'm basking in it. And headed by Ryan Dancey, no less. Edit: Oh my lord it's being done entirely in-house. They literally don't have any experience whatsoever with any sort of video game programming. At all. None. And they're jumping into making their own MMORPG. I'm going to love - and I mean love - watching this. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Nov 23, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 02:23
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:They literally don't have any experience whatsoever with any sort of video game programming. At all. None. And they're jumping into making their own MMORPG. Actually in their defense they have a guy who worked on City of Heroes and for some strange reason also on the World of Darkness MMO. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 02:46
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Actually in their defense they have a guy who worked on City of Heroes and for some strange reason also on the World of Darkness MMO. The first is a game that continues to enjoy long-term peripheral success in spite of fundamental gameplay issues, and the second game remains in development limbo thanks to unrelated issues involving gross mismanagement that all but crippled the publisher via managerial arrogance. So yes, those two are entirely appropriate entries in the resume of someone working on a hypothetical Pathfinder MMO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I am in awe. I think I'm basking in it. They describe it as being like their minis deal with WizKids - they know that they don't know how to make minis themselves, so they contract out with someone who does, then tell them what kind of minis they want. Now the question here is can Ryan Dancey create a working MMO or not. Sadly, my money is on the "no" as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 04:30
|
|
