Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)

[Brandon]

For those that dont know what pathfinder is, I suggest going here http://paizo.com/store/games/roleplayingGames/p/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG and checking it out (the alpha download is free btw). Since the discontinuation of Dungeon and Dragon magazine Paizo publishing decided it would continue these great articles under a different name and eventually it turned into an entire new edition. Its still in its Alpha stage of development but Paizo's done an excellent job of listening to their player base and improving things that didnt work great in 3.5

The system has had a lot of tweaks to it, some good, some awesome, some not so good but I have yet to see a tweak that I absolutly dont like. Below is an account of our adventure tonight with some of the cooler things that happened in it.

--------------------------------

Tonight I got to play my first chat game of Pathfinder with several other friends who are spread around the world. Tonight was an exploritory night to check out new class features and try out a few combats to see how the updates of pathfinder compared to 3.5. For the first time in several years I put down my holy symbol (for those that dont know my favorite class is clerics) to try something new and after a quick look around the new Sorcerer really called out to me. The class was still an arcane magic powerhouse, sporting more spells per day then the wizard but less able to be known but the real thing that struck me was the idea of heritages that were built into the core class. Heritiages are nothing new, after 3.0 was released I remember seeing several articles on other magical bloodlines then dragons but even in books like complete arcane/mage, and dragon magazines these were always add ons. In Pathfinder your heritage is part of the core class and really shapes your character and their abilities. When I started reading through them I was like a kid in a candy store but eventually chose celestial, figuring that sometime thousands of years ago an angel bred with one of my characters ancestors to create a champion of good. As I went further into character creation i noticed they consolodated a lot of skills turning things like hide and move silently into stealth, or balance, jump, and tumble into acrobatics and that some race abilities have changed like everyone gets an additional +2 to a stat. Small characters still kind of get screwed when trying to be front line fighters though.

Anyway we started out and were recruited to enter a old crypt and put the undead creatures inside to rest. We had a group of five with a sorcerer (me), cleric, rogue, barbarian, and fighter all at level 3. When we got in we were killing skeletons and zombies when our cleric couldnt turn the entire groups. The first things I starting noticing was how useful it was to have cantrips and orisons as at will powers. Even though these were low powered spells having them usable at will really helped me kill things continuously and save my bigger spells for tougher creatures. One of the cooler aspects of the night was when our barbarian started using rage points to give himself supernatural abilities besides just the normal barbarian rage. There were several times in the night where he set his ax on fire just by spending rage points. Our fighter also had some bonuses to resisting fear and had bonuses because he had class abilities devoted to armor making him harder to hit and able to do certain skills easier (he said he didnt get weapon specialties till later though).

Eventually things got stepped up a notch where we stopped fighting hoards of skeletons and zombies and moved up to vampire spawn. The first time grapples came up I was amazed that they had simplified the system although Im not sure how I feel about them still provoking AoO's. We fought through the vampire's fairly easily and then crossed over into the third and lowest level of the crypt where we found the mastermind vampire/necromancer that had been causing the whole problem. I blew all my heavy hitting spells as quickly as I could and our fighter and barbarian kept the thing off me. However after a massive critical our barbarian fell and that got everyone worried...till I used my heavenly fire bloodline power to get him above 0 hit points and back into the fight. When I ran out of spells I just kept using heavenly fire against the undead (it heals good people and hurts evil ones) and eventually we killed the guy and the session ended.

------------------------

If you dont like 4th edition (I personally have played in it yet but Ive read everything and can see a lot of flaws) yet you want to continue playing 3.x with material coming out all the time I would check this out. Pathfinder is definatly an interesting game so far and I liked a lot of the tweaks that paizo has put in so far

[Xillen]

Sounds interesting. My group surely ain't planning on switching to 4.x yet, but there are indeed some things in 3.x that can use tweaks :)

*is downloading to check it out*

[kongming]

Paizo's done an excellent job of listening to their player base and improving things that didnt work great in 3.5

*collapses onto the floor in laughter*

I wish we had Spoiler tags so I could throw all of these quotes into one Spoiler box. Anyway, there are many more, but I hope this gets the message across.

Yeah, seriously. People do a thread about the serious problems the monk has, and he interprets it as 'the only problem is that it costs too much to fake enhancement bonuses'.

So I was bored, so I added some comments to the thread. I don't hold out much hope that jason will actually heed them, since his initial response to the thread as a whole was 'shut the fuck up'.

And yet, his response is the same as before. 'Well, you haven't tested it, so you can't possibly know that its bad'. But really, we have, its been done, tested, and it fails.

No, its true, you don't. But it helps if the designer isn't a blithering moron who can't even read the text he writes and realize its fucked up beyond belief.

Really, the man wrote up the bard ability, put the pdf up, someone immediately pointed out the obvious problems, and his reply?

'Oh, its at the top of my fix list'.

What the hell? The problem didn't even exist until he wrote it- why include it if its that fucked up?

We aren't valued or wanted there. And while neither one of us is thin skinned enough to go off in a huff just because people hate us, we both have important things to work on and can't be bothered putting genuine effort into a project which won't benefit from that labor.

I think you've got a perfect storm of three factors coming together in Pathfinder:

1. You've got one guy basically doing all the design work by himself (possibly as his first major game design, as opposed to adventure writing) project.

2. He didn't get the job because of his vast design resume, but rather because he happened to work at Paizo and have some 3.5 revision ideas scrawled down.

3. The lead designer is naive enough to expect to get things mostly right his first time out and is genuinely shocked when people point out major problems with his work.

I think Point 3 is the most interesting one here. Any time you try to do a big job like revising 3.5, you're going to get parts wrong no matter who you are (though I still wonder how he decided ki strike was so awesome its use needed to be limited). That's because you probably haven't had a chance to analyze or observe every element of the system in detail. Therefore, when you post your playtest pdf on the internet, somebody who's obsessed with some part of the system that you only have passing experience with (like the guy who really likes the monk concept and has made a million variants in an attempt to improve them) is going to pick that area apart. You need to expect that, and not accuse people of being antagonistic when somebody's thread title says your fix is like a bandaid on a mortal wound.

If you present a concept to the internet, you shouldn't be at all surprised when someone stands up in another part of the world and says "We tried exactly that, it didn't work and I wouldn't suggest going that route." And what you really shouldn't be is offended when that happens. I mean sure, you should take what people say on the internet with a grain of salt, but automatically discounting people because they tell you that they have experience working on the problem you are working on and that your proposed angle of attack proved unfruitful is batshit insane.

this thread is descending into Paizo-like circlejerkdom fast.

When the Open Playtest was reported, I was very hopeful. It is after all an unprecedented attempt - it's something which could theoretically achieve the kinds of results that the distributed network of D&D fans can already achieve - breaking the system within hours of publication. Regressed repeatedly, that could make a system that was resilient enough to withstand the vast majority of campaigns - maybe even all of them. But it would take dedication to do that, and the Paizo management has refused to put that effort in.

Indeed, they've made it clear that they don't even want other people to put in that kind of effort. Jason Bulmahn straight up said that K and I were "making extra work for him" as if that was a bad thing. I've been on both sides of the development team / playtest group divide, and making more work for the dev team is the playtest group's actual job. Complaining seriously that they are doing that is disingenuous.

And there's good solid reasons to not want to do things correctly in this case. Imagine for the moment that the success of the playtest is determined based on how many of the voices on the voluntary board are saying positive things. That's pretty easy to imagine actually, as superficially that sounds like a pretty reasonable way to do it. If lots of people are still complaining about stuff, it seems reasonable to conclude that there is more work to be done. If lots of people are saying it's the best thing ever and changing anything now would be a step backwards, then it seems likely that it's ready for publication.

The problem here is that the board is voluntary. People who like the project will post more and people who don't like the project will leave and then not post anything at all. In short, you can get the same effect on the playtest feedback by pissing off people who are critical to the point where they leave as by actually fixing perceived problems. And this is the strategy that the folks at Paizo are employing. Giving feedback about what needs to be fixed isn't helpful. It makes Jason hostile, because discussing flaws creates more work for him. Work that he can skive off of by just banning people who report problems.

It's just a thread where people come in to felate each other and insult people with actual swearing that is auto-edited by the board software. It can't possibly not be against their code of conduct, but it continues because the thrust of it is pro mutual masturbation and anti science. And that's obviously what Jason wants out of the community. If it wasn't, they would have come down on the other side.

for them to say, "We're going to carry the 3.X torch, but ignore the smartest people invovled," is just straight-up dumb.

I'm actually surprised that Paizo is taking a page from WotC's book where they ignore playtest feedback and clear mechanical problems in favor of some sort of divine authority of "we are the publishers, so we know better" and they have forums just to give people something to play with rather than letting it be a incubator for a better game. It's this attitude that is going to make 4e DnD a failure, so Paizo's adherence to this model is disappointing.

It's like a combination popularity contest and Oberoni Fallacy writ large. Paizo can & is riding on their success from their time as publishers for Dragon & Dungeon magazine so as to not have to try to improve the game at all, making the whole open playtest another form of advertisement.

The important part is that anyone who isn't a blithering idiot can see through those kinds of charades and the Paizo designers side with him again and again despite his total lack of contribution of in-game insight.

So yeah, those guys are in-house character assassins. And they are set to go after anyone who advances the cause of truth, inquiry, or peer review.

Honestly, I see no reason to even bother with Paizo. The environment there is identical to the one at WotC, which makes sense as it is in fact the same people, or at least the same sort of people.

But he's also exactly what Paizo wants. He's going to write a long winded review of Pathfinder RPG that won't really say or analyze anything. And he'll give it 4 stars. If they can get 20 people just like him they can generate some real (if incomprehensible) buzz on Amazon and RPG.net that will sell real products.

I think I found the funniest thing ever. Some guy tried to do an evaluation of some mechanics, and he immediately was accused of being Frank.

The bar has gotten quite low over there when people trying to address mechanics problems are immediately demonized by being accused of being someone known for being demonized.

Since the only reason that anyone cares what they have to say about this or any other topic is that they promised to come in and fix problems, isn't this just a reason to walk away in disgust?

I think this is the major problem they have. Based on his response to the sorcerer thread, Jason clearly wants people to tell him they like his shit. It does matter if a small number of people tell him that, no, 2+2 != 3, as long as other people tell him they like it.

[Xillen]

Please select the text between the ( ) signs:

(How does this work for spoilers?)

[kongming]

That's not the kind I meant. I mean the box with "Click here to expand (may contain spoilers)". Because that was a long list of quotes.

---

That being said, Paizo-attitude aside, there are many good things about Pathfinder. They made a start by taking "Save or Die" effects out (then added such effects to some other classes?), but they decided instant-death itself is the only problem. "Save or Lose" is still there (Hold Monster, Dominate Monster, Charm Monster, Sleep, Colour Spray). But it at least was a start.

Last I checked, the Monk was a bit of a mess, but they were moving in the right direction. They've looked at specific spells that cause problems and tackled them to fix them (rather than just one big "Because wizards can Gate/Bind genies for wishes, all casters are broken, MASS NERF!") - last I checked, anyway. The Bard was made more playable AND more interesting, skills were simplified a bit...

And it sounds like the Barbarian is now a lot more fun than before, too.

So although I have many bad things to say about Jason Bullman and Paizo, as well as many of their board members, at least Pathfinder itself looks pretty good.

[Brandon]

I cant really speak for Paizo's attitude because frankly, I havnt seen an attitude. What I have seen is designers working hard to add flavor back into the game and I think thats a really good thing. Im sure Paizo's people has some assholes amoung them  but so does Elliquiy. You arent going to find a group of people on the internet where there isnt at least one person that bugs you.

Anyway, I want to get back to whats good about the game and what kind of changes they have made. Last night I just did a brief look over the party when we went on a short dungeon crawl but now Im gonna get more specific.

To start, lets talk about skills. We all know how useless it was to take a cross class skill in 3.5 unless you were staying low level. In Pathfinder skills still have a rank system but the idea of cross class skills was tossed out the window. You still have class skills but now when you put ranks into a class skill you get a +3 bonus to it. You can spend skill points in non-class skills without having to do that crappy 2 points for 1 rank rule that 3.5 had. 1 skill point equals 1 rank in Pathfinder. This IMO helps break the molds of each class and gets away from that pigeon holing crap that Ive hated so much about 3.5. Now I could make that stealthy barbarian who stalks their kill. That diplomatic and silver tongued fighter who solves things through talk first and his blade second. That scholorly sorcerer who's looking for answers in a book and in themselves. I can do all of that, and more, and not be penalized for wanting to be different (yeah thats what I felt 3.5s cross class system did). As I noted last night, another great thing is that they have consolodated a lot of skills. Stealth, linguistics, perception, and acrobatics are 4 of the new skills and they all have 2 or 3 other skills pulled into them giving more options when designing a character and I think more options are always a good thing

[kongming]

I cant really speak for Paizo's attitude because frankly, I havnt seen an attitude. What I have seen is designers working hard to add flavor back into the game and I think thats a really good thing. Im sure Paizo's people has some assholes amoung them  but so does Elliquiy. You arent going to find a group of people on the internet where there isnt at least one person that bugs you.

That was actually about Paizo themselves - the designers. It's similar to how Privateer Press are misogynistic dickheads who insult fans of "anything else", yet they also happen to produce good games as a completely different thing. So as long as you don't actually offer any criticism to them, you can just focus on Pathfinder itself.

I'm glad to hear about the change to skills. It's something I've always done as a DM - except for the bonus. I always just said "There are no cross-class skills. If something grants you a class skill as an ability, you get a +1 to it instead" But that way of handling it is possibly even better. I approve.

The adding of flavour is very much take-it-or-leave-it, as it's so easy to make new flavour for your own games that every single player could seriously make their own flavour for their own abilities, however, it doesn't hurt the game, and it's good that they did so. It helps provide a game world to play in right from the word go.

I look forward to hearing more good news from you.

[Chris Brady]

Having downloaded all the Alpha's today, all I've seen is that it's more of the same.

The Fighter STILL sucks, the Cleric still has the major buffs, the Druid's Wildshape is still busted and Wizards can BE the entire party after level 7-9.

Nope, they ain't changing enough.

About 4e?  To be honest, I'm still on the fence on it.  I had fun on the game day, but...  I'm still not sure it's for me.

[Brandon]

Chris keep in mind that it is still Alpha, theres still changes to be made, opinions to be listened to, clarifications to be made, and in no way is any system ever going to be perfect. However this still remains a viable update to the 3.5 rules for those people that do not want to switch to 4th edition

Speaking of, lets talk about fighters now. In 3.5 they got no respect with good reason for being just a feat hoarder. Now they continue to get a lot of bonus feats but also some new abilities. Namely weapon and armor training. Weapon training is an ability where you choose a type of weapon like axes. You then get +1 bonus to hit/damage rolls with all axes. As you get more weapon trainings your previous ones continue to grow. So by the time you get to level 20 your first weapon training group is +5 to hit and damage rolls. Also at 20 you can pick a specific type of weapon like a longsword in which you gain mastery over. Once you've mastered it you automaticly confirm criticals, increase the crit damage rating (from x2 to x3), and you can not be disarmed while holding it.

Armor training is a little different. Armor training applies to all kinds of armors and everytime you get it while you wear any kind of armor you gain a +1 bonus to ac, -1 to armor check penalties, and +1 to dexterity modifier per armor training. At 20 I think its only +4 to each but at level 19 you also get 5/- damage reduction when wearing armor. This combination of abilities gives the fighter the ability to be the best protected member of the party. A paladin or barbarian could still take blows but they just wont do it as well as a fighter.

This does a lot to bring the fighter up in the balance scales but IMO the class is still lagging behind.

[kongming]

opinions to be ignored

I fixed it for you.

Anyway, I'm not so sure I agree with you on the fighter abilities. Firstly, plain numbers are boring - the fighter isn't gaining actual abilities.

Secondly, +5 to hit and damage sounds an awful lot like "Polymorphing into something with 10 more strength than you" (actually, that works out better), or any number of other buffs. As for armour, I shall direct you to polymorph/shapechange, both of which grant way more than you'll ever get by wearing armour. And DR 5/- at level 20 is... well, a joke, actually. If a CR 20 Balor chooses the weakest option available and makes a full attack, it'll average at over 60 damage still, plus entanglement. If it actually casts a damaging spell, it ignores the DR completely.

I mean, it's nice that they made some kind of effort, but... unfortunately, they seem to almost be taking the approach of the WotC board members who claim there's nothing wrong with the fighter. I still direct people to the Tome "Races of War" to see what a real fighter fix should be.

Incidentally, I am indeed keeping in mind that nothing will ever be perfect. So far (from what I remember and you guys are telling me), it looks like it is at least improving on 3E, and that is something.

[Brandon]

Thats another thing, they've cleaned up polymorph making the wording more exact in what you can and cant do with it. Its no longer a "OMG I PWNED THEM!1!1!!1" spell but a bunch of cool spells that can turn the tide of a fight or grant a quick escape if used right. Notice I said bunch here, what they did was turn it into a whole new subschool of magic having different levels granting different amounts of power. It still needs work though

Back to the fighter and armor mastery though. Lets say you are level 20 and you have a paladin and fighter in the group. Lets also assume they have the same gear of +5 full plate armor, a +5 large shield with, +5 amulet of natural armor, +5 ring of protection, and a dexterity of 18. This equals (10 base + 4 Dexterity bonus (reduced to +1 for the paladin because of max dex bonus) +5 natural armor bonus +5 deflection bonus + 13 armor bonus +7 shield bonus) = 48 ac for the fighter and 44 for the paladin. A balor with its main attack bonus at +31 will hit the fighter on a roll of 17 or higher and the paladin will get hit on a 13 or higher. Thats a almost 1/4 of the die which is a big thing in the grand scheme of things and IMO nothing to sneeze at. If the balor strikes with every attack and does 30 damage on each attack (120 damage total) the paladin is nailed with the whole 120 damage while the fighters DR brings it down to 100 total damage (25 damage per hit). Likewise, I dont think thats anything to sneeze at. The paladin is still able to soak up the damage and avoid some of the blows but the fighter does it better

Anyway, I agree that the fighter is still lagging behind but its definatly better off then he was.

[kongming]

True. I will take any improvement offered.

My warning sensors are being triggered by the multiple polymorph spells, though. The [Polymorph] subtype WotC did sucked majorly. It was awful, ensuring that people would never choose them, instead bullying their DM into allowing Polymorph as-is, and merely promising not to abuse it with specific forms.

Also, if they're multiple spells, the Sorcerer gets raped yet again (unless it's one spell that can be cast as a higher level spell slot to gain the greater effects). Now don't get me wrong, the Sorcerer is used to this happening - right from the word go, in 3.0, then in the book "Skip Williams Hates Sorcerers", then in 3.5 and still going, but it's likely just one more slap in the face to them.

[Brandon]

The multiple polymorph spells let you take the physical forms of elementals, plants, animals, magical beasts and so but they are made to give straight bonuses and penalties based on your choice. If your using elemental body 3 (a 6th level spell) and want to become an earth elemental for example I think its +6 strength -2 dex +6 natural armor or something like that. Beast shape 3 as a huge magical beast has similar bonuses as well. Even shapechange is limited by these lower level spells because it gives you access to all the lower shapechanging spells at once for a 10 min/level duration and still allows you to change at the beginning or end of the characters round. Even the druids wildshape class feature is limited by these shapechanging spells. What I like best about this system is you can still turn into the a huge magical beast or something just as fearsome looking but the bonuses of doing so are limited and not game breaking

You're right, sorcerers do kind of get screwed with multiple spells that are similar. I think there needs to be some way for them to forget past spells and learn new ones in their place or to simply upgrade. Although with their bloodline powers Sorcerers are pretty sweet now even with that problem

Edit: Edited to clarify look vs bonuses of said spells

[Xillen]

About the skills, does that mean that someone who multiclasses into 2 or 3 classes suddenly has a +3 bonus on a LOT of skills?

So does that make Sorcerors a little more into casters with special abilities instead of full casters (A la the Wilder) or am I seeing that wrong?

Also, Fighter VS Paladin, I always felt the paladin's abilities mostly as fluff, and could consider the fighter feats more interesting. Now if the fighter also receives general bonuses, does the Paladin receive anything to compare? (the 13 to hit as opposed to 17 to hit is a scary example. It means the paladin is receiving twice the hits already.)

[shadowheart]

*downloaded*

like the 3.5 derivative Basic Fantasy RPG.  Haven't liked 3.5 generally though ... will be interested to see how this compares.

[Far eyes]

Well I have bin following Paizos development over some time now, was disappointed with the Sorcerer I was expecting something a lot better, and more taught out.

Although they still make some of the more awesome modules

[Brandon]

About the skills, does that mean that someone who multiclasses into 2 or 3 classes suddenly has a +3 bonus on a LOT of skills?

Im not 100% sure on that because they havnt really discussed multiclassing (or at least I havnt seen any changes to it) so the answer might be yes. If so its still the ranks invested +ability modifier +3

So does that make Sorcerors a little more into casters with special abilities instead of full casters (A la the Wilder) or am I seeing that wrong?

Sorcerers are still full casters the same as they were in 3.5. They still only know a limited number of spells and still have more spells per day then wizards. However the addition of bloodlines has changed their focus a bit and added a lot of flavor. Bloodlines can really turn the tide of certain situations like how I revived our barbarian after he fell in battle. I could only do that with the celestial bloodline's heavenly fire ability. Bloodlines also give you bonus spells known based on which one you choose (I got bless at 3rd level but if I continue playing him Ill get magic circle vs evil, remove curse, greater dispel magic, gate, and more as he progresses in levels). You also get bonus feats, another class skill, and special Extraordinary or supernatural abilities based on your chosen bloodline.

Like fighters I think sorcerers are still lagging behind a bit but they're way better off then they were too

Also, Fighter VS Paladin, I always felt the paladin's abilities mostly as fluff, and could consider the fighter feats more interesting. Now if the fighter also receives general bonuses, does the Paladin receive anything to compare? (the 13 to hit as opposed to 17 to hit is a scary example. It means the paladin is receiving twice the hits already.)

The short of it is, Paladins are a lot more badass now. Now I acctually miscalculated something about that armor example between the fighter and paladin. The paladin acctually gets hit on a 10 or higher because he's wearing full plate and I accidently added the full +4 dex bonus to his ac rather then the +1 he was supposed to have. Paladins have gotten some changes too though. Now Paladins become immune to a lot more then fear and give the party the same +4 bonuses with different aura's as they level (and to my understanding all these auras can be up simultaneously). Lay hands was changed too and does more then just heal. Its their cure disease, heal, remove curse, and break enchantment ability but requires you to use multiple uses to use those other abilities. They get 7 smites/day by 20th level and turn undead was also changed (its called channel energy now) so that it heals the party at the same time as damaging and frightening undead. Then at 20 they get the ability holy champion which is DR 10/evil, makes the smite evil ability banish evil outsiders, and maximizes the effects of channel energy.

[Chris Brady]

The  problem with the Pathfider RPG is how far do they want to change the system?

Because as 3.5 stands right now, there's no point in taking the Fighter Class for more than 2 levels, most of the feats do not scale well if at all, magic is MANDATORY at higher levels, if not overpowering them, and Wildshape is still the nastiest beast of them all.

Also, a sense I'm getting is that a fair bit of the 'Pro-Pathfinder' people are MAJOR wizard fans, which means screw the rest of the classes as long as their babies get to keep their power.

So, are they going to change what?  Are they going to rebalance?  Wouldn't be better to just scrap the 3.5 base and go full OGL?

This is all my opinion, of course.

[shadowheart]

Meh.

I will stick with Basic Fantasy and Mazes and Minotaurs for old school goodness (or 1st ed. AD&D if I can ever find the books again)  and GURPS and HERO for when I want tons of detail.

3.5 and this '3.75' both fail in that regard .. they are too complex in terms of rules, class options, and just plain 'glitz' for what is in essence a hack-and-slash RPG.

Granted, my opinion alone, but there it is. :)

[Brandon]

Chris did you acctually read what Ive posted? Ive already mentioned that wildshape/polymorph/shapechange has been massivly overhauled to be less game breaking as well as put the fighter and sorcerer up on a pedestal to show that they've gotten an overhaul to make them more powerful and more interesting. The days of a wizard transforming into a monster to out do the melee classes in every way are gone. Save or die spells have likewise been overhauled so its not just a make this save or die situation.

Wizards have pretty much stayed the same except that their school specilization choice now gives them a few supernatural aiblities (most in the form of cast X spell 1/day) and just like the sorcerer they got a hit point boost. Unlike the sorcerer their cantrips per day are limited too.

While we have the wizards up for discussion, how about telling me exactly how they can "be the entire group"? Ive never seen a wizard that can find/disable traps, get in the way of the most powerful opponents, be able to heal and buff the rest of the party, and continue his blasting and problem solving tradition all at the same time. I have seen wizards summon monsters and send them down the hall to trigger traps, or polymorph into a big monster to do/take lots of melee damage (which I already said has changed). Ive yet to see one use powers to heal outside of polymorphing into an angel or similar creature (which I will state agian, shapechanging spells have changed so you cant do that now) or turn undead. Sure they can buff themselves and the party but what magic class cant? Hell paladins and rangers can make decent buffers if they can spare the spell slots. Then theres their own archetype which I think they should keep. A cleverly placed grease spell or cone of cold to the enemys front line are the kinds of things that wizards are expected to do afterall. Help me understand where you're coming from and hopefully I can show you how the problems have gotten fixed

[Far eyes]

How about The Rainbow Servant + War mage a whacky build and you lose a couple of caster lvls but the end result is definitely nice

[Brandon]

Im not sure what the plan is with non-core base classes like the warmage, favored soul, spirit shaman, etc. There may not be one yet for all I know. However prestige classes are still a possiblitiy. There are a few notes about skill requirment changes that mostly go into which skills have been cosolodated and another note on prestige classes that figured for cross class skills needing their required ranks raised. You can still enter prestige classes but now its not a waste if you stay with the same class for 20 levels unlike with 3.5. For example if youre an Elemental bloodline sorcerer you gain feats and bloodline powers as you level. If you class out of sorcerer and go, lets say Elemental savant you're still gaining the savants powers but loosing out on bloodline feats/powers as well as the progression of some powers you might already have

[Far eyes]

End of the line

If I play 3.5 I have enough house rules of my own. I don’t really need thairs, added to that some of their stuff is just plain bad. I say some I like most of it but not all so I read the AP picked my likes and just incorporated them in my 3e game

Now at the moment my group is playing 4e but I am fairly shore we will return to 3e once every so often. And I do mean The groups house ruled SP system, DR for armor class based AC, VP/WP custom version using edited skill system gaining version of it. And not paizos

But their modules are good

[Brandon]

well thats fine, if Pathfinder isnt for you I fully support going to whatever system is. Keep in mind though this is just alpha. You may want to check out the final version when it comes out

[NightBird]

FWIW, I like the minis for Pathfinder, especially that they're not pre-painted plastic crap.

I have some friends that are going to try 4E, but if it turns out to be a bust, Pathfinder is high on my list to try.

[kongming]

I'll probably stick with 3.5 + Tome upgrades, simply because I know I can trust stuff by Frank & K (for one thing, they actually show the math behind it rather than saying "Trust me, my name is on the front cover.") and their stuff is plain awesome. Fantastic flavour, ways of explaining the weird things that exist, actual balance, and things are generally awesome all the time.

I *have* heard that Jason is more interested in adding flavour to the Sorcerer than actually making it comparable to the other full casters (or for that matter, changing more glaring problems - the monk is still a joke). But if there's an actual improvement to abilities thrown in as well, I won't complain. Is there an option for "No, I'm not the descendant of a dragon or whatever. I am just that damn good." or does every Sorcerer have to have "Mummy fucked a (strange creature)" in order to get their special powers?

While it's all well and good to say "they want their favourite wizard to not get a nerf", the fact of it is that the best point of balance is this: can it contribute meaningfully, and survive most of the time, in a level-appropriate encounter? This means that MONSTERS are the way you balance the classes. And that means that, at levels higher than 5, you look at the Wizard, Cleric and Druid, assume they won't use the particularly abusive abilities (just change those individual tricks), and fix everyone else to compete at their level.

Yes. That means that at high levels, Wildshape and friends need to be changed to a decent buff that doesn't win the game (sounds like they did just that), Gate shouldn't be used to call in creatures you couldn't reliably defeat as a party (ie "CR higher than the party level"), but most of all, the fighter and friends need to be doing as much as the wizard is. Not the other way round. To those who have a hard-on for Tolkien's crap: only play level 1-5 games. Done. Above that, fighters are: the Iliad, THIS IS SPARTA!, Beowulf, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Hercules, and (as much as I hate to reference it) Dragonball. They are not "Derp de derp derp, I stand and hit with sword."

Now, I've never believed that Wizards can do everyone else's job, but they are able to cover all bases, given planning. In reality, everyone should be able to cover all bases in a pinch - just not being as good at those things as their specialty. As for what they can do:
Traps: summon monster, tell monster to wander in front of the party all the time. Or Dispel magical traps.
Searching: if it's magical (including any trap with a DC over 20), Detect Magic will basically find it. If not, they can't find it, and that's okay.
Any time-is-not-of-the-essence scenario, including out-of-battle healing: Planar Binding. Seriously, they can summon Outsiders with Raise Dead as a (Sp).
Combat: Damage is for chumps. First level they bust out Sleep, Grease and Colour Spray (save-or-lose spells). From then on, it's Charm Person/Monster (combat over), Hold Person/Monster (Hold = coup de grace), Dominate Person/Monster (combat over + a free cohort! This is an example of a spell that needs to be dropped), Finger of Death, Forcecage (look, Ma, no save!), Wail of the Banshee, Power Word: Kill... I crossed out the ones that presumably don't exist any more in Pathfinder.
They can also bring Wall spells up, so as to tell the monsters "You stay there/go here." Combine it with Evard's Black Tentacles of Forced Penetration and/or Acid Fog, and they have done a better job than any "tank" ever will.
Also, they can fly, turn invisible, and see invisible things. They can also say "Who cares about my AC? You have an automatic 50% miss chance if you hit, and/or have to roll to see which of the five of me you actually target. Four of them are illusions, though."

And really? That's okay. That's the kind of stuff everyone should be doing (in their own manner). So if the Wizard can indeed still do those, that's okay. It's seriously better than 4E with its "Lol, no-one can do anything now! Look! 2 [W] + Strength plus you KNOCK THEM BACK FIVE SQUARES!", but the question that has to be asked is "Why can't everyone else do the equivalent of those things?"

Far Eyes: lose two caster levels? The Rainbow Servant gives +1 caster level at every level. Sure, the CHART shows that you lose two caster levels, but the text (under "spellcasting") says "at every level you gain..." WotC pointed out that when two sources disagree, you go with the text, not the chart. So your Warmage/Beguiler ends up being able to spontaneously cast their entire list, plus the entire Cleric list, plus those domains.

[Brandon]

Acctually there are a couple of variations on the sorcerer bloodlines that dont involve interbreeding. The ones that do include Abberant (the far realms), Infernal (Devils and the 9 hells), Abbyssal (Demons and the infinate layers of the abyss), Celestial (angels, Eladrians, Guardianals, and Archon's, oh my!), Draconic (Dragons obviously), Elemental (the four primary elements but who says you couldnt add more?), Fey (Fairies, Nymphs, dryads, and who knows what else), Arcane (your family has always practiced magic but while your ancestors might have been wizards you have learned magic through innate talents), and Undead (Maybe you were born dead and were revived but later developed power from it? Maybe your an odd off shoot of a vampire or lich?)

The one that isnt determined by an ancestor breeding with something is Destined (Fate itself has granted you magic power. Maybe your a chosen one or the child of some prophecy?) but you could also include Arcane and undead with some different ideas

You are right about the monk still being a joke though

If wizards are burning all these spells to be more effective in the encounters then the solution to me isnt the game system but the DM. The first thing that Dm should do is talk to the player and tell them to stop overshadowing the rest of the group. If they dont comply what they need to do is put in more encounters and give the players (or at least the wizard) less time to rest and get those spells back. Nightly patrols finding that party are a great way of doing so and if they wizard is taking all the glory in these earlier encounters then the other players should easily be able to pick up the slack

[kongming]

Well, I'm glad there's the option for "I'm just amazing because I am!" And yeah, Arcane and Undead both seem to also have less to do with your parents being the reason you're good at what you do.

[Chris Brady]

As long as magic is an auto success (Saving throws don't count, besides half an effect is still a success) I want no part of it.  So for those of you who love 3.x and want it to continue, then I say:

Happy Gaming!

[Far eyes]

Auto success, like disintegrate at lvl 20, 40d6 Vs 5d6 or Finger of Death Dies vs 3d6+20.

[Chris Brady]

Knock opens doors and locked boxes at minimum maximum range of 120ft (Most traps don't reach that far), Fly allows one to not have to touch the ground, Tenser's Floating Disk is a wonderful make shift palanquin, the various Summon Monster spells can call up wonderful back up...  And if you ever get tired, Rope Trick or Mordenkienan's Mansion are almost impregnable fortresses.

And if the wizard is smart/high enough, he/she will have those spells and not have to worry about the rest of the party, if they really don't want to.

[Brandon]

There are no save or die spells now, I believe thats the 3rd time someone has said that in this thread.

you know Chris a lot of your complaints about the wizard can easily be handled with a clever DM or just a talk with the player. If you have 4 locks on a door a Knock spell is only going to undo 2 of them and unless the party lacks a rogue to pick locks then a wizard is unlikely to have more then 1 memorized. Fly also lets you circumvent some dangers, but that can be delt with by placing powerful air currents in certain areas, dispel magic traps that trigger on proximity or just go off every xdx rounds, or spikes that drop from the cieling to a hieght of 5 feet every other round.

Once you get even mid level the summon monster spells become little more then an annoyance. Even at summon monster 9 the highest CR you can bring out is I think 13 and thats vs CR20-23 encounters. Even at that level why arent the enemies using spells like Protection from X or Magic circle vs X to keep summoned creatures away, or failing that, why arent they using dispel magic to just get rid of them?

I think Rope trick and the Mansion need to remain though. Wizards have called up safe havens out of nowhere since the dawn of time and I consider it an iconic ability. Even if a wizard summons it in the middle of combat to give himself a chance to recuperate whats stopping all those enemies from getting ALL of their allies together to attack the second he comes out, dispeling the spell, or just running away?

The best way to fight magic is with magic. Where are all the goblin adepts? Ogre mages? Devils with class levels? I really just think its bad DMing with a smart wizard that you've encountered. With that said, if you want to keep this anti 3.x wizard stuff going then how about making another thread titled something like "Why I dont like wizards". This thread is about pathfinder not the 3.5 wizard and how they "owned" the previous system.

[Chris Brady]

Brandon, I'm just relating the spells that I once had a Wizard player memorized.

This guy was good, if he needed more than what he had, he'd have a wand or a ring of it.  He also made amazing use of cantrips.  Problem was, he was too good and some of the other players (Who never said anything) started to get bored not having to worry about anything, because odds are, he had it covered.

Now, Pathfinder uses this as a base, and frankly as long as it does, I'm leery of it.

But I'm STILL not sold on 4e...

[kongming]

Chris: It's not a problem with the Wizard, Cleric, Druid and properly played Rogue. It's a problem with everyone else. Aside from a handful of abusive spells/tactics, the monsters are made to the power of "Wizard and friends: here is a challenge. Everyone else? Fuck off." If you don't think people should be doing crazy good stuff, I suggest playing low level, or 4E where no-one does anything useful, or a White Wolf game where the best ability is "Allies 5: The entire US marine corps".

Seriously, what wizards do HAS to be the base. But every other class needs to be brought up to that base. See: the Tome material by Frank & K. And when that happens, everyone has some ability to temp in for anyone else's job, but no-one is outshined by anyone else. Pathfinder makes the mistake of not bringing everyone else up to that level.

There are no save or die spells now, I believe thats the 3rd time someone has said that in this thread.

Sleep. Colour Spray. Charm/Hold/Dominate Person/Monster. Forcecage. Tasha's Hideous Laughter. PW: Stun. Deep Slumber. Anything else that causes Paralysis/Sleep/Coma/Helplessness/Stun/Nausea.

Sure, they don't actually kill the target, but it's still a Save-or-Die to most people (or Save-or-Lose to be precise). Except for Forcecage, which doesn't allow a save. You just cast it and move on. If you *have* to kill the foe, you cast it, then place down an acid fog, black tentacles and wall of fire.

you know Chris a lot of your complaints about the wizard can easily be handled with a clever DM or just a talk with the player. If you have 4 locks on a door a Knock spell is only going to undo 2 of them and unless the party lacks a rogue to pick locks then a wizard is unlikely to have more then 1 memorized.

There isn't a problem with wizards here. Everyone should be able to open a frigging door. I'd argue that if the party lacks someone who can pick locks, it'd be rude to place too many locks or traps in the area as a DM. You can't just say "Nobody wanted to be minesweeper? HA! Suck my dick!"

And the fighter can smash the door down. If the doors are all made of adamantium, they can instead smash the walls down. There are usually options. It's not like "open a door" is a special magical challenge. Now the fighter *should* be able to smash traps into not working - throwing a weapon to destroy the mechanisms, scratching the runes so that they stop working etc. This is a case of "Not the wizard's fault."

Fly also lets you circumvent some dangers, but that can be delt with by placing powerful air currents in certain areas, dispel magic traps that trigger on proximity or just go off every xdx rounds, or spikes that drop from the cieling to a hieght of 5 feet every other round.

Or just give everyone the ability to fly/gain a climb speed (in dungeons)/jump really high and fight mid-air. I mean, we're talking about incredible heroes, after all.

Once you get even mid level the summon monster spells become little more then an annoyance.

Exactly. Occasionally you might summon one that can cast healing spells, for the HP, or you might send one to set traps off for you, but that's about all.

I think Rope trick and the Mansion need to remain though.

This is a tricky one. On the one hand, it's an iconic ability, on the other, it just breaks the game when you tell casters "You don't need to abide by the same rules as everyone else. Here, you get one encounter per day."

I'd prefer it if spells couldn't be regained in those areas, or something similar. So the party could sleep, lose their fatigue, have a meal, cast healing spells and all that, but could not regain everything.

[Chris Brady]

Part of my issue, and this is not Pathfinder but 3.x, has been the over reliance of magic.  Most parties I played with (3) and all the other anecdotes I've heard on-line (And not only from those who complain, actually, most of them were absolutely happy with it) is that the entire party based it's tactics completely on what the Casters (Both Wizard and Cleric) had available.

And if one or the other magic user was some how removed from the fight (Either by death or some other contrivance) the party folded faster than Superman on laundry day.  And often if they stuck it out, they might have had a chance.

Also, one thing that seems common is that whenever the Wizard or Cleric have blown their wads, the party holes up for the night.  And it's not because the Wizard whines about it (Although that did happened sometimes) but because all the other players are afraid to push on because of the lack of real firepower.

That saddens me, I want every class to be useful, to be able to cover each other if one falls.  Maybe not with the same tools as the others, but able to handle whatever challenge is available in case one falls or happens to be missing.

In 3.x there isn't, and unless they radically change the system (Which they can't really) then Pathfinder won't change enough for me.

[Brandon]

Im just done talking about wizards now and unless it specifically has to do with Pathfinder arcane spells, wizard specifics, or anything specifically Patherfinder then Im going to ignore it at this point.

So lets move on to something else. I got done reading the barbarian today and its very different. Constitution is an Infinatly more important ability score then it was in previous systems. Rather then rages per day a barbarian now gets Rage points and can spend a single point to enter rage. They also get rage powers that are like supernatural abilities a barbarian can use after spending more rage points. Some include my earlier example of making your weapon add elemental damage, adding you barbarian levels to attack or damage rolls (not both), or improving your DR. A barbarian can now rage more then once per an encounter as well but after they leave rage they are fatigued for a number of rounds equal to the rage points they spent x 2. I thought that these ideas gave the barbarian a lot more flavor

[Far eyes]

The new rage system is a nice idea, most rage powers are a waste of Rage points.

Honestly though I would and am keeping every enervate, Finger of death and power word Pawn spell in my 3.5 game. Simply because these are tools I use to make a world ware magic can be screwy

Pathfinders fighter or barbarian don’t really come close to anything close to wizard after lvl 6 or so and honestly I don’t want to loose spells, that’s why I have Spell Comp and Comp Mage, PHB2 I like having a lot of spells

If I want a game witch is less dangerous and more action packed I will go with a 4e game.

The new grappling and sunder rules are a bit better, the grappling one is actually pty retarded when you look at it. But no I wouldn’t call pathfinders AP idea good, because they are trying to bend 3.5 int what 4e is.

[kongming]

That saddens me, I want every class to be useful, to be able to cover each other if one falls.  Maybe not with the same tools as the others, but able to handle whatever challenge is available in case one falls or happens to be missing.

In 3.x there isn't, and unless they radically change the system (Which they can't really) then Pathfinder won't change enough for me.

The Tome Series. Seriously. http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=48453

[Xillen]

Don't the keen players always take a bit of that focus?

I once ran a campaign with one player rolling a Half-Ogre with a Spiked Chain, focussed on tripping opponents. In no time, the entire party's tactics was based around the half-ogre's weapon reach. Casters made sure to stay in it and move with it, Rogues used it to great advantage for flanking, others used it as a base to attack from, move out and then back in.

If you have one player who's willing to take up all the possibilities, then that will almost always have a big impact in the game.

[Chris Brady]

Xillen, the Half-Ogre isn't in the 3.x books, whereas the magic the parties I had were all from the PHB.

And that's not including the horror stories from the net.

Also, didn't your players Enlarge the Ogre to be more effective?

[Xillen]

No. The Half-Ogre is not a humanoid, so enlarging him would not have been an easy trick.

I guess you could accomplish something similar by taking a human or half-orc fighter, and have a wizard or cleric cast enlarge on them, but that would make him quite depending on the others.

I was kinda assuming we counted in the WotC supplementals. My bad.

[Brandon]

Acctually the half ogre first appeared in savage species for 3.0 and then again in races of Destiny for 3.5. I think that when your group finds a good tactic theyre going to use it and plan around it as long as its effective no matter what the tactic is. Lets face it though, the second that clerics run out of healing spells (or in pathfinder it will be channel energy uses and healing spells) theyre going to want to rest whether you're going easy on them or not.

[Xillen]

I think Chris meant the Core books. And yeah, tactical parties will do that.

I can still remember the first time I played a cleric. It was in 2nd edition, and the group was battered up pretty badly, so they decided: "Let's spend the day here to rest." Naturally, since we weren't going to do anything that day, I stacked on healing spells and played baindaid in the morning. Then they decided that now that everyone was on decent health again, they might as well continue adventuring that day.

That was the first and the last time I played band-aid in the morning. Since then, on rest days, I'm doing the healing in the late evening.

[kongming]

I've seen Clerics simply declare "I worship the god of war. You can handle your own healing. I simply buff myself and fight."

One friend had a hilarious way of teaching the cleric a lesson: he pestered him halfway into the 1 hour prayer for spells. After a day or two without any spellcasting, the cleric calmed down a bit and played with the rest of the team - he prepared his combat spells, but accepted that he might need to occasionally convert to a cure.

Ideally, everyone should have healing capacity (no, potions don't count) - that way, it doesn't fall on one character to do all the healing. Everyone can pitch in/cover themselves, and so saying "I'll be cleric" does not mean "I'll be the band-aid box." That'd also mean that the "healer" roles wouldn't need to be given crazy good benefits just to make them attractive (see: casting in full plate with a Cleric full BAB, d8 hit die and 2 good saves).

[Brandon]

As far as clerics go there needs to be less selfishness on both sides. Clerics need to understand that on occasion they need to do some healing. At the same time everyone else needs to realize that they shouldnt be expecting a cleric to ONLY heal.

This is where Pathfinder helps fix that because use magic device can be an effective skill for everyone. If a person wants healing they just need to buy a wand of Cure X wounds and use it on themselves. Its not a perfect solution but its one more thing that I find good about pathfinder

[kongming]

Its not a perfect solution but its one more thing that I find good about pathfinder

Actually, I'd argue that it IS a perfect solution - it means that anyone can heal themselves out of combat - and seriously, at the rate you use them, they're dirt cheap - but the cleric and druid have access to the bigger healing for in-combat when needed.

Of course, the cheapest option is a trap of Cure Minor Wounds. Yes, a trap. That costs 250 GP, and creates a device that, when triggered (for instance, a ball trapped to trigger when you touch it), casts Cure Minor on you and automatically resets. Infinite uses.

I'm seriously not sure whether to say "That's dumb. Simply make it a use-activated item for 900 GP, not a trap." or to say "That's pretty funny. DO IT!"

[Xillen]

I've seen Clerics simply declare "I worship the god of war. You can handle your own healing. I simply buff myself and fight."

One friend had a hilarious way of teaching the cleric a lesson: he pestered him halfway into the 1 hour prayer for spells. After a day or two without any spellcasting, the cleric calmed down a bit and played with the rest of the team - he prepared his combat spells, but accepted that he might need to occasionally convert to a cure.

Oh, defenitely. But if we decide to rest for the day, then even when worshipping a god of war, it would be sort of pointless to fill myself with buff spells and not use them all say, since we're resting, while I could've boosted up the group. The problem was that after I boosted up the group, the group suddenly decided to take action that day. And since I was completely out of spells, I just hung around in 2nd rank with my halberd, while the warriors up front took a beating without any heals from me to back it up, since I already burned all my spells.

You can make such a trap for 250 gold? :o Anyhow, that's where the DM has to step in and say "no!".

Wands of Cure Light Wounds is the first thing group gold is usually going to. Yeah, it's the cleric or druid that uses it, but it'll benefit the party, so the party better cough up the money for it!

[Brandon]

I think you missed the point there Xillen, I was saying that with Pathfinder having no limit on how many ranks you can put in a non-class skill you could max out use magic device and then anyone could use a wand of Cure X wounds to heal themselves in or out of combat. While in 3.5 only the divine casters or the rogue could do that

Come to think of it, this also helps aleviate the magic problem for lower level spells too. Theres nothing stopping the fighter from taking ranks in use magic device and putting up some walls to create a bottleneck that enemies have to meet him at to engage the group.

[Xillen]

I was mostly referring to Kongming's example about clerics.

And yeah, I could see how everyone would be able to heal him or herself out of combat with use magic device, but I don't really see it's importance. Does it really matter that much if I use it on myself, or if I give my wand to the cleric so he can use it on me?

Unless you mean groups could run without Cleric/Druid/Healer/Favored Soul/Factotem, where I guess you'd be right.

[Brandon]

Well I didnt realize the usefulness of the use magic device thing till Kongming mentioned it. I think that if a group of people are going to invest ranks in the skill and be responsible for their own healing then yes a healing focused character probably wont be needed. I also think that it will free up even more spells for clerics to use in offensive ways and thats a good thing IMO.

At higher level I think youre going to need spells higher then 3rd level to survive but considering how much money you have at those levels I dont see a problem with anyone picking up a use activated, infinite charge, item that does heal when you use it.

[Xillen]

Well I didnt realize the usefulness of the use magic device thing till Kongming mentioned it. I think that if a group of people are going to invest ranks in the skill and be responsible for their own healing then yes a healing focused character probably wont be needed. I also think that it will free up even more spells for clerics to use in offensive ways and thats a good thing IMO.

The "you don't need a cleric to begin with" I understand. The point where it saves up cleric spells I fail to see, because even without the UMD, the cleric can still use wands that he didn't buy himself, not?

[Brandon]

Yes but they never get to use them because they are forced to be healing 24/7 through converted spells, memorized spells, or other items like scrolls and wands. If someone is doing their own healing then that free's up the clerics action in a round to do something else

[Xillen]

Ahh, during combat. You're right there. Most of the time I'm just fending for myself during combat. If they're stupid enough not to run away when they're about to die, then it might help the genepool to let them die there and then :P

[kongming]

If they're stupid enough not to run away when they're about to die, then it might help the genepool to let them die there and then :P

*laughing* I like your style.

"Cleric of Darwin"

[Far eyes]

That’s one of my biggest problems with 3e you often do not have the chance to tray and run, because if I the enemy is really stronger you are probably screwed unless you have something like teleport at your disposal

[Xillen]

True, but they could like take cover behind those that are not yet injured and use reach/ranged weapons :)

And Cleric of Darwin? Now that would be an awesome idea! :P

[Chris Brady]

So their solution is to make Magic Spells available to anyone in the form of wands etc, which TO ME proves my problem with the 3.5 rules set.

I'll give this a pass.

[kongming]

Tell me, do you want balance in the form of everyone being able to do things on the same level of the spells, except in their own fashion and not relying on other people/equipment to provide those spells?

If so, once again I mention the Tomes. They basically solve that problem.

Or do you want spellcasting to simply be as useless as everything else?

If so, I recommend 4E. They really did well at making sure everything has the same boring, weak sauce abilities in that.

See, currently I'm not sure if your problem with 3E is "some people can do awesome things" or if it's "other people can't".

[Brandon]

Well last night was our second session of Pathfinder and I have to say I was exhausted and barely able to keep my eyes open by the nights end. Last week our adventuring party was fighting undead in a crypt but this week things changed a bit. We started out by getting our rewards from the adventure last week, leveling up to level 4, and then immediatly went on to looking for other work that our group could do. The mission we ended up taking was one that required us to go into the wilderness to meet up with a small town of woodcutters who had been having trouble with gnoll incursions.

We quickly found that surviving in the snow covered peaks of the mountains was hard but thankfully our barbarian and fighters survival checks were enough to keep us all fed (but just barely). I think if our fighter and barbarian hadnt both maxed out their survival we would have starved to death on the way there, let alone during the adventure. So definatly Yay for no more cross class skills

Anyway, we got to the village of the woodcutters called Salmon creek. When we got there we immediatly went to the mayor to talk about the gnoll situation. My sorcerer's diplomacy skill really rocked that meeting and I was able to negotiate a 50% increase on the money we would earn if we took care of the gnolls. We spent a couple days in town to interview the various woodcutters and again my diplomacy skills kicked ass. By the time we left and went up into the mountains the whole town was like our best friends.

We traveled for a few days into the wilderness and eventually entered gnoll territory. Small hunting groups would follow us but never engage us in talk or battle which had us worried that we were being led into a trap. Unfortunatly we were right. Four days after we got into their territory we came upon a ravine that was a good defensable position but unfortunatly the 2 hunting groups knew the area better and set up an ambush of archers on the high cliffs and warriors to rush into our front line fighters. Thankfully my heavenly fire bloodline ability and cantrips helped with those archers and between me, our rogue, and cleric we were able to dispatch them without to much damage. By that time our barbarian and fighter were in bad shape so I had to play healer for a couple of rounds with my heavenly fire again. With only a couple of gnolls left and most of my spells exhausted I decided to be a little ballsy and join the melee with my Longsword (humans get a free martial weapon prof). Now I wish I hadnt done that because one of the gnolls turned around and hit me with his great ax and got a maximum damage critcal, killing me instantly. So that taught me to stick with Cantrips and bloodline abilities if I play a sorcerer again.

We ended the session after the ambush so now Im thinking about what else I might play. Sorcerer was fun and flavorful though, much mroe fun then the 3.5 sorcerer. The celestial bloodline power heavenly fire was awesome and had a huge effect on our party. Being able to always use it to damage our opponents and heal each party member 1/day was a godsend. Now I have to think up a new character and I think I might try a druid next

[Chris Brady]

Tell me, do you want balance in the form of everyone being able to do things on the same level of the spells, except in their own fashion and not relying on other people/equipment to provide those spells?

If so, once again I mention the Tomes. They basically solve that problem.

Which are?  I didn't collect much, I admit.

Or do you want spellcasting to simply be as useless as everything else?

If so, I recommend 4E. They really did well at making sure everything has the same boring, weak sauce abilities in that.

Having played it myself, I'll have to politely disagree and say that at no time did the FIRST level abilities feel 'weak'.  Hell, the Human Fighter nearly single handedly defeated a 'level 3 brute' white dragon by pushing it around and smashing it hard, repeatedly.  And this is the same beast that took out a 30 HP Dwarven Fighter on it's first pass with a single attack combo.

The Game Day adventures were MEAT GRINDERS, and on an adventure module creation, just plain bad, but the characters themselves were pretty good at what they were trying to accomplish.

See, currently I'm not sure if your problem with 3E is "some people can do awesome things" or if it's "other people can't".

My problem is both, and at high levels it happens AT THE SAME TIME.  Unless you have the Magic (power or toys) to help mitigate it, or if you're GM is a dick or not.

[kongming]

Let me say that there's a reason all the advertising was done for first level stuff. Hint: it's not because "all games traditionally start at first level."

People get a handful of different abilities at first, and sufficient HP. From then on out, every ability you gain (less than 1/level) is really the same - damage that doesn't scale (and the damage doesn't scale well from level 1 abilities to level 30 abilities - you end up dealing, for instance, 5*Weapon + STR + magic bonus + feats. or 5d10 + Int + magic bonus + feats, for a DAILY power, when facing something with over a thousand HP), and one of the following:
*Daze/immobile/stun for a round (this is, sadly, the best of the bunch, as you can gang up with friends and Stunlock an enemy)
*Same as above, except save ends (so, it lasts for a round if you're lucky)
*Lasting damage (save ends. See: they always save, and no-one even cares about the piddly damage dealt)
*Slide them a couple of squares. They then walk right back as if nothing happened, maybe provoking (a basic attack, see: who cares?) on the way.
*You or a friend get a tiny bonus, and actually have to care about this bonus because it's what counts for good in this game: small bonuses instead of actual abilities
*You or a friend can spend a healing Surge
*You attack someone else for fuck-all damage

And that's it. And that's all you'll ever do. Everyone will only gain combat abilities, and spend them grinding away slowly at the massive HP of enemies (it starts off as ideal, then quickly becomes stupid. Before you know it, you're maxing out Intimidate just to force boodied enemies to surrender, and even then it will soon take too long just to bloody them). Skill challenges are completely retarded, disease DCs are in the "Yes, you will fail." range, rituals are completely stupid for a variety of reasons and still don't actually achieve much... all the game really has is combat, and that is boring and unimaginative.

Now, 3.5 + Tome material. Let's take some examples:
Fighters: can shatter Walls of Force, allow all damage dealt to count as "Ongoing" (so if they full attack a caster for 100 damage, then the caster needs to make a Concentration check with a DC over a hundred in order to cast on their next turn), an use a ranged touch attack as an immediate action to cause any action to automatically fail (spellcasting, attacks, movement...), can make two immediate actions per turn, can make a free 5' step on anyone else's turn and can make magic items with a craft check. They're masters of identifying monsters for bonuses, too.

Barbarians: become immune to mind-affecting effects when raging, gain relevant DR, add loads of damage to attacks, gain fast healing when they don't rage, and pick up various immunities and things. They're probably the most basic class still.

Knights: gain spell resistance, energy resistance and various immunities. They also grant Evasion to anyone standing next to them, can elect to take an attack for anyone next to them, and also can (as a Swift action) challenge a foe. If that foe fails to damage the knight by the beginning of the knight's next turn, then the knight adds insane amount of damage to all of their attacks against them for the round. Essentially, attacking the knight is a bit of a waste, because it takes a lot to kill them. NOT attacking the knight means you die. They also gain mounted combat abilities, and it is outright expected that after level 10 they are riding dragons instead of horses.

Samurai: cut through anti-magic fields and walls of force, have utterly deadly criticals, can make criticals happen all the time, get millions of AoOs (and an ability that lets them say "I'm taking all of my AoOs against you, right now, even though you didn't provoke), and can use their weapons to deflect spells away/back at the caster.

Rogues: it is outright assumed that rogues dual-wield acid flasks (ranged touch attack sneak attack, 3 attacks at first level and it grows from there), use magic devices to the full extent, and use "Bonus Feat" for the Rogue special ability to take feats they don't qualify for (as this is completely within the rules). This keeps them playing the same game as everyone else - and able to fight monsters. There are cheap-as-dirt wands of Gravestrike etc. to sneak attack golems, undead, plants and all the rest.

There are also some base classes for rogue-variants, such as the Jester, the Assassin and the Thief-Acrobat, all gaining cool abilities that are fun and useful.

Monks: can practically fly, are actually hard to hit, can actually hit their foes, gain SR, and can enter stances that provide relevant benefits such as "I hit you. Save or die.", "50% miss chance!", actual flight, teleportation, TK added to their attacks, ability tomake unarmed attacks at a distance, ability damage/drain on attacks, and "I hit you. Everyone except me within 30' takes 10d6 Sonic. No save. No, have the damage. Really, I insist."

The casters: mostly remain the same, except Clerics and Druids don't automatically know all splat-book spells (they can scribe them like Wizards, and gain ONE non-core spell per level for free), and Wildshape has been adjusted, as have certain spells, to not be plain stupid.

Monster characters are now actually playable, instead of a joke.

Instead of ignoring inherent problems in the game, it either fixes them, or makes them into features of the world.

Feats have been changed - you can do useful things with feats, especially the martial characters - stunning/dazing foes, reducing their movement, dealing Dex/Con damage, being taken along for free when people teleport near you (you choose to, it's not automatic), being able to ignore magical bonuses to AC, blindsense and two-weapon fighting that doesn't make us cry.

---

Think of it as "D&D 3.5 - you still know the basic rules! - except it's balanced so that when a CR X monster rocks up, everyone of level X can actually meaningfully contribute to the battle, and is also almost guaranteed to have something to do when the battle ends."

Now, if the Schuztaffel rocked up and said "Play 4E or Pathfinder, or I shoot you!" then I'd pick Pathfinder. I'd make sure to play on Easy mode by playing a caster, but at least I wouldn't be playing 4E. However, as it is, I'll bully/beg DMs into running Tome games for me, and it will remain the superior option, and is likely to be the best thing until either TGD completes "The New Edition" or we at Elliquiy complete the game we're working on, in which case one of those two will likely be the best.

[Xillen]

Just a quick question. Would those tomes be compatible with Pathfinder, since they're both based on 3.5? IE. could they be mixed?

[Brandon]

Im not familiar with the tome series...well Ive only seen the book of nine swords in play which I felt was completly overpowered but granted it might have just been the player manipulating the system and a crappy DM.

That said, even if its not immediatly interchangable I think just a few adjustments and you could use the tome series without much difficulty

[Chris Brady]

I liked Bo9S.

Brandon, honest question here, why didn't you like it?

[NightBird]

<snip>

My problem is both, and at high levels it happens AT THE SAME TIME.  Unless you have the Magic (power or toys) to help mitigate it, or if you're GM is a dick or not.

Okay, so nobody really gave a damn about the minis for the concept (and I do realize that the squee factor of minis is a fringe aspect of roleplaying), but I have to chime in again on this last statement.

As somebody who's been playing since the 70s, I would have to say that, no matter what system was involved, which edition, what extra rules or supplements were allowed, the single most significant determinant of whether a game was fun or not had a helluva lot more to do with the 'dick factor'. If the GM or even one loud-mouthed player the GM didn't pull back into line was a royal PITA, the game sucked. If somebody lived to min/max, or the GM had to be the one to 'win' by the monsters killing us all, or a player had to rules lawyer everything or the GM wasn't creative with how player decisions affected the game, the evening sucked. Big time. When everybody was going with the flow, building characters that had more to do with being the characters they were than pinching the absolute most out of every area the rules allowed some sort of uber-playering, the game, any game I played was fun.

There is no way for any design team to figure out and then design into the ruleset ironclad terms to preclude all the myriad ways people can be dicks. I don't think they should. If you don't have a GM who can do a credible job of making the rules into something fun by intelligently making decisions about the specific circumstances of a particular set of gamers in this instance of a game right in front of you, then I don't see it as necessarily being all the authoring company's fault. I put a lot of importance on the judgment of the GM as being the single most important aspect to make or break a campaign and a group, with the players' approach to the game and each other as a close second.

Just like how the same job can be heaven or hell depending on what the boss makes of it, the same game can be cool or miserable depending on what the GM and other players contribute.

[kongming]

Tome of Battle: Book of WEEABOO FIGHTAN' MAGIC actually:
a) Isn't a "tome" game as such (the "tome series" are unpublished book-sized documents by Frank & K: Tome of Necromancy, Tome of Fiends, Dungeonomicon, Races of War and the incomplete Book of Gears, Book of Trees & Tome of Tiamat)

b) Isn't overpowered. It has certain breakable combos in it, just like everything else, and it does show the core fighter up for the weaksauce piece of junk it really is. It also provides options for the characters, even if they are largely the same (yet with more variety than 4E, amusingly enough)

That being said, my favourite Book of 9 Swords ability has to be the one which "removes one effect that is affecting you". Examples can include: night time (the effect is limited vision - POOF! No more night, ever), time (it can eventually grant ageing penalties - POOF! No more time!), gravity, pregnancy...

Not powerful per se, as it can't exactly be used to win a fight, but it can turn the universe upside down. It's one of those "We'll point it out and laugh, but no-one is ever going to actually do that." things.

[Far eyes]

In some cases ToB is in fact severely limited, as a lot of pavers assume and only work as Sword and Board or 2h weapon. And don’t really work with TWF

But if you mean pure damage output, two humans going against each other one using ToB one being a simple PHB, CW barbarian they will be prty much equal, the barbarians damage might even be higher

Say kongming do you know ware I might be able to get those files you mentioned, they sound interesting?

[kongming]

Sure thing: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=48453

That has most of the stuff - though the site itself has all sorts of other random things there. There are even a few feats, classes etc. that I invented (such as prestige classes for large characters who don't just want to be "HULK SMASH!" Ever seen a 10' tall ninja? No? Exactly, you never see them until it's too late.)

[Far eyes]

Hehe Thanks, it seams one of the sites that appears a lot in the links is down at the moment. But I bookmarked it and will look it up later

[Brandon]

So I got to play again the other night and just as I thought I made a druid to replace my now dead sorcerer. We started out this week just after last weeks massive ambush with my druid joining the party and telling the group that it was not one but two tribes of gnolls who were at war, the Sabertooths and the Bloodfurs. My druid didnt know all of the story so we traveled further into Bloodfur lands and ran into a group of Sabertooth gnolls that were gathering information. We stopped and talked with them and the druid and I both handled the negotiations (again yay for no cross class skills!).

We found out that the Sabertooth clan had turned away from the demon princes old ways of bloodshed and had adopted the harsh yet fair laws established by other nomadic and barbarian tribes that they had met before. The Bloodfurs wanted their hides because they had moved away from the traditional ways of Yeenoghu. Fearing that the war between tribes would spill over into their neighbors lands the Sabertooth cut down the bridge that gave the woodcutters easy access to the nearby trees. Without it the Bloodfurs would have had to travel another fifty miles to get to the village. With the story in our heads we offered to help the Sabertooths overcome their enemies if they would allow the woodcutters to continue their work and they agreed with a few minor stipulations.

So our group got to go to war with the gnolls. We went with the scouting party back to their camps to meet their warchielf and he sent us out as an advance guard to wipe out Bloodfur scouting parties and patrols. This was a bunch of minor fights but it was when I really got to play with Wildshape and it has changed massivly. At 4th level I could choose to become a small or medium animal of my choice, taking on its form and gaining its movement types. I started out doing some scouting in the form as a hawk, flying around and noting where these groups of gnolls were. In this form I had the movement type of the hawk but only a +2 Dex and +1 natural armor bonus and I got none of the penalties that would have come with the transformation (like mystrength being reduced to 6 with 3.5 rules but staying at 14 with Pathfinder rules).

Anyway, once we found out where they were we went hunting and everytime we found a group I would wildshape into a cougar (In 3.5 I would have ruled a mountain lion as a Tiger but in Pathfinder it didnt matter.) In the form of a courgar my stats changed to be +2 strength and +2 natural armor and would have been the same as any medium animal. If we were playing 3.5 and assuming Courgar = Leapord I would have had +2 Strength, +4 Dexterity, and +1 Con. Now one thing Ive noticed about wildshape is that it isnt clear on how attack forms work. Do you use the base creatures damage for claws and bites? I would think so but it doesnt say that so thats something to clear up for beta.

Anyway, we killed several groups of gnolls and after I did some more ariel scouting of their village our group is planning on the final push into Bloodfur land with the Sabertooths. Hopefully the plan we formed will work well and we can send most of the Bloodfur's packing next week and wrap this adventure up.

As I think everyone can see Wildshape is nowhere near as abussive as it would have been. I just made 5th level on Saturday night and we all know that the old wildshape could make you cringe right after you got it. Its nowhere near perfect and could still use some more clarifications but its definatly not the IPWNJOOWTFBBQ!!11!!!!1 stuff that it was in 3.5 and I think thats a good thing

[Brandon]

I was reading through some more things tonight and I found out something awesome. Pathfinder has gotten rid of experience costs! Instead you take the experience cost and multiply it by by 5, whatever number that equals is the additional cost. So lets say you were to cast wish to give yourself +1 constitution, the extra cost of that spell would be 25,000 gold pieces. This means that you are no longer punished by falling behind in leveling if you want to create magic items for the rest of the group. I always thought that was the dumbest idea they ever came up with anyway

[kongming]

I fully agree with you there - it was especially stupid when you consider that by careful planning you can end up with more XP than the rest of the party (craft a small item, lose a small amount of XP, drop 1 level, then, when you next gain XP as a group, you earn more because you're lower level than the rest of the party, and the difference is more than the XP you spent, so you end up in front).

Now, you can still totally enter Wish Economy before 10th level, as Wishing for items as a (Sp) ability still won't actually cost you anything (whereas Wishing for items as a spell will cost you money instead of XP, I suppose? Kind of a "Well, there's no store, so I'll import things from Wishland! There's an import tax though."), and Paizo have chosen the "pretend this doesn't happen" solution, but that's one little thing.

To the majority of players, this does indeed mean "Score! I can just spend money to make things, instead of the nonsensical XP cost!"

And Wildshape sounds a lot more reasonable.

[Brandon]

Yeah the big bonus to wildshaping as I see it is, if you were going to make a halfling druid that specilized with wildshape you could skip on your Str, Dex, and constitution scores (making them like 6/6/8) and wildshape would instantly change them to higher scores in 3.5 like the leapords 14 str, 19 dex, and 15 con. In pathfinder your scores acctually mean something with wildshape which means far less min/maxing

another interesting change to wish is that if you want to gain innherrant bonuses you have to reduce another ability score. Im guessing they did that because they wanted people to focus on the tomes that grant inherrant bonuses, which Im fine with. I always used those instead of wishes anyway

[Xillen]

You don't want to have a low con as a Druid in 3.5 either. Wildshape doesn't affect hit points, which is actually the main result of constitution. But yeah, can we say Gnome Druid with Str 6, Dex 8, Con 16?  Something easily done with pointbuy system.

Do the tomes also give you a penalty on another score, like wishes do? Also, if you later want to increase your inherent bonus, do you need to do all the wishes all over again? If so, do the penalties stack?

[kongming]

In the Tomes, it's simply "Well the maximum you can be granted is +5 to each ability score, so just let the players do it (they'll like the bigger numbers) and do the same to basically any intelligent enemy when you reach that stage."

Because if everyone has a +5 across the board, it doesn't really change anything.

Also, in theory Wildshape doesn't affect your HP (it changes your Con, but not your HP) but in practice it totally does.

Step 1: Wildshape from a 10 HD, Con 6 thing into a 10 HD, Con 20 thing. Your hit remain at 6+9d8-18 (~28).
Step 2: Cast Bear's Endurance or whatever it is, for +4 Con - and it recalculates your HP. You are now 10 HD, with Con 24, and your hit points change to 15+9d8+63 (~118).
Step 3: Hope you don't die when Wildshape & Bear's Endurance end.

[Chris Brady]

So has anyone played the Pathfinder Fighter for more than one level?  If so, how does he feel like?

Better?  Same as 3.x?  Worse?

I can't seem to find a straight answer that isn't biased for or against.

[Brandon]

I havnt played the pathfinder fighter yet but one of the members of my group does and Ive seen some interesting things. The first thing that comes to mind is our fighter is more resistant to fear then any other mind effecting ability. Right now he only has a +1 bonus against fear spells/abilities but at level 18 it would be +5 and bravery also stacks with a paladin's aura. Armor training is something else thats been helpful because his Maximum dexterity bonus is higher then normal in full plate and his regular armor bonus is also higher. Its an Extra 2 ac compared to say a paladin with the same gear which doesnt sound like a lot but at level 5 it can be. He has just picked up weapon focus this level (he took axes cause he's a dwarf duel wielding a dwarven war ax in one hand and a hand ax in the other) so I havnt seen that in action yet but weapon training stacks with the weapon focus/specilization feats so I think we'll see some big damage numbers in the near future

[kongming]

Well, I haven't actually played it, nor even actually looked at the stuff, but I will give you a quote:

"Fighters are underpowered? No problem! Just give them flat bonuses that fuck the math in the ass!"

That being said, I'm not sure whether that means "They can compete as actual characters, and tend to always hit, damage, make saves, avoid attacks etc. while not having *options*" or if it means "They still don't do anything." It's hard to tell (and is a biased statement).

[Brandon]

As someone who does know whats going on with fighters I think they now have a mix of interesting ablities. They get bravery, weapon training, armor training (probably their biggest boost), and they still get a lot of bonus feats but thats about it. That said, I still think they need some major bonuses but they're far better then they were. As you can see in one of my earlier comparisons Fighters can beat other heavily armored characters in AC easily, sometimes by 1/4 or more of the d20.

The fighters also get these 2 abilities which arent bad

Armor Mastery (Ex): At 19th level, a fighter gains DR
5/— whenever he is wearing armor or using a shield.
Weapon Mastery (Ex): At 20th level, a fighter chooses one
weapon, such as the longsword, greataxe, or longbow. Any
attacks made with that weapon automatically confirm all
critical threats and have their damage multiplier increased
by 1 (a ×2 becomes a ×3, for example). In addition, he cannot
be disarmed while wielding a weapon of this type.

I think the fighter needs a few things that ONLY effect the fighter. Those things include but arent limited to

1. The highest base attack bonus. Give them 25/20/15/10/5 at level 20. Just make it so that after level 15 Bab scales at a larger rate then +1 bab per 1 level. Maybe something like this

15 15/10/5
16 18/13/8
17 20/15/10/5
18 23/18/13/8
19 24/19/14/9
20 25/20/15/10/5

2. I remember hearing some 4e stuff about weapons acctually meaning something to fighters. Like spears helped bypass armor and swords granting extra attacks. I dont think that ever happened, or perhaps it was just a lie, but lets bring that idea to fighters so that weapon choice is a big deal in their hands (and only theirs). How about a fighter with Weapon training (swords) gets +1 attack in a full attack action or Axes deal +int modifier in damage when sundering armor and that damage cant be effected by hardness.
3. Keep armor training, I like it, its slow at first but it adds up and if you want to be a purely defensive character no one does it better then the pathfinder fighter.
4. Give bonuses similar to size bonuses when the fighter is the recipient of combat manuvers or special attacks like Improved grapple, bull rush, or swallow whole

[kongming]

Allow me to put my bitch hat on and critique.

Armor Mastery (Ex): At 19th level, a fighter gains DR
5/— whenever he is wearing armor or using a shield.

I still stand by my belief that DR 5 is worthless at 19th level - it should seriously be "half your level" at a minimum.

Weapon Mastery (Ex):

Not amazing, but it's certainly nice.

1. The highest base attack bonus. Give them 25/20/15/10/5 at level 20.

The +10/+5 already aren't hitting, why bother? Better idea: Fighters get +20/+15/+15/+15 - they only take up to a 5 point reduction. This way, their extra attacks actually hit. Then let them, as part of a feat, change it to -2 (+20/+18/+18/+18).

They'll then be routinely hitting enemies. You needn't ask if this is already used successfully in a system. You know what I'll say.

2. I remember hearing some 4e stuff about weapons acctually meaning something to fighters. Like spears helped bypass armor and swords granting extra attacks. I dont think that ever happened, or perhaps it was just a lie, but lets bring that idea to fighters so that weapon choice is a big deal in their hands (and only theirs). How about a fighter with Weapon training (swords) gets +1 attack in a full attack action or Axes deal +int modifier in damage when sundering armor and that damage cant be effected by hardness.

This couldn't hurt - especially if they allowed options ("special attacks") and benefits that scaled. For instance "Spears ignore any and all DR. At level 5, a spear deals 1 point of Con damage whenever it hits. At level 10, you can make one attack with a spear as a standard action (so you can't do it on a charge or in a full attack), making it as a touch attack as it finds the perfect spot to ignore armour. At level 15, you may take an attack of opportunity on someone who charges at you. If you hit, they are held in place and can't advance (thus, can't make the attack)."

4. Give bonuses similar to size bonuses when the fighter is the recipient of combat manuvers or special attacks like Improved grapple, bull rush, or swallow whole

No arguments here - after all, I'm sure we can all agree that many a hero of legend could out-grapple monsters far bigger than themselves.

[Brandon]

Armor mastery: I dont think DR is supposed to be high at any level. I think its supposed to be a small scaling ability that just helps a little bit. That said, I do still think that Armor mastery needs to scale for epic levels but so far I dont think Paizo is planning for any epic level material (which is a shame because I love epic). One thing I would like to see for armor mastery though is get rid of the speed penalty when wearing armor

Weapon Mastery: I think a good way to improve this is Increasing the Critical rate by +1 and letting it scale with epic levels. Likewise I would also like tos ee the critical multiplier scale with epic levels. Maybe an addition x1 for every 10 levels or so

1. The only problem I see with that is that sometimes you arent fighting a big baddy with a few levels above you but instead you're fighting 10-20 little things at once. In these cases the extra attacks could be a lot more useful and have a lot better chance of hitting. I could be convinced on taking the 20/15/15/15 idea though

2. For spears I think Ild rather see something like 1st level: Spears Negate armor bonus up to 1/2 the class level 5th: same but includes natural armor 10th: same but includes deflection bonuses 15th: same but includes Dexterity bonuses 20th: same but negates all other (i.e. sacred, morale, etc)armor bonuses

Axes could be 1st: The fighter gets +4 to confirm criticals 5th: adds 1/2 class levels to confirm crits 10th: can get crits on creatures normally immune to critical hits 15th: Automatically confirms crits 20th: Crits bypass DR

Swords could be 1st: Gain 1 additional attack per day 5th: Gain 1 addtional attack per hour 10th: Gain 1 addtional attack per encounter 15th: Gain 1 additional attack per round 20th: ?

4. I see it in two different movies. First think back to Dragonheart where the guy gets trapped in the dragons mouth and eventually puts the tip of his sword against the roof of its mouth as they sit there and try to get the other to give up. Thats the fighter with expertise fighting bigger opponents. Then think of Jaws 3 where the hollywood guy dives down into the pumps for the aqua park and he gets trapped in the sharks mouth tries to unsuccessfully blow the thing up with a grenade. Thats the fighter without the expertise.

That said, I think them being considered (not acctually be) a size category larger for every 4 levels would go along way. That means for a small character youre medium at 4, large at 8, huge at 12, Gargantuan at 16, collassal at 20 and collossal+ at 24

[kongming]

Armor mastery: I dont think DR is supposed to be high at any level. I think its supposed to be a small scaling ability that just helps a little bit.

That's the Mike Mearls/Paizo talking. If you want it to be there at all, it has to be relevant. DR 5 at level 20, especially when half the attacks are from energy types (and thus ignoring DR straight-up), just isn't doing anything meaningful. If it was higher, it would mean enemies would have to adjust tactics (using less effective energy attacks, or missing more often by Power Attacking), or you'd straight-up survive more hits.

but so far I dont think Paizo is planning for any epic level material (which is a shame because I love epic).

To be fair? Epic would require more than the minor fixes Paizo are doing. It would need a complete 100% rewrite. Epic doesn't work. At all. That doesn't mean it's not cool, mind you, it's still awesome in theory, but so far is best handled by making shit up - the fighter types are riding dragons in Epic. This means you give them dragons to ride, with level-appropriate abilities (even if you make the dragons up with hit dice and stuff instead of picking them from the manuals), and make rules for doing so. Rather than the silly Epic Magic rules, you just keep giving spell slots and let them invent fantastic new spells to fill those slots. And so on and so forth.

By this stage, you can't just pick an encounter from a book anyway - you actually have to look at the numbers the PCs have and tailor something for those numbers (because there is no "standard". A 20th level armour class could be anything from "less than zero" to 100+)

1. The only problem I see with that is that sometimes you arent fighting a big baddy with a few levels above you but instead you're fighting 10-20 little things at once.

Except people rarely care about those little enemies. I mean, if you're doing damage appropriate for your level, you should be popping them on a successful hit or two, and if you have DR that is worth writing down, half their attacks won't even hurt you. Or you use Whirlwind or something. Because fighting groups of weaker enemies is less common, it shouldn't be the assumed default - you can take things that make you better at it.

But you are right in that high level characters should be fighting armies and winning. But level-appropriate DR and damage goes a long way to allowing that (and it can be done in regular 3.5 if you know what you're doing).

That said, I think them being considered (not acctually be) a size category larger for every 4 levels would go along way. That means for a small character youre medium at 4, large at 8, huge at 12, Gargantuan at 16, collassal at 20 and collossal+ at 24

Exactly, and a Medium character would, at level 20, grapple as a Titanic/Colossal+/Awesome creature - which means that he'll be able to grapple the monsters of that level, and won't be outgrappled by a wizard (who currently make the best grapplers).

[Brandon]

As long as you're being delt physical damage then DR is relevant. Even if its only 5 points per hit thats still 5 points per hit. Its not negligible because its always in effect with physical attacks just like energy resistance is always in effect for fireball lobbing mages or flaming weapons. Would it be nice to have more sure, but this is the kind of DR you cant bypass too unlike when the paladin gets holy champion with his DR 10/Evil

Epic: yeah I totally agree that they need a complete redesign. I always thought a cool idea would be to give Epic moves to fighters (and just fighters) which were pretty much the same thing that epic magic was. The system still has some promise but after about level 26 it breaks down, till then its acctually pretty good if you establish clear guidlines for you players

I also like epic more as a DM because I feel like it gives me more room to be creative and tailor a game that better fits my players

[Chris Brady]

I'm not sure, to be honest, but I think what Konming is saying is that at around level 20 most things that are a challenge don't focus on physical attacks anymore.  Mainly due to the fact that most monster damage doesn't scale.

So, assuming I've read this right and to use an example, if a monster has the option of attacking 3 times for 2d8, 2d8 and 4d6, or casting one spell (Let's say disintegrate doe 40d6), more often than not the spell will be used, and DR won't help.

Did I get that right, Kon?

[kongming]

That is partly the issue, but also, DR 5 isn't a big enough portion of the physical damage dealt - let's pick a few things you might face at level 20:

Balor: You'll never see your DR come into play. It summons another Balor, and they seriously spam Implosion, Dominate Monster, Blasphemy and PW: Stun. Or they both unleash a Firestorm to help chisel his HP down (bypassing DR) so as to make sure PW: Stun works. Then, once he's stunned, he dies.

Pit Fiend: Blasphemy for the win. Maybe a Mass Hold Monster, followed by Fireball (Held = no Ref save) or a coup de grace. It can even summon a Horned Devil to speed up the coup de grace process. It also has Meteor Swarm, but really it just spams Blasphemy.

22 HD Marilith: If it's being kind, it has 6 swords. One deals 3d6+13, the other five deal 3d6+6. Then there's the tail slap of 6d6+6 plus improved grab and constrict (6d6+19 plus a chance to pass out and lose instantly). If it's being mean? It holds one sword in all six arms, dealing 4d6+45 damage (and with a 6:1 power attack ratio, it burns 5 points of BAB and slaps an extra 30 damage on top. Final result? 89 damage -5 is 84 damage, followed by a tail for about 32-5 = 27, plus improved grab, followed by constriction of 40-5=35 plus save vs pass out. Total damage taken this round by the fighter: 146, and if he passes out? He is killed in the following round). How much did DR help him? It took 15 points away, meaning it takes 2 rounds to finish him off just like it would have anyway (and not saving him if he fails the Fort save).

A tag-team of Half Dragon Fiendish 44 HD Colossal Centipedes: they bite for 4d6+18 each. That's an average of 32 damage each, or 52 on the smite. There's poison as well, but I'm confident he'll pass the save. His DR is moderately useful here, although the smite attacks will be scary for a brief moment, until he realises they only get 1 smite each. Note: Take 8 HD from each of them and you have four centipedes dealing the same amount of damage each.

Mature Adult Red Dragon: Bite (2d8+11), 2 claws (2d6+5), 2 wings (1d8+5) and tail slap (2d6+16), or a 14d10 breath weapon. It could easily choose Power Attack and Improved Natural Attack as feats. His DR works best against this - assuming it does a full attack (it probably will) instead of a breath weapon, grabbing and swallowing, or casting spells.

[Brandon]

I guess Im just going to have to disagree. I think that DR should never be more then 1/4 of a single hit. It should be something small, especially if its the type that cant be bypassed.

Also I think the Dms you all have played with lack a little creativty. When I run a game I do use appropriate CR encounters but do so by usually adding class levels to lower CR monsters or in rarer circumstances advancing creatures to give an equal challenge.

[kongming]

The thing is that it can be bypassed: by everything that isn't a regular weapon attack. But energy types get through just fine, save-or-lose powers don't even deal damage (yes I know the death effects are few and far between, but Dominate/Hold/Sleep/Stun all result in you losing the game).

And for those that are using physical attacks, if it isn't a relevant amount, it's worthless. It needs to extend your lifespan by at least one round per battle, because it's accepted that you're going to heal up between fights (a wand/trap of CLW is spare change) and are not going to receive sufficient healing in battle (anything less than "he's nearly dead after fighting a few rounds. Heal up to full HP!" is a waste of a turn). Therefore, if you're not surviving at least one more round out of it, the DR was actually as useful as an accordion except you can't use it for Bardic music.

And most of my DMs prior to coming here did lack creativity, but I certainly don't - I pulled up some critters that are automatically CR 20 (and the dragon is listed as less than that, but that's an example of WotC blatantly under-rating a monster to artificially make it more challenging, and thus more memorable). But the Marilith has HD added to make it CR 20, the centipedes have templates and loads of extra HD...

And if you want class levels, consider this: At level 20, a rogue who, for whatever reason, is throwing darts instead of acid flasks (ranged touch attacks) will unleash up to 10 attacks per round. Heck, make them Brilliant darts (and we're still being kind and not just using DR-ignoring acid flasks) and they are basically an automatic hit. Each of those darts does tiny damage, plus anywhere from 10d6 to 12d6+20 sneak attack damage.

Best-case scenario? 7 attacks, only 4 hit, and it's only +10d6 sneak attack each. Ignoring the actual darts, around 140 sneak attack damage is dealt, minus 5*4 (20) = 120. The DM knows how to optimise? 10 attacks each hit for 12d6+20 sneak attack, or a total of ~620-(5*10=50) ~570.

The fighter explodes into a fine red mist. Granted, in this instance, no amount of sensible DR will actually save him, as DR 20 is still letting 420 points through, but even the best-case scenario is cutting the fighter's HP in half (if he's lucky).

Now, if a caster does something, DR doesn't even come into play.

---

Essentially, so few things are actually affected by it that the DR needs to be impressive enough to make weak attacks (see: all minion-things, armies of significantly lower-levelled enemies) do ~0, and to let him survive a few extra rounds by level-appropriate foes who choose to deal physical damage. It basically acts as a way of shutting that option down for enemies. They go "Oh, that's a fighter. No good trying to use swords, let's make do with our weak magic/throwing acid."

[Chris Brady]

I guess Im just going to have to disagree. I think that DR should never be more then 1/4 of a single hit. It should be something small, especially if its the type that cant be bypassed.

Also I think the Dms you all have played with lack a little creativty. When I run a game I do use appropriate CR encounters but do so by usually adding class levels to lower CR monsters or in rarer circumstances advancing creatures to give an equal challenge.

See the problem as Kongming points out is that at level 15+ DR is pointless.  Mainly because most of the critters at that level don't use physical attacks if they can get away with it.  And most of them can get away with it.

[RubySlippers]

Pathfinder D&D doesn't exist unless GARY GYGAX designed the rules and guided the creation its NOT D&D.

For me D&D is the original game, AD&D 1st Edition and D&D 2nd edition anything else is D&D-esque or a cheap and crappy knock off of the real game he crafted.

(my opinion)

I'm in a AD&D 1st edition game now and the fighter with double weapon specializatio and heavy armor is perfectly good for a fighter they don't need uber powers just walk up and beat the guy into pulp that's what they do. And take damage so that the other players can do their thing.

I did play this and found it utterly unnecessary and far to complicated for a simple class why change things that aren't broken? Fighter + Hit Points + Armor + Decent Weapon (maybe with some combat improvements in his or her favorite) and there you go.

[shadowheart]

Pathfinder D&D doesn't exist unless GARY GYGAX designed the rules and guided the creation its NOT D&D.

For me D&D is the original game, AD&D 1st Edition and D&D 2nd edition anything else is D&D-esque or a cheap and crappy knock off of the real game he crafted.

(my opinion)

I'm in a AD&D 1st edition game now and the fighter with double weapon specializatio and heavy armor is perfectly good for a fighter they don't need uber powers just walk up and beat the guy into pulp that's what they do. And take damage so that the other players can do their thing.

I did play this and found it utterly unnecessary and far to complicated for a simple class why change things that aren't broken? Fighter + Hit Points + Armor + Decent Weapon (maybe with some combat improvements in his or her favorite) and there you go.

Ahh, so I am not alone in this opinion! :)

Though I will state that I found 2E fun (then again it's what I remember playing fondly in my college RP group so .... :) )

[Chris Brady]

Gary Gygax hadn't designed a game alone since the original with Dave Arneson...

In fact the BECMI version was barely looked at by him.

Alternatively, the things that he and Dave put INTO the original game ARE STILL THERE.

Hit Points, AC, the Six Stats, so technically, both of you are either fans of a game that hasn't existed in print since 1978, or you play all of them and like all of them.

So which is it?

[shadowheart]

If I am going to play AD&D, my preference is first edition AD&D (my agreement with RS was less the Gygaxian authorship than the spirit of 1E).  2E is fun, and as I noted, it's what my gaming group in college played. 

In my opinion, 3rd and 3.5 editions simply put in too many rules and layers of glitz that are just not necessary.  They bog the game down, again in my opinion, and just don't have the simple flow of 1E (despite its occasional clunkiness).

[Chris Brady]

The problem I always had with D&D in ALL it's versions (I started with AD&D 1e) was the fighter.

There never was much to it.  The Mage always got more special abilities, and magic toys just got boring after a while.  In 1 and 2e the fighter pretty much plateaued after level 3, while the Thief, Cleric and Mage all got cool abilities that scaled up with the levels.  And weapon specialization sucked compared to Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Disintegrate and Power Word: Kill.

The 3e came along and offered 'Feats' for the Fighter.  Which were cool in the beginning, but then it became clear that they weren't enough, especially as it boils down to an 'arms race', where you try to build as fast as possible to the 'Save or Dies' so that the bad guys don't get to use them on you.

But that problem has always been there since the beginning.  3e was a good attempt at trying to make all the classes fun, but in the end it failed by over doing the Cleric and Druid, quickly followed by the Wizard.  They dominate past level 10-12.  But then a lot of folks never really got past that.

The issue I have with Pathfinder is that as long as it uses the base issues of 3rd edition, the Magical Arms Race and clearly overpowered magic classes (the strongest and most common listed set of issues that WoTC got from it's surveys to players, which they did in terms of market research) and as long as they use 3.x as a base, then it'll have the same problems.

The main issue with Paizo is that they have no concept of a design goal.

They need to address it like:

1. List the most common "problems" with 3.5
2. Field experts and players for solutions.
3. Only keep the solutions that:
a. don't break compatibilities
b. are simple and elegant
c. if a. and b. cannot be met 100% don't even address the issue at all. All mechanics have warts and everybody knows it. People sticking with 3.5 have already accepted those warts. They'll lose no one.

Pathfinder RPG has ideas when they are in dire need of VISION.  A singular focus.  A real end result, because right now, it's only 3.55 at best, rather than the touted 3.75.

[kongming]

The problem I always had with D&D in ALL it's versions (I started with AD&D 1e) was the fighter.

Agreed. It's always been a problem class that needed to be fixed. In the earliest editions, the fighter was a punishment for not rolling well enough to be a real character. Seriously, that's why it existed. Your stats weren't good enough to be a ranger, thief or mage? You get to be the fighter. After that, well... it's still been a bit of a joke. Heck, one person suggested "If you have to play a fighter, play a group of them. Because each individual fighter is crap, you should have a whole bunch." (like a summoner or Pokemon master in that respect).

Alternatively, the DM gave special artefact swords and stuff to artificially balance it. And that's bad too.

The Mage always got more special abilities,

Usually after a few levels - traditionally, the casters have sucked at low levels, although the 3E divine casters broke that rule by starting awesome and getting better from there. Then taking a brief detour at overkill junction.

3e was a good attempt at trying to make all the classes fun, but in the end it failed by over doing the Cleric and Druid, quickly followed by the Wizard.

Not exactly. Ignoring a few individual problem spells (Gate, Shapechange/Polymorph etc.), they are what the balance point was - monsters were designed to be a challenge for them. So there was nothing wrong with them except for the problem spells (and the Druid class feature of Wild Shape, which duplicates a problem spell). The real problem was that the fighter and friends weren't as good - fighter was the problem class, and it hasn't been pulling its weight. So the issue is that people are given, at character creation, the option to be useless (without spelling it out for them).