Alternate Rules: Defense

Armor is highly impractical in my world of Hekinoe. I had to actually scale the environmental danger rules down a step, or my players would have died by now from heat, most days in The Know World end up getting to be at least ninety out. It is too hot for heavy armor, and Pathfinder resolves close range firearm attacks as a touch attack, which I like, but with guns being so commonplace, armor is basically useless, beyond a few special types I've come up with.

My thought is that it would be prudent to add a Monk AC style feat series to the game. I would model it after d20 Modern or 3.5 Unearthed Arcana's class defense bonus. I figure that people with the reflexes and instincts for it would have developed a style of fighting that involved not being where a bullet was aimed or a blade fell. Something beyond just having good reflexes that was discovered when men realized that a close range bullet can punch through plate mail as easily as leather armor. 

It would apply to touch attacks, and wearing armor would negate it or halve it, as would being immobilized or restrained, but I'm not sure if I want to treat it like a Dexterity bonus to AC and have it be negated by using Bluff in combat or when flat-footed, though that would seem appropriate.

The requirements would be something like Improved Initiative or Evasive Reflexes and above average (thirteen or higher) Wisdom or Dexterity to kind of indicate quick reflexes to dodge with or a strong gut instinct/intuition telling you where not to stand. Perhaps a base attack bonus of a certain level would be an appropriate prerequisite as well to indicate experience. I don't want to make it too all difficult to obtain, but it is a pretty useful feat series, so I have to make the requirements reflect that.

I'm not sure how I want to stagger the bonus though. The class defense bonuses start at +2 and some go as high as +10 by twentieth level. It totally overpowers a Monk's class AC ability, which starts at zero and caps at +5. But, a Monk would have a high Wisdom to go along with that, so maybe the progressions I've been looking at aren't that overpowered in comparison.

I think I have a good starting point to work with, we'll see what comes up. On a side note, considering the whole nature of my post about Coddling, perhaps it is time to teach the guys about heat exhaustion and dehydration...

Why I Like It: Pathfinder

A Note: I don't know anything about Golarion, the adventure paths, or all the third party stuff. I make this post strictly from the point of view of the Pathfinder "3.75" ruleset and the main books associated with the rules.

Audience participation. This is one of the main reasons I really like Pathfinder and Paizo. Instead of dropping a one hundred and sixty page splatbook on us every month, Paizo involves its customers in the process. Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat were each cut up into bits and pieces, then released for public consumption as free pdfs. People get the pdfs far in advance of the book's release date, play around with them, post on forums, and your comments and critiques get involved in the next round of playtesting, and all the comments and critique of that round get involved in the final product. We the player get to help the company make their product, we're given a voice to complain with or critique with that the company listens to. It is grand. A cynical person might say that Paizo is getting free playtesting and errata work out of this, but fuck, I get free pdfs prior to a book being released, and if I want to, I can have an impact on a book. I think it is a fair trade off.

Pdf sales. I love this. I'm not going to lie and say I've never pirated a pdf. I love to own books legally, I try to buy as many as I can afford and find, as long as they are of decent quality. Pathfinder actually sells quite nice pdfs of their products, usually around the ten dollar mark. The pdfs are high quality, some with hyperlinks to other relevant sections of the books, and also always with nice bookmarks. I love physical books, but I don't need physical monster manuals, and a pdf option is a cheap way to preview a book you're curious about that you're not sure you really need. The pdf sales also show that Paizo is intelligent and understands that this is the digital age. Some people do all their gaming over the internet or on their iDevice or phone or whatever, and sometimes it is more practical for people to have a ten dollar pdf than a forty dollar two hundred and fifty page hardcover book. As I said in a previous post, I used a pdf reader and dice roller on my phone to build a scenario for Labyrinth Lord. Pdfs are handy, and I think most gamers are willing to buy, rather than pirate, if the quality is there.

Price. To talk about pricing, I have to rag on Wizards/3.5 a bit, sorry. Wizards is the king of the one hundred and sixty page splatbook for twenty-nine ninety-five retail price, page one hundred and sixty is always an ad. They have said before that they offer a reduced price on bigger core books (PHB, DMG, Monster Manual), so they can charge more on slimmer additional content books like Complete Arcane or Psionic Power or whatever. The price per page of those splatbooks comes out to nineteen cents per page. The price per page on the PHB and DMG is ten cents a page for six hundred and twenty combined pages. The Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide and Gamemastery Guide are both over three hundred pages and they both retail for thirty-nine ninety-nine, ends up being about twelve cents a page for both of them. Ultimate Magic, which is close in tenor to a splatbook, is over two-hundred and fifty pages and weighs in at about sixteen cents per page, retailing at thirty-nine ninety-nine. The Core Pathfinder book is sort of a PHB and DMG combo of over five-hundred and seventy pages and is about nine cents per page, retailing at forty-nine ninety-nine. Granted, the last page of each of those Pathfinder is an add, just like Wizards' books. I guess what I am saying is that all of Pathfinder's core books are more expensive per book, but cheaper per page, so there is more content overall. Maybe. I dunno, the one hundred and sixty page splatbook page count limit infuriated me. I have never been displeased by buying a Pathfinder book, so I think that if the quality is there, I am ok paying forty bucks, retail.

Options, like 3.5 Edition, there are a lot of feats and classes and such and they give you a lot of variety. I'm not going to go on at length about it, I already have in 3.5's thing. One thing I do like is Archetypes. Instead of making hundreds of classes and prestige classes, Pathfinder has things like Archetypes, options you can choose that replaces a class' feature with something else that changes the way it plays. An Alchemist can exchange his Mutagen ability for an alternate Mutagen that improves his mental stats instead of physical. An Archer Fighter can replace his armor abilities to gain the ability to make trick shots with a bow. All of the changes are small, but they are effective at altering the class in a fundamental way to fit your goals for playstyle.

Class variety. Even without archetypes, the classes have a superior variety over previous iterations. All Barbarians will rage, but they now have variations on the effects of their rage. Some become terrifying, others develop an utterly impenetrable mind, others gain the ability to hurl huge rocks or cause their mount to rage alongside them. Sorcerers have various bloodlines that grant them differing bonus spells and feats and strange abilities.

Power creep. Power creep is a real threat in these games, latter 3.5 splatbooks are much more potent than the core book stuff. Pathfinder "solved" this by just amping up the abilities and powers of the base classes and races. This is an admittedly crude solution, but it shows that they recognize that power creep exists and are at least attempting to rectify it/head it off.

I really like Pathfinder's skill system, it is mechanically no different than 3.5's, but it borrows some elements of 4th Edition. Like 4th Edition, some skills are folded into others, Listen and Spot are now Perception and Move Silently and Hide are now Stealth, and so on. In addition, cross class skills are not a thing in this game. You have class skills, and if you put a skill point in one them, you gain a plus three bonus to skill checks with that skill. Buying ranks in any skill only costs one skill point, regardless of whether or not it is a class skill, class skills just get that nice plus three bonus. It is a little simpler to manage, you don't have to mess around with half ranks and that sort of thing, plus the overall list is slimmer, which makes picking and choosing a lot easier. 

I guess everything I said about 3,5 Edition applies here as well, the games are very similar. The primary differences are Paizo's style versus Wizards of the Coast's style and a few slight rules clarifications, alterations, and so on. 

Thought of The Drive

Posted today, instead of tomorrow, because.

So, on the one hundred mile drive to a hospital (ok, 96.4 mile drive) I had today, a few thoughts occurred to me. One of them was Pathfinder/DnD related. What would a campaign be like where the GM kept track of the player's hit points? What would a game be like where the GM kept all the magic pluses and abilities of weapons and armor and such secret? What would it be like if I just had a massive dice roller doing all the math of the game behind the screen for the group? 

Instead of your +5 mithril flaming burst short sword, you have a gleaming silvery blade that becomes scorched and blackened when it draws blood and erupts in flame when it splits armor and strikes foes. Instead of being at one hit point, your breath is coming in ragged gasps and you grow ever weaker as your lifeblood puddles at your feet and you strain to draw your blade. The ring upon your hand is not a +1 ring of protection, instead, it is a silver band of magic that grows warm when your are attacked and a blade halts before striking your flesh. 

I'm not sure how feasible a campaign of this style would be, where the GM essentially rolls all the dice. Would players even enjoy that sort of thing? Part of the fun of the game is rolling dice to do stuff and being infuriated or excited by the result. It just seems more story-like and more conducive to role-playing, the players can experience things more I guess, rather than worry about math. Anyway, I'm not sure the idea has any merit, but I thought it might be neat. 

Inquisitivitivity: Part 1

We gamed last Sunday. We didn't get a super shit ton done, but we did make some progress. I was tired and had had a long long day at work, Fred seemed like he was exhausted as well. It was hot, and we were missing two members of the team (Jeff and Jeremy). I think it went fine though, if a bit slowly. Fred was running late so I think the rest of us were kind of dilly dallying so that we wouldn't be too far into everything when he showed up. 

There a few things I wanted to happen, mainly for them to meet with my NPC and to find a common ground with him, and also to actually see the shadow monsters. Both happened, and both went fairly well. I think the guys understand quite clearly that the shadow monsters are not something to be trifled with at this time. 

The goal of the scenario was to get information, but they didn't spend a lot of effort researching the past ten years. Primarily, they focused on local stuff and sorcery. The visit to the library got kind of side tracked with the whole rifling through Krieg's property and trying to set an ambush for him and that sort of thing, heh. 

I was kind of bummed that I couldn't include some of the fights, one is pretty cool, I don't know if they'll end up getting to it though. We'll see. Regardless, I think we're ready to get into the meat of the scenario when next we meet. We finished roughly a third of the scenario, so there is definitely enough material for our next session. As always, I am optimistic about next time.

Smartphones Are Skynet

Slow day at work today, not because the city is behaving though, heh. With only my phone, a notebook, and a number two pencil, I was able to construct an entire Labyrinth Lord scenario. Plot, side quests, main quest, hooks for future scenarios in the land of Somnium, enemies, loot, etc. I fucking love this phone.

To be fair, my phone is equipped with an Adobe pdf reader app, a sweet dice rolling app, a nice little notepad app, and pretty much every DnD related pdf I own, along with this Blogger mobile app I am using.

Why I Like It: 4th Edition

One of the main things I like about 4th Edition is the refinement of the challenge rating system. I find the encounter balancing system to be easily understood, which makes making combats a lot easier. With the experience points budgets and encounter levels, it is very easy to understand the estimated power level of the party versus the difficulty of an encounter. It gives you very good control over how much you challenge the party.

Format. I love the format of 4th Edition, the way stat blocks are laid out and written. I find the class blocks to be informative and concise, far more easily understood than other editions and their endless sprawls of text. Powers are laid out very clearly. The way they breakdown the targeting and timing mechanics of each power are very nice and easily understood. I guess a lot of what I love about 4th Edition involves how easily understood stats and such are, they really work hard to convey info in well designed blocks and such. The feat format is well designed as well, they're broken up by tier and sometimes by race and class, which can save a little bit of time by showing you directly where to go for feats, rather than having to have to page through all three thousand feats. 

I think defenses are a cool concept. One of the design ideals of 4th Edition is to put the issue of success with a d20 roll on the attacker. Like your AC, your Will or Reflex defense is something you control with your stats or feats, and the enemy has to meet or exceed it. I also enjoy that they've allowed you to use the best of your Strength or Constitution for your Fortitude defense, Intelligence or Dexterity for Reflex, and Wisdom or Charisma for Will.I know that it is basically a new version of the saving throws we've had forever, but I do like that they've made it so that the instigator of an action has to make the d20 roll. I also enjoy that defenses have a static number, you're not relying on luck to protect your from an effect that is going deal two hundred damage to you in a round (i.e. Finger of Death), your defense (or that of your enemy) is what it is and you (or the enemy) must work to shore it up and can use effects to improve your chances of affecting your opponent's.

Static hit points. Brilliant, enough said. Your Constitution still has an effect on how many hit points you, but you don't have massive differences in survivability like you can in rare cases with other editions. 

I think the design behind the skill system is pretty grand. Many skills have been folded together with others to make some skills more comprehensive. Perception now covers both visual and aural detection and that sort of thing. There has been some oversimplification of the system, but I can get over that. The trained static bonus combined and the 1/2 level bonus system of 4th Edition, really combine nicely to make a very simple and easily understood/used skill system that doesn't end up being some overbearing system of accounting and book work. (A note, I never felt that way about 3.5 Edition and do not feel that way about Pathfinder). 

The power system has some appeal to me, but it is a kind of mixed bag. Encounter and at-will powers for martial character represent a sort of suite of maneuvers and techniques learned over years/levels of engaging in battle. At-wills for spellcasters represent orisons and cantrips and such fairly well. In theory, the power system is basically just a different version of the Vancian system of magic, spellcasters are still fundamentally limited in what kind of shenanigans they can pull off, the limits have changed to once a day and once every five minutes, rather than by how many times they memorized something, but they are still limited in a similar fashion to previous editions. Like I said, mixed bag, I like some of it, and other chunks of it bother me. Overall, I think it is a positive. One thing I very much like is that even wizards have to make attack rolls now and that all stats can be used to make an attack roll and every ability score has a use, some affecting the secondary affects of powers. Granted, attacking with Intelligence or Charisma is a bit...odd, however, DnD is rife with dissociative mechanics and attacking with your Charisma bonus is no different than having two hundred odd hit points and having to be stabbed a hundred and fifty times by a goblin to finally croak. 

So there's some stuff about why I like 4th Edition, I'm sure I could come up with a few more points, but those are the major ones. 

Alternate Rules Part 1

So, I've been playing Pathfinder for over a year now. I feel confidant in saying that Pathfinder is close enough to 3.5/3.0 that my experience playing/DMing the latter carries over to the former. That puts me at roughly nine years of experience with this ruleset. I feel like I know the system and how the rules work, I feel like the rules themselves don't have too many surprises left in store for me. 

For a long time, I have resisted making new DnD things. I don't toy around with feats or classes if I can avoid it, I have created traits and a few feats yes, but always for reasons of background or by basing them first on something I've seen in 3.5 Edition. I think now I am not only comfortable making house rules for wonky stuff like janky magic or world unique races, but bending/breaking the rules of the game itself to fit my needs. I think I have the experience necessary to do so without turning everything pear shaped and reducing it all to rubble. 

So what does this mean? First, it means that there are things that irritate me about Pathfinder, just like there are things that have irritated me about every edition of the game. Second, it means I'm prepared to go back to just pulling shit out of my ass that I think is cool and start looking at things and changing them if I don't like what I see. I can't guarantee how often I'll post something like this, but it might become a regular thing. We'll see.

We'll start off nice and simple and slow. Monks. It doesn't explicitly say it in Pathfinder, but I've always felt they are more psionic than anything else, a lot of people probably agree with me. A lot of their abilities are listed as supernatural or spell-like abilities, but there is nothing in the rules that speaks as to whether or not they are a magic class or what. They're clearly something other than a warrior type class like fighter or barbarian or rogue. 

So this rule isn't a rule pe se, more of a clarification. Monks, and all of their powers, are considered psionic in nature, the same way a Psion's, Psychic Warrior's, or Soulknife's are. So, effects that suppress magic don't affect them, but effects that suppress psionic powers would keep them from performing some of their powers. Ok, yeah, that is a rule, but there you go, Monks are a psionic class in the same way Soulknives are. Super.

While I'm thinking of it, I might try and go through some of my old 3.5 stuff feat by feat and prestige class by prestige class to see what might fit in with Pathfinder and maybe convert it if I have to/feel like it. We'll see. Not sure how committed I am to this whole "I'm changing everything!" bug that bit me. I'm not even sure I really need to convert anything ultimately. Who knows. Monks are psionic, whoa!