Libertad wrote:CatharzGodfoot wrote:Well, Pathfinder isn't backwards compatible with D&D, so you'd have to re-write pretty much everything. Other than that, it would probably work OK.
Judging__Eagle wrote:Print off the PDF make a 'new' page that has has something such as "The Tomes of the Pathfinders"; and then hand out that as your rulebook; saying how you found some people who did the "Pathfinding" of doing a slightly better D&D kuldge than Paizo did.
You're all just afraid I'm going to combine a ruleset you love with one that you hate.
Actually, I really am not scared of what you do in your games. Mostly because I don't really hold 3e to be the ideal standard; just a mainstream method, of gaming.
The reason I say to replace the PHB with the Tomes PDF is that most of Tomes can be used as a stand alone book instead of the regular PHB. So you could save yourself the effort of having to bring the PF book as well; and just keep a DMG and some MMs around.
After a while, my group only used PHBs for the spell lists.
To be honest though, I'm sort of sick and tired of anything related to D&D's
systems, but not its stories or settings.
Overall the system is too crunchy; and doesn't actually give lots of options without forcing the user to learn additional sets of data and mini-game rules.
I'm still eager to tell stories about Heavy Metal in primitive agrarian cultures; even in bronze age ones. So far, using AWoD/After Sundown as a system has worked fine, and is in line with the sort of class-free sort of storytelling that makes sense to me.
Kaelik wrote:2) Most of the best builds can be done as well or better as Archers in Tome. For example, technically, nothing stops ranged power attacking other than my hatred. And of course, Samurai Archers, Monk Archers, and Knight Archers might be subbing slightly less damage for being able to hit from far away, so totally worth it. Archers can also use assorted abuse to attack as often as a TWFer as well.
What and how can archers get attacks approaching a TWFer?
I've usually picked up TWF on most melee builds b/c double attacks and shitty sheild rules mean I have little/no incentive to get tiny, meaningless, defenses; when my offenses could by doubled.
[edit: text keeps not going through]
Usually the fact that there's TWF means that I can dual wield and throw magical darts, acid flasks or a semi-obscure elemental bomb magic item that comes in a 20' blast radius and a variety of flavours of enchanted balls (freezing balls, shocking balls, fiery balls, acid balls and I believe sonic
the hedehog balls).
The damage may suck, but some things are too big to get close to. The elemental orbs are straight up rickokulous, in a post-wish economy a rogue or other chucker could plausibly throw 8 orbs that deal 10d6 (ref 15 for 1/2 I think) energy damage.
If you want to be
silly have ranks in Perform (juggle) and
juggle your energy orbs in the air; stack some ER that you care about (20+), and/or get Lighting reflexes. You can be a silly clown, juggling shimmering orbs; that you can allow to all fall at the same time and/or throw at enemies. While 10d6x8 isn't all that super, it can give non-casters some ranged AoEs that matter; and allow actual spellcasters to focus on spells that warp the battlefield or limit enemy options (the fact that injury only matters at 0 hp means you're best off alpha-striking single targets, or applying de-buffs on things you can't instantly/quickly remove from action; some de-buffs
are alpha strikes,
Colour Spray all the way up to
Charm Monster).
[/edit]
As for "melees" being super cheese, yes, they utterly
can. However the person who does this is also going to be the person who suggests that all of the casters in a group become blood mages that sacrifice chickens to cast more powerful magics (aka. Deathknell to boost CL then cast long term buffs). Either way, you're going to get cheese.
The stone cold facts are that most people
can't bring the cheese. Even in the instances were I've myself made pretty cheesy high skill point RoW 'fighter' builds (really, more like a very martial rogue/bard/monk), I've known that they have bit weak points (lowish hp; a grapple score of "bab + str mod (of maybe +4? usually a +0); AoEs that require to be near/at targets; even a reach of 30' always puts you in counter-charge distance of almost everything).
When compared to actual archers, flat out melee characters are left looking a bit weak. Strategically and tactically,
missile is the foil of
armour (while assault foils missile, but not always), and personally, I'm the sort of wargamer that gets hordes of archers and/or other ranged attacks; because killing an enemy when they are
over there is better than when they are in your face.
The reason they
don't seem that way is that most encounters involve creatures that have to charge the PCs and attack them at very close range; or encounters occur in confined environments (I once had to figure out if a character of mine could move to one side of a room, then to the other; then back to the middle; in order to use the +16 Whirlwind ability
You can let players be a fighter, samurai, or just about any of the martial classes, and they can have a whole pile of feats that they picked out, but
if they don't use them, or
use them improperly it's like watching a wizard cast sleep on a zombie, or control undead on a flesh/bone golem, a good idea, but a wasted action and resources.
Just my observations so far.