| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Portella |
Posted - 09 Feb 2009 : 22:45:10
Anyone running pathfinder rpg beta with the realms setting? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| althen artren |
Posted - 11 Mar 2009 : 18:51:59
Scrolls shared, scribes:
I highly advise if you pathfind in the Forgotten Realms,
try not to carve another path through Cormanthyr, for the
elves may not be so gentle on you as they were with the
guy in Harrowdale. |
| PaulBestwick |
Posted - 11 Mar 2009 : 13:15:49
quote:
Originally posted by Portella
Of all the scribes who lives in the uk and where?
Portella, I live in the UK, but in live in Nottingham a good way north of you. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 11 Mar 2009 : 12:37:11
I'm incorporating PF rules into my ongoing campaign here and there. One of my favorite aspects of PF was what they did for the fighter, and as there are no PC fighters in my group... well, let's just say that they're gonna be seeing some Zhents who are a trifle more combat-savvy than they have been. Likely the same goes for the sorc, and I reallllllly want to graft the PF 0th lv spells concept onto my ongoing game.
We shall see. |
| 4uk4ata |
Posted - 24 Feb 2009 : 10:04:15
I am planning a PF campaign in the Realms, near Iriaebor to be exact. I may need to get out of lurk mode every now and then ;) |
| Portella |
Posted - 16 Feb 2009 : 21:18:34
Of all the scribes who lives in the uk and where? |
| Portella |
Posted - 16 Feb 2009 : 21:06:01
bah i want to play. |
| Baldwin Stonewood |
Posted - 16 Feb 2009 : 20:02:18
I'm running a pathfinder game that originated in Crimmor, Amn. I used Ed's write up in Dragon 334 as the foundation for the city. That article is excellent and provided me with a wealth of ideas. While the party is still in Crimmor the adventure will trend towards a seabased/pirate campaign. So far, the conversion to pathfinder character creation has been simple, npcs do need some tweaking but I have not had do anything with the monsters yet. I did have to homerule the use rope skill since it does not exist in pahtfinder but could be important in a sea adventure. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 16 Feb 2009 : 01:55:54
quote:
Originally posted by Sian
set him up against roughly the same character based on paizos ... that is ... if he is primarily fighter toss him in a gladiator combat with a Fighter of the same level :P
I wish it were that easy. |
| Sian |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 16:51:20
set him up against roughly the same character based on paizos ... that is ... if he is primarily fighter toss him in a gladiator combat with a Fighter of the same level :P |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 16:03:31
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-So are you scared you might like 4E "IF" you played it. 
No worries there. I think they are a good ruleset for what they are doing, but I don't feel that they are 'appropriate' for a fantasy setting. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 13:40:24
-Just play a 20th Level Druid and out fight the Fighter, and summon some critters for the Cherry on top!  Or the 20th Level Cleric and heal yourself and summon as you go.
-Prestige Classes are no big deal to me. Now this one guy I game with builds Voltrons with every character. 2 of this 3 of that. Sprinkle 4 diferent Prestige Classes, and he has on hell of a Voltron going.  Also dont forget the Munchkin Race and Dragon Magazine (print version) cheese.
-So are you scared you might like 4E "IF" you played it.
-I have another player in my group that treats everything as a "loot pinyata" No dont kill him he is my Mary Sue Character for story purposes. I know he has a nice sword but its not for you dude. Both are in their 30's. The WOW players are really bad, lets loot while combat is still going. Scared someone will get the good loot. Yet they dont want to play 4E.
-Players cant game with them, and you cant game without them. 
BRIMSTONE |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 13:39:50
-Stupid Double post!  
BRIMSTONE |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 06:20:39
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-What kinda issues?
BRIMSTONE
He doesn't believe 3.5 has anything wrong with it. The discussion we had tonight led to him admitting that prestige classes are a 'necessity' for character story and growth and doesn't understand why anyone would ever want to play something like a level 20 fighter.
It's actually quite a quandry I find myself in. From everything I've seen about his playing style and tastes, I know that not only would 4th Edition be perfect for him, but that he would love it. He hasn't even looked at the rulebooks because he's upset with WotC for bringing out a new edition making all the money he spent on 3.5 rulebooks worthless (he's not a lore junkie, so every book he owns is either a splatbook or similar) and refuses to spend more money on them.
I honestly feel guilty at times, knowing that if I showed him the books, he'd be happier than a Zhent with a harem of Harper slaves, but I keep 4th Edition from him because I don't want to play them. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 05:56:19
-What kinda issues?
BRIMSTONE |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 05:44:35
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I am working on posting a few more characters this Sunday on the WotC boards.
The conversion is actually pretty simple. As for the 'power level' of the Paizo classes, it's not that huge of a bump really, IMO. They balanced out a few of the classes to look more balanced at higher levels (the fighter makes me drool again). You may need to bump encounters up a level, but for the most part it still works the same. The biggest difference is changing the feat progress from every third level to every other level, so you might just want to toss an extra feat to the baddies to even things out.
Ugh, not going to be able to post more characters this weekend. Just DM'd this evening and brought up possible future campaigns using Pathfinder rules and got some serious backlash from one of the players. Now I'm going to be spending most of this weekend addressing his questions. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Feb 2009 : 14:34:20
I noticed that even within the standard the 3e rules, there was always 'must-have' Feats, and ones no-one would ever take
I've been thinking about taking the PF system, and tweaking it, and having 'A'-class Feats, and 'B'-class Feats, and the ''B' Feats would be a lot of the racial and perhaps the regional ones.
The only problem with that is it would be a LOT of work modifying each and every class's Feat progression to include, or cause 'power-creep' by just tacking them on (as Agetrion did).
Then I was going to create a class sub-system of Feats to balance everything - Fighters needing to 'train' to level up with a weapon, or a Mage having to take a level in a school, to take spells of that level, etc..)
And then I decided all of that sounded VERY complicated. Basically I wound up with the bare-bones of a class-free system, which wouldn't even be D&D anymore. |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 12:45:45
quote:
Originally posted by Nerfed2Hell
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
There's one major difference: we're using Racial Feats brainstormed on the Paizo Boards, and every PC gets a free Feat at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th level. The players seem to like them, as they add more racial flavour to the classes (and in many cases support the class features and PF beats nicely).
What, the improved basic feat progression isn't enough for them and they need more "bonus" feats?
No, that's not the issue here, because it was I who made that call. You see, I wanted to test out the ideas presented on the original Alpha playtest thread (on the Paizo forums), and I feared that the "almost-worth-taking"-type Racial Feats (which most of them are -- a bit better than "half-feats"/traits/background feats) would not be popular with the players if they had to "burn" their feats on them. Some of them are better than others, while most only help you in certain situations. So, either I had to use DM fiat for force their hand, or give them as "freebies".
Yes, they make the PCs in the campaign a bit better than their "pure" Beta counterparts and NPCs, but I keep that in mind as I'm running the game. |
| Portella |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 01:02:57
i am not familiar yet i have just recently downloaded the free beta rule book. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 00:35:56
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
There's one major difference: we're using Racial Feats brainstormed on the Paizo Boards, and every PC gets a free Feat at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th level. The players seem to like them, as they add more racial flavour to the classes (and in many cases support the class features and PF beats nicely).
What, the improved basic feat progression isn't enough for them and they need more "bonus" feats? |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 00:28:16
quote:
Originally posted by Portella
Anything else you have found ? Did you have to converted anything? if so what?
(I assume this one is for me?)
Well, NPC conversion would have taken some work to do, but that was one of the reasons I decided to set the campaign in a remote, "uncharted" place (i.e. a town that's not been properly detailed in Realmslore -- and I'm disregarding the disappointingly lame info in 'Four from Cormyr'). Although I *did* ask Ed for "official" lore, because I'm still in the progress of detailing the town and the PCs like to "get around" and meet NPCs as much as they only can (between adventures, that is).
Another reason was to set the campaign in "monster country" that has plenty of ruins within a couple of day's travel. As it is a playtest campaign, I haven't written any epic campaign arc, but rather tend to write "stand-alone" adventures (some of which have loose ties to each other, while others do not) for every session.
The rules work better than in 3.5, but there are some issues, such as the lack of skill points with clerics and fighters (both of which seem to use INT as a "dump stat" with point-buy), and this tends to lead them spending that one rank per level on class skills only (i.e. no Perception = always surprised). Also, certain spells are still problematic, and since the base math underlying the mechanics remains largely unchanged, I'm actually convinced that at some point there will be major difficulties regarding Will saves (only the cleric and the paladin stand a chance -- the rest will have +5 at 20th level). However, the new Channeling system works elegantly, although I became painfully aware that "squishy" villains need also *living* minions to protect them from parties with more than one Channeling PC.
We're using some spells and magic items from FR supplements, but no Feats, as I like to keep it as close to the "core" rules as only possible. There's one major difference: we're using Racial Feats brainstormed on the Paizo Boards, and every PC gets a free Feat at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th level. The players seem to like them, as they add more racial flavour to the classes (and in many cases support the class features and PF beats nicely). |
| Portella |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 00:08:22
I hoping that the RTM version of pathfinder will contain a lot of the fixes that people have been talking about. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 22:56:56
I tried it... and while there are some good changes in both the alpha and beta, there are things I don't like. I've been putting together my own 3.5e/Pathfinder hybrid (so, I guess a D&D 3.62 edition) combing changes I like and updating older material (such as races, classes, skills, and feats) with all the regular "extra" material from official sourcebooks and third party sources, too.
A big flop for me is CMB and the way skills are handled, and a few of the core classes seem a little over-powered and got some tweaking (or outright replaced with something entirely different from core 3.5 or Pathfinder). Love the unlimited cantrips/orisons, love the redefined Channel Energy compared to the older Turn/Rebuke Undead ability, and ditched the whole spontaneous casting of healing spells because of it... now clerics can spontaneously cast their domain spells. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 20:35:49
quote:
Originally posted by Portella
Anyone running pathfinder rpg beta with the realms setting?
I have two campaigns going, and they both use PRPG rules. If you want a kickass Excel character sheet, check this out:
http://chargen.motime.com/
My two gaming groups now swear by it! :) |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 16:15:27
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
Due to licencing issue will there ever be official pathfinder/realms material? I doubt it is possible.
-Only if WotC and Paizo sit down, and WotC grants Paizo the Forgotten Realms license. Which, as you said, is doubtful, given Paizo's "challenge for control" with WotC. |
| Portella |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 14:30:17
they did change the cantrips and orisons so they are not game breaking... it looks quite cool. and makes a lot of sense played in FR |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 13:47:27
quote:
Originally posted by Maruluthu Mistrivvin
I'll decide in when it comes out
so far, the changes are good, but minor imo
it needs something like 4e powers, but less restrictive, maybe a feat/spell trees system, but flexible
it will never happen
I disagree. Looking at the at-will use of Orisons and Cantrips for casters, and the powers that Clerics, Sorcerers and Wizards get, I think they do have that flexible style akin to the 4E powers. And they also expanded on some of the tree feats (Stunning Fist, Power Attack, Dodge, etc.) as well. |
| Marc |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 13:40:37
I'll decide in when it comes out
so far, the changes are good, but minor imo
it needs something like 4e powers, but less restrictive, maybe a feat/spell trees system, but flexible
it will never happen
|
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 13:37:00
I am working on posting a few more characters this Sunday on the WotC boards.
The conversion is actually pretty simple. As for the 'power level' of the Paizo classes, it's not that huge of a bump really, IMO. They balanced out a few of the classes to look more balanced at higher levels (the fighter makes me drool again). You may need to bump encounters up a level, but for the most part it still works the same. The biggest difference is changing the feat progress from every third level to every other level, so you might just want to toss an extra feat to the baddies to even things out. |
| Portella |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 12:25:59
Anything else you have found ? Did you have to converted anything? if so what? |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 12:22:46
quote:
Originally posted by Portella
Anyone running pathfinder rpg beta with the realms setting?
I am. My campaign is set in Thunderstone, Cormyr. There are a few issues with the rules (mainly with the "gap" in balance between the spellcasters and the "martial" PCs), but I think the final rules will deal most of that stuff. |
