|
Eox posted:Dreamscarred seems to be kicking Path of War development back into high gear, right on the heels of that mystic archetype book there's now a new akashic initiator class and a new discipline. The class is one of the weirdest things I've ever seen in pathfinder as a d6 HD, 1/2 BAB full initiator and veilweaver that ultimately feels kind of like Zenyatta from overwatch. The discipline, Radiant Dawn, is the most chock-full of fuckery thing they've ever released and seems like a blast to play with, essence or no. Zenyatta is an odd comparison. What makes you say that? D6 HD being sniper bait?
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:04 |
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Zenyatta is an odd comparison. What makes you say that? D6 HD being sniper bait? fake edit: Decree of Death is pretty much just Discord Orb, but you can't spam it
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:flavor as Zenyatta's balls As an uninformed observer, Overwatch seems weird.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:As an uninformed observer, Overwatch seems weird.  In addition to these Orbs of Destruction, he can also have an Orb of Harmony follow one ally to heal them at a moderate pace, and an Orb of Discord which applies a debuff to one enemy, causing them to take 30% more damage from all sources. He's a support character with mediocre healing but surprisingly real DPS. Does Pathfinder have Warforged? I forget.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:that, and the apparent "balance between light and dark" theme, including the off-healing. Sun's Gleam also seems particularly easy to flavor as Zenyatta's balls. Does the class get the ability to float? Haven't looked too far into it It doesn't. Would you like it to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
To really replicate the feel, they need to have some sort of 20 ft. fly speed, and then a way to bump that up to at least 60 ft. for a short period of time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:It doesn't. Would you like it to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:As an uninformed observer, Overwatch seems weird. Overwatch is incredible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Overwatch is alright.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Overwatch is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Got it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:Does Pathfinder have Warforged? I forget. Bestiary 5 has rules for android PCs
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Overwatch is Good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
A straight up Zenyatta build would actually be pretty easy with the right disciplines. iirc Sleeping Goddess has a float 24/7 stance and the Iron Tortoise 9th is Transcendence without the healing. All in all the Rajah is super neat, although definitely for experienced players. I like the idea of a more fragile initiator but I do think this is the only class so far that actually needs an initiation-modifier-to-HP feature to keep from being too easy to pick off. e: the feat called High Noon may have also made me associate this with Overwatch Eox fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:It doesn't. Would you like it to? Two questions: 1. Why only half-BAB? Even with Vassalage accuracy fixer, most 3/4 BAB classes have some kind of accuracy booster as well, and it also only works on Vassalage attacks + relies on having enough allies around to put titles on. The attendant d6 HD also make it a bit squishy. I understand if low-attack potential is something you're not super worried about, Radiant Dawn is a real neat support-type Discipline, and it looks like you have a half-Akashic together with a Harbinger-progression Initiator skeleton, so that's already fairly strong. 2. Iirc part of the inspiration for this class was the Pharoah, Ssalarn's akashic/initiator hybrid - you wouldn't happen to know if that's still in the works, or any kind of ETA on it? I vaguely remember there being talk of a Desert-themed book of some sorts that was in development and would contain the final Pharoah, I've only read the pre-alpha draft but it seemed neat, very tanky. Apologies if it's been covered, I don't follow giantitp forums and so miss most of DSP's announcements.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
I don't think the class needs to be more like Zenyatta, for the record.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Same here, taking a few design cues could be useful considering the similar intent of the class but it stands very well on its own already. I'm extremely excited for the archetypes, the chassis itself is already weird enough that taking it in another direction will make for a neat playstyle no matter what. An Eternal Guardian focused control tank could be interesting, maybe with a little positional fuckery like the later stance in EG which lets you threaten normally from every square you've passed through. On another topic, I'd pay very handsomely for a Path of War expansion to the Conflict PvP rules.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Ambi posted:Judging by the avatar, you are the author of the class, and this is a refined version of the Emperor from a while back? It looks rad! Some kind of veil that grants levitate and speed increase+flight with additional Essence might work for a Zenyatta-esque mobility? Ambi posted:2. Iirc part of the inspiration for this class was the Pharoah, Ssalarn's akashic/initiator hybrid - you wouldn't happen to know if that's still in the works, or any kind of ETA on it? Not quite. Emperor was my proof of concept that I could write a class, sort of 'getting my foot in the door'. While the Emperor was a frontline leader type, Rajah is a backline support. If you're familiar with a 4e Lazylord, it takes a few cues from this; so the play styles are totally different between Emperor and Rajah Since Pharaoh is Ssalarn's project, you'd have to ask him through GitP; I can't really help you there, sorry. Ambi posted:Two questions: The Rajah was, from the start, not designed to be a front line chassis. It's a backline support, sitting with your wizards, and doing your dirty work from afar. We didn't want another Frontline Leadery type (As the Zealot fills this niche), nor another 'Rally around me' type such as the Warlord or Warder; and another D8, 3/4ths BaB would have to compete with the Harbinger, Mystic, Stalker, and Medic; who all perform their own functions. Thus, the design mechanically was created to fill the niche of a true support that can utilize both the Akasha and initiator subsystems. Naturally, the D6 1/2 BaB chassis wasn't filled in the PoW line up, and it ended up being perfect for the Rajah. While some people may disagree, any good class has a weakness to it. Since Pathfinder is inherently a team game (Typically 3-4 players + GM); these weaknesses that are built into classes allow for other players to step up and niches that need to be filled, and the D6 chassis was perfect for this. By shuffling their strength into their allies, Rajah has a very clear weakness about being singled out -- They can still protect themselves with counters and what the Demiurge can grant them (As long as another ally has a title), but will largely rely on their teammates to help protect them in combat. Since the Rajah gives out good benefits to the team (through both the veils and supporting them with maneuvers); a team should naturally want to protect them, creating a healthy give-and-take mechanic between the Rajah and her team. That being said, we are looking to make sure Vassalage does give the accuracy needed, so the accuracy fixer is something we're keeping a close eye on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Summoners are ridiculous. Their eidolon seem to be better fighters than fighters—and they get a spell cast each round to boot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
The rajah class is a cool design, but I shudder to think how the whole title mechanic would actually work in play. You're basically handing the rest of the party a stack of abilities they have to keep track of and you can keep changing the numbers on them every round.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
Roadie posted:The rajah class is a cool design, but I shudder to think how the whole title mechanic would actually work in play. You're basically handing the rest of the party a stack of abilities they have to keep track of and you can keep changing the numbers on them every round. It hasn't been terrible, actually. The typical approach is that you show your allies what titles you can grant, and they pick which ones they want that'll synergize with their build. Now, while you can change the essence around every turn, it's hardly suggested or even recommended -- Changing essence should be done when there's a clear benefit for doing so (Like prying essence out of an unconscious/out of position ally); and doing so eats an action that can be used on strikes/boosts/counters. I don't think I've shuffled essence in or out of essence that much in combat during internal testing, since I'm always doing everything else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
pretty much. If I'm playing with a Rajah, I'm probably working one of the titles into my character build and working around it, rather than taking it as a nice bonus. If I optimize myself towards The Sniper title and the Rajah gives me The Nightmare or something I'm probably not happy, or as effective as I would be. And hopefully the Rajah would realize that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
The Dragon posted:In addition, as a standard action, the veilweaver may make a single attack against a creature with their
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Is there some place that clearly catalogs the state of Path of War with all errata and current development?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
I haven't played regular dnd in quite a while, and have been mainly playing a bunch of other systems like Numenera and Shadow of the Demon Lord. I've avoided Pathfinder because it always seemed like a rehash of 3.5, which I never played and wasn't attached to like so many other people. This said, just looking at the vast amount of Pathfinder books at my FLGS, and with some other players saying they love the setting, the options, and the tactical feel of Pathfinder, I'm starting to become curious. Are they exaggerating? If I haven't played 3.5, what would pathfinder offer me? Is the setting that interesting?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Hiro Protagonist posted:I haven't played regular dnd in quite a while, and have been mainly playing a bunch of other systems like Numenera and Shadow of the Demon Lord. I've avoided Pathfinder because it always seemed like a rehash of 3.5, which I never played and wasn't attached to like so many other people. This said, just looking at the vast amount of Pathfinder books at my FLGS, and with some other players saying they love the setting, the options, and the tactical feel of Pathfinder, I'm starting to become curious. Are they exaggerating? If I haven't played 3.5, what would pathfinder offer me? Is the setting that interesting? Pathfinder is 90% identical to 3.5, with some different classes, some different spells and monsters, and some fiddly differences in the fine details of combat resolution. As an RPG, it has exactly the same advantages (crunchy in-depth combat, expansive mechanics for all kinds of things, an elaborate character-building system) and disadvantages (crunchy in-depth combat, expansive mechanics for all kinds of things, an elaborate character-building system) that 3.5 does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Pathfinder removes some of the more insane stuff in 3.5, which can be a pro or a con depending on what you're looking for. I've never played 3.5, so I can't go into that much more detail, but there's less semi-official content that has really out there interactions. Pathfinder has a ton of tweaks on 3.5 without changing anything super core, even though it does touch some fundamental things like XP gain, feat progression, etc. This post has a good breakdown of some differences, but it's probably going to be too specific if you don't have background in either 3.5 or PF. Personally, I've never played 3.5, but from my time spent online reading about both (discussion can overlap on some boards), I think I'd prefer Pathfinder. I do really enjoy PF, but the only other systems I've played are 4e (bad) and Exalted (totally different).
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Pathfinder balanced some things, but also unbalanced a bunch of stuff. Paizo didn't really put out any of the good classes from 3.5, third party stuff is hit and miss. Though there is the Dreamscarred stuff which is probably some of the best 3rd party stuff. Dreamscarred Press put out stuff for Psionics, and for the Tome of Battle stuff, or at least things that are definitely flavored after them. They have also been putting other things out based off later 3.5 stuff, as well as some offshoot companies that are also producing stuff based off later 3.5 classes like the Warlock.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Hiro Protagonist posted:Is the setting that interesting? I would say parts of the setting are interesting. It's usually described as a "kitchen sink" world with a bunch of patchwork nations with their own theme based on real world nations and fantasy traditions. On the former from you've got a revolutionary France land, a post-revolutionary United States land, a decadent Byzantine Empire land, a Viking land, etc. On the latter front you've got an empire allied with Hell, a land of the undead, various genie/Arabian nights variations, an "atheist" land that bans gods, a barbarian land where a super advanced spaceship crashed that has mutants and out of control robots, a dead/wild magic land that has developed firearms, a land fighting to contain a demon invasion, a permanent winter kingdom run by witches descended by Baba Yaga, etc. I would guess the people who love the setting love particular parts of it. I wouldn't say it's an entirely sensible whole with defensible history and world politics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Pathfinder is 90% identical to 3.5, with some different classes, some different spells and monsters, and some fiddly differences in the fine details of combat resolution. As an RPG, it has exactly the same advantages (crunchy in-depth combat, expansive mechanics for all kinds of things, an elaborate character-building system) and disadvantages (crunchy in-depth combat, expansive mechanics for all kinds of things, an elaborate character-building system) that 3.5 does. Pathfinder CORE is 90% identical to 3.5 CORE. Once you start including ancillary material, they get pretty different.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Having played both it's the same poo poo with some different classes and class mechanics Edit my first couple weeks of playing 3.5 was me going "if it's the same as pathfinder, then the rule is x" and then the 3.5 person was like YUP it's the same sugar free jazz fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Jun 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
How do people handle crafting? I just took Craft Wondrous Item, and the implications of how it works with WBL are odd. The RAW rules I've found are just this section: "However, game balance for the default campaign experience expects you and all other PCs to be close to the listed wealth values, so the GM shouldn't just let you craft double the normal amount of gear. As a guideline, allowing a crafting PC to exceed the Character Wealth by Level guidelines by about 25% is fair, or even up to 50% if the PC has multiple crafting feats." If I were to just craft items for myself, I could be expected to have (at level 6) a total WBL of ~20,000gp, the 16,000gp base with the additional 4,000gp from the crafting pool. Assuming I was precisely at my adjusted WBL, I could have 12,000gp in bought/found items and 8,000gp in crafted items to meet the expected guidelines. Where it gets hairy is crafting for party members. It later goes on to say that if you craft items for your party members, that saving in WBL is drawn from your increase pool. Selfishness aside (i.e. I don't want to be gifting what is effectively my gold to party members in excess of what is normally expected), it seems like it gets really clunky for WBL. The concern is moreso at the party level rather than the individual level, so a crafted 8,000gp item is effectively +4,000gp for the party, which is the extent of what a crafting feat should add. Whether another player gets an 8,000gp item for 4,000gp, or I charge them 8,000gp and pocket the 4,000gp, I shouldn't be crafting any more items until that item has left the party (by hook or by crook). As written, it's recommended that at that point I couldn't even craft an otherwise unavailable item at full price. I do realize that WBL is just a guideline, but I'm already in a large party of six people, and I don't want to make my DMs life more difficult trying to balance an overgeared, underleveled party. How do people handle the crafting of items, both in terms of having it impact WBL and avoiding the awkwardness that comes in from crafting more cheaply for yourself?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:I would say parts of the setting are interesting. It's usually described as a "kitchen sink" world with a bunch of patchwork nations with their own theme based on real world nations and fantasy traditions. On the former from you've got a revolutionary France land, a post-revolutionary United States land, a decadent Byzantine Empire land, a Viking land, etc. On the latter front you've got an empire allied with Hell, a land of the undead, various genie/Arabian nights variations, an "atheist" land that bans gods, a barbarian land where a super advanced spaceship crashed that has mutants and out of control robots, a dead/wild magic land that has developed firearms, a land fighting to contain a demon invasion, a permanent winter kingdom run by witches descended by Baba Yaga, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Hiro Protagonist posted:Fair enough. Are any of the novels worth reading? They don't have to be art, but I use to love reading DnD novels as aa kid, even before I played, so I have a bit of nostalgia allowing me to read those kind of bookk, and it may be a good setting primer. Death's Heretic and The Redemption Engine are good detective novels about an atheist forced to work as an investigator for the goddess of death and fate. Liar's Blade and its sequels are light hearted and amusing adventures of a conman and his talking sword. I recommend those first.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
At this point are there any fantasy character tropes that you couldn't portray with Path of War classes without too much refluffing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Are there rules in Pathfinder for spells and/or other ways of keeping constructs (particularly the sapient ones) in good repair?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Jade Mage posted:Are there rules in Pathfinder for spells and/or other ways of keeping constructs (particularly the sapient ones) in good repair? e: They're both bad, and you should use Make Whole as Cease to Hope said below. The non-spell repair rules are 100gp for 1d6 healing, takes 1 day per 10HD, and involves a skill check? A wand has a higher up-front cost, but only costs 30gp for 1d6 healing (4500gp, 90/charge, heals 3d6), isn't time-limited, and doesn't have a skill check. Elysiume fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Jun 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Jade Mage posted:Are there rules in Pathfinder for spells and/or other ways of keeping constructs (particularly the sapient ones) in good repair? Make Whole repairs constructs, d6 healing/level, up to 5d6, as a second level cleric/wizard spell. A wand of Make Whole wouldn't be quite as efficient as a wand of CLW, but it'd do the job for spot repairs. There's also Rapid Repair in UM, but it's garbage for a fifth-level spell. (5 healing per round for level rounds.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
There's Greater Make Whole in the technology guide.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:04 |
|
|
Elysiume posted:How do people handle the crafting of items, both in terms of having it impact WBL and avoiding the awkwardness that comes in from crafting more cheaply for yourself? Crafting is surprisingly self-regulating, and in my game I don't even bother attempting to limit WBL based on crafter feats. The whole bit with crafting feats impacting WBL has to do with guidelines for Pathfinder Society Play or for new characters at mid to high levels - if I start with 62k gp normally, with Craft Wondrous I'm allowed to instead start with an extra 15k GP worth of items. If the entire party is starting fresh at 10th level, some or all of that bonus 15k could be applied to any of the other party members as well. However, once the game is in play, it doesn't matter. Crafting takes time, not just money. Depending on the kind of game you're in, the biggest limitation on crafting items might not be available funds, but rather on spare time to get crafting work done. Under ideal circumstances (8 hours per day of uninterrupted crafting in a safe and well-equipped location), you make 1,000 GP of progress per day. Otherwise, you make 250 GP of progress per day. Even a fairly modest mid-level item (like a +4 Belt of <insert physical attribute>) will take over a month to make from scratch, if you're adventuring every day. By bumping up the DC, you can double the speed at which you craft - 2,000 GP/day and 500 GP/day, respectively - but major upgrades and powerful items still take a great deal of time. As a GM, it's fairly simple to limit the impact of crafting feats by simply reducing the length of downtime between adventures. The scaling pricing model for items also generally means that character power does not increase linearly with wealth. The biggest use of crafting, in general, is taking advantage of the ability to place multiple item properties into a single slot. Rather than simply having a Cloak of Resistance +2, the rogue can now have a Cloak of Resistance +2 and Elvenkind - at a 50% markup for all secondary properties. This allows the party to benefit from items that they might not normally consider (because the "standard" permanent boost items are typically the optimal choice). This also serves to drain party wealth very rapidly in bite-size doses without significantly increasing party power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 06:29
|
|
