|
Well, except for the times they changed things to cater to Pathfinder's awful fandom, like making the Soulknife poo poo. Their stuff before the 'playtests' is a lot better.
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 09:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:51 |
|
|
J. Alfred Prufrock posted:Well, except for the times they changed things to cater to Pathfinder's awful fandom, like making the Soulknife poo poo. Their stuff before the 'playtests' is a lot better. Play to your audience.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 11:02
|
|
|
Colon V posted:what do you guys think of Paizo's "original" monsters? The ones that weren't already in an SRD. The Jabberwock, etc? You know, I really love the art and lore in Paizo's monster books but I'll be damned if I've seen anything I could call original in there. The Jabberwock's been part of D&D off and on since 1981. But in fairness they'd be hard put to find an idea that hasn't already been covered in some monster manual somewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 12:05
|
|
|
Colon V posted:Before someone starts making snarky comments about 4e, and this turns into an edition war, what do you guys think of Paizo's "original" monsters? The ones that weren't already in an SRD. The Jabberwock, etc?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 12:41
|
|
|
Fear of Vorpal Weapons (Ex) A jabberwock knows that a vorpal weapon can kill it swiftly. As soon as it takes damage from a vorpal weapon, a jabberwock becomes shaken for 1 round. If it is hit by a critical threat from a vorpal weapon, whether or not the critical hit is confirmed, the jabberwock is staggered for 1 round. Is it just me or is that a terribly unnecessary rule, only included to make readers feel smart for getting a reference?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 12:50
|
|
|
There's something hilarious about making the Jabberwock an enemy, and then not allowing vorpal weapons to simply auto-kill it. "A jabberwock knows that a vorpal weapon can kill it swiftly. Actually it can't because vorpal is a pretty terrible enchantment, and even if they do get a crit, they might not confirm it, so really, jabberwocks are pretty dumb."
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 13:12
|
|
|
How the vorpal thing should be handled: if you kill a jabberwock with a crit, your fame spreads throughout the land and the way you refer to your weapon becomes universal. If you frequently say "Dude, this is a badass sword!" then all over the world young adventurers flush with cash from a dungeon raid will walk into their nearby weapon enchanter's shop and request a "badass enchantment" on their sword. Similarly, if you refer to it as "totally sweet" then the enchanters will simply sigh and enchant those adventurers' weapons as vorpal blades, mark them up by 50% and tell them they're now totally sweet. Your weapon immediately becomes a +10 badass/totally sweet/shiny sword/axe/hammer, because you're a melee class and frankly you could do with a bit of a boost.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 13:40
|
|
|
veekie posted:Well, part of the issue is that it also makes tanking into more of rocket tag than it already is. A LOT of monsters will see their damage go steeply up by being able to always full attack, to the detriment of frontliners and the delight of summoners(who get all the perks, none of the drawbacks). You talk as if speeding 3.X combat up is a bad thing! I use full-attack-as-standard-action along with my simplified attack rolls house rule to overall speed up combat. Good point about summoners, though. Perhaps jacking up the spell level of all summons by 1 is in order.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 14:54
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:You talk as if speeding 3.X combat up is a bad thing! I use full-attack-as-standard-action along with my simplified attack rolls house rule to overall speed up combat. Good point about summoners, though. Perhaps jacking up the spell level of all summons by 1 is in order. But it is, D&D combat is lightning fast as it is, concluding in 2 rounds typically, which minimizes the role of tactics. If you could make each round contain less to resolve, you can have more rounds, thus, more tactics, without increasing actual table time consumption. Strategy(what you come to the fight with) and luck determine the bulk of a D&D combat rather than tactics.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 16:30
|
|
|
But that lightning-speed that you describe is more the consequent of OP crowd-control and/or SoD effects than full-round attack actions.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
veekie posted:But it is, D&D combat is lightning fast as it is, concluding in 2 rounds typically, which minimizes the role of tactics. If you could make each round contain less to resolve, you can have more rounds, thus, more tactics, without increasing actual table time consumption. Strategy(what you come to the fight with) and luck determine the bulk of a D&D combat rather than tactics. You mean in in-game terms right? Because in my experience once you hit 8 or 9, combat takes ages.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 17:08
|
|
|
Danhenge posted:You mean in in-game terms right? Because in my experience once you hit 8 or 9, combat takes ages. It takes a long time to end, but the victor is decided within the first 2 rounds. Hell, usually the first depending on saving throws. The real time consumption of 3.5/PF is sloshing through the hit points of the encounter you've already effectively beaten. GaryLeeLoveBuckets fucked around with this message at 21:26 on May 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
Danhenge posted:You mean in in-game terms right? Because in my experience once you hit 8 or 9, combat takes ages. In terms of number or rolls per round(mainly due to additional attacks, meleers would be 2 iteraties + Haste, archers would be 2 iteratives + Rapid Shot + Haste, and then theres natural weapon users and TWF'ers), yes it does take ages. In actual contact, moderately optimized characters rip straight through monster health rapidly, or said monsters are out of the fight due to control effects. Take a plain Fighter 10 with a +1 Holy greatsword, skipping whatever feats beyond basic power attacking. Enhancement +1/+1(better if you have someone to deliver GMWs) Weapon Training +2/+2 Power Attack -3/+9 Boots of Speed/Friendly Haste spell source +1 to hit(+1 attack) Strength 24(16 base, 2 from level advancement, 2 from race, 4 from item) +7/+10 BAB +10(2 attacks) Holy +2d6(could be flaming, frost, whatever) You'll be attacking at +18/+18/+13, with a damage of 4d6+22 per hit, with light buffing against a CR 10 monster with a typical 130hp and an AC of 24. This would be average 2 hits per round for average 36 damage each, which is half the monster's hp. One character wipes out half of the appropriate challenge monster in a single round on average. Two characters should kill it dead, and fast too, as does getting an additional hit or a crit in. And thats just stock standard optimization most groups would have access to without raising any eyebrows. Bards bolstering your party, pouncing, or mounted charging, could turn it into a turn 1 kill.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 18:03
|
|
|
You can always adjust CRs to give a challenge that is appropriate to the level of play. I GM for two groups, one very casual and one very experienced. The more experienced players have several optimized casters that know how to play off each-other. The casuals have an alchemist as their primary healer. I design the encounters to be appropriate to each group and everybody has a good time - even if what each party can handle at similar levels differs by 4+ CRs.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
Of course you could(and should, once you got a grip on your group's competency), I personally add extra health to any solo or paired monsters, but it doesn't take away that full attacks chew into round resolution time and makes kill conditions happen fast(since damage is cumulative). At the same time spells are rather tough to interfere with, and the caster doesn't really NEED a tank with normal casting times.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
Solo monsters in 3e/PF aren't very good fights, because of the whole PC/NPC mechanical transparency that was the hallmark of 3e. If you've got a big bad villain facing off against four to six PCs, team hero is going to get four to six more turns than team villain (or even more if you start bringing in cohorts, summons, and companion characters). So unless team villain is capable of swinging some huge AoE lockdown abilities or is an absolute blender in combat, team villain is going to get clowned pretty quickly since team hero can afford to delegate tasks, and team hero only needs to land one good save-or-lose ability to completely shut down team villain, while team villain needs to land several save-or-lose abilities.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
Hi. I never played in this system but I want to. I also found this: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Farmer_%283.5e_Class%29 Would this be compatible with the rules of this system? I wish to water the meadows with the blood of my enemies.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
Herr Tog posted:Hi. I never played in this system but I want to. I also found this: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Farmer_%283.5e_Class%29 It would take a lot of conversion work for all of the class abilities. Most of them are based off of abilities that changed quite a bit from 3.5 to Pathfinder. Bardic Knowledge (I Reckon), Lay on Hands (Green/Brown Thumb), Smite Evil (Don't Touch My Daughter), Turn Undead (Turn Pests)... they're all different in Pathfinder to varying degrees. Turn Undead is probably the most radical change, so you'd want to base Turn Pests off the new version, which is actually just a feat in Pathfinder. "Mettle" is now Stalwart (see the Inquisitor in APG for details.) Also the normal skill list changes (Hide and Move Silently merged into Stealth, Listen, Search, and Spot merged into Perception, etc.) And even if you do all the conversion work, and you get it all ready to play, your GM may not feel the result is balanced. Can it be converted? Sure, but that's no automatic guarantee. Kvantum fucked around with this message at 06:18 on May 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
veekie posted:it doesn't take away that full attacks chew into round resolution time This is a big reason why I summarize them with a single d20 check.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:30
|
|
|
Kvantum posted:Great Info
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 06:35
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:This is a big reason why I summarize them with a single d20 check. Same problem addressed, different solutions I guess. I figured eliminating full attacks and making the majority of spells take a full round to cast would: -Improve per-round resolution time(theres still mass targeting spells but thats another matter) -Reduce Rocket Tag. Less damage per round also makes things that stun, daze or nauseate enemies less 'lose' and more 'hinder'. -Make TWF less costly(you only need the basic feat after the change) -Make extra attack sources more powerful(Haste, Flurry and Rapid Shot go up in value) veekie fucked around with this message at 10:42 on May 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 10:29
|
|
|
Herr Tog posted:Thank you for your well written and well thought out response. It is clear to me now that I should get the core rule book, get the conversion PDF and then find a GM. Then I can talk and work out making some kind of farmer. Thanks again. Something to remember is that class doesn't have to equal identity - that is, you don't have to write "farmer" in the class field to play a farmer. You could, for instance, stick druid in there and be a farmer with a mystical connection to his plants and animals. Grab, say, an aurochs for your animal companion and you've got your beast of burden. There are lots of ways to do this, so even if you don't get to play that homebrew class, you can probably find a satisfactory alternative.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:42
|
|
|
I'm thinking of running an Iron Heroes game and this thread is the closest thing to a 3E thread we have so I have a question: are there any supplements/PDFs/whatever for running businesses in a 3E campaign? I have an idea for a campaign that involves trade and business so I'd like to find some rules rather than having to make my own.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 05:15
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Something to remember is that class doesn't have to equal identity - that is, you don't have to write "farmer" in the class field to play a farmer. You could, for instance, stick druid in there and be a farmer with a mystical connection to his plants and animals. Grab, say, an aurochs for your animal companion and you've got your beast of burden. There are lots of ways to do this, so even if you don't get to play that homebrew class, you can probably find a satisfactory alternative. Thank you so much for this info.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 05:50
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:I'm thinking of running an Iron Heroes game and this thread is the closest thing to a 3E thread we have so I have a question: are there any supplements/PDFs/whatever for running businesses in a 3E campaign? I have an idea for a campaign that involves trade and business so I'd like to find some rules rather than having to make my own. Do you intend to make a whole economics meta game for the players to engage in? If not, I'd just use trading goals and business relationships to drive plots.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 05:55
|
|
|
Finally played my first game of pathfinder tonight a halfling cavalier. Was pretty fun although some rules questions came up and some things I didn't know about. I guess the biggest thing was my cavalier is using a lance while mounted on a wolf. As far as I can tell if I charge then I can attack, but my mount can't as it doesn't have reach (As you have to attack from the closest square from which you can attack). Now, ride by attack feat would seem to negate this but and the DM seems agreed on that ruling but  .Also it looks like a lance charge with a non-reach beast will never get a full attack AND it makes positioning in combat really tricky. I think I am going to switch to a rapier because this stuff is pretty confusing.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 06:44
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:Do you intend to make a whole economics meta game for the players to engage in? If not, I'd just use trading goals and business relationships to drive plots. I do actually. I want one of the central conflicts to be choosing peace or war as each PC's personal path. In other words, they can choose to level up normally or level up their business.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 06:49
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:I do actually. I want one of the central conflicts to be choosing peace or war as each PC's personal path. In other words, they can choose to level up normally or level up their business. Not quite what you're looking for, but the Kingmaker Adventure Path has quite a lot of really nice world building rules for Pathfinder. Reading through them might at least give you a direction to go in for this sort of thing, though it sounds like you may want something a little more commerce focused.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 08:43
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:I'm thinking of running an Iron Heroes game and this thread is the closest thing to a 3E thread we have so I have a question: are there any supplements/PDFs/whatever for running businesses in a 3E campaign? I have an idea for a campaign that involves trade and business so I'd like to find some rules rather than having to make my own. I can't actually remember any such thing off the top of my head - all I've got is a vague feeling that I've heard of one some time in the past - but we do actually have a 3e thread and it's been reasonably active lately. Here it is. Good luck finding something.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 20:48
|
|
|
So going to chime in here because well, I've got a player who's the kind of guy who sells the other players a mortgage. As in I left the room for 5 minutes for a private interview with another character and came back to find them all in a bidding war for who'd get their house built first. So I've had to cobble up a lot of rulings for businesses ectra. I've found the largest useful sources are both 3rd ed books. The DMG 2 has shop keeper/running rules in general, and the stronghold builder's guide has the most comprehensive/solid building rules and cost out there. The factions guide in PF has some in it mostly due to the prophets of Kalistrade, and king maker was great in a more "overview" kind of set up- but using it straight will fast get you seriously over powered via gold PCs. I'm trying and failing to remember where the leadership feats come from- but I know there's a series of them that can really come in handy if the PCs go that route of fiscal empire building. edit: Yeah, I typo-ed and didn't catch it. Thanks for pointing it out. Discordian Angel fucked around with this message at 01:52 on May 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
Discordian Angel posted:I've found the largest useful sources are both 3rd ed gooks.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 23:07
|
|
So I played a Pathfinder Society game today, which is the first RPG I have sat down and played since just before 4e came out. I'm playing a raging drunk barbarian dwarf going Shadowdancer. It seems to me at least wheree I am that the only people who play Pathfinder are min-maxing the gently caress out of everything, and my character is more "entertaining" than "broken" which is just an alien concept to most people now.  .
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 16:49
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:So I played a Pathfinder Society game today, which is the first RPG I have sat down and played since just before 4e came out. I'm playing a raging drunk barbarian dwarf going Shadowdancer. It seems to me at least wheree I am that the only people who play Pathfinder are min-maxing the gently caress out of everything, and my character is more "entertaining" than "broken" which is just an alien concept to most people now. It is okay buddy, I'll play with you. Got Fantasy Grounds?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 17:19
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:So I played a Pathfinder Society game today, which is the first RPG I have sat down and played since just before 4e came out. I'm playing a raging drunk barbarian dwarf going Shadowdancer. It seems to me at least wheree I am that the only people who play Pathfinder are min-maxing the gently caress out of everything, and my character is more "entertaining" than "broken" which is just an alien concept to most people now. Welcome to D&D man, where way too many people show up because Wow doesn't let you teabag people.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 17:19
|
|
|
Nope
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 17:20
|
|
|
EscortMission posted:Welcome to D&D man, where way too many people show up because Wow doesn't let you teabag people. gently caress those people, I troll them at Encounters and roll-play the poo poo out of everything. EVERYTHING. WAFFLEHOUND posted:Nope You seem like a cool guy who likes making cool characters and role playing. We'll work something out.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:So I played a Pathfinder Society game today, which is the first RPG I have sat down and played since just before 4e came out. I'm playing a raging drunk barbarian dwarf going Shadowdancer. It seems to me at least wheree I am that the only people who play Pathfinder are min-maxing the gently caress out of everything, and my character is more "entertaining" than "broken" which is just an alien concept to most people now. Well, mechanically pretty much everything you have works at cross purposes, besides barbarian+dwarf. Most groups tend towards at least medium-low optimization, where you are expected to do something well, and can do that fairly easily if you stick within theme(though Shadowdancer is problematic anyway with its prereqs and low contribution to offensive ability). Dwarf - +Con, -Cha Barbarian - Str and Con are what you need. Its good at hitting things with big weapons Shadowdancer - Dex and Cha are what you need. It does hit and run and magical shadow effects. Especially for organized play(like Society), you're going to see a lot of concern with having the ability to get as much out of the game as you can. That means at a minimum, everyone being strong at their chosen act, and being worth their share of the loot.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 18:24
|
|
veekie posted:Well, mechanically pretty much everything you have works at cross purposes, besides barbarian+dwarf. Most groups tend towards at least medium-low optimization, where you are expected to do something well, and can do that fairly easily if you stick within theme(though Shadowdancer is problematic anyway with its prereqs and low contribution to offensive ability). Out of four encounters I ended three of them in one shot before anyone else in the party could even get to it. So gently caress them. t  Herr Tog posted:gently caress those people, I troll them at Encounters and roll-play the poo poo out of everything. EVERYTHING. Hit me up on AIM (also anyone who wants to talk characters), it's FoWafflehound.
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 18:47
|
|
|
In that case I don't see what they have to complain about. Sure its not very synergistic, but I assume you managed to make the part about hitting like a truck work out well enough to compensate for the rest.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:51 |
|
veekie posted:In that case I don't see what they have to complain about. Sure its not very synergistic, but I assume you managed to make the part about hitting like a truck work out well enough to compensate for the rest. Kinda, I mean the end result I'm going for is a raging drunk barbarian who is taking attacks of opportunity on everything and poofs around while using booze to sustain his rage well beyond what he should be able to for his level. e. Seriously though totally down for aimchat I haven't talked character optimization since '08.
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 19:15
|
|