5th Edition announced

Hiya mate!

paradox42 said:

Clearly, you've never played Pathfinder if you believe that.

Click to expand...

I'm curious how Pathfinder is in anyway better (set up) for epic play than 3/3.5E?

If anything the impression I get (and it might well be a false impression I readily admit) is that, if anything, its actually worse.

Upper_Krust said:

If anything the impression I get (and it might well be a false impression I readily admit) is that, if anything, its actually worse.

Click to expand...

Given that, as you noted, Paizo hasn't released anything relating to epic-level play, I'm curious about how you came to that conclusion.

Hiya mate!

Alzrius said:

Given that, as you noted, Paizo hasn't released anything relating to epic-level play, I'm curious about how you came to that conclusion.

Click to expand...

Thats why I noted the bit about being (set up) meaning as we approach level 20. Is there anything specifically changed in their high level play (lets say 13-20 for the sake of argument) that suggests epic play would be better under Pathfinder?

*I* was referring to the pronouncement that "there's no mechanical difference between the two games." The statement is patently false and easily disproven; the most obvious difference is with how skills work in PF. There is no longer a 4-rank thing at level 1, and all skill points spent get the spender 1 skill rank no matter what the skill actually is (essentially, this is identical with one of 3.5 Ascension's Divine abilities; I don't recall off the top of my head whether it was Maven or Omnicompetent- but PF characters get it automatically starting from 1st level). There's also the fact that several skills got compressed together; for example, Diplomacy now handles both its original purpose and the purpose which used to be handled by a skill named Gather Information.

As for Epic, the above examples illustrate that the math is made easier in some ways. But the specific ways in which it is made easier will not necessarily translate into a smoother game- I haven't yet played in or run a PF game above level 12, so I can't honestly say yet. Only experiments and playtesting will prove or disprove the assertion that PF handles Epic better than 3.5 (or doesn't).

The abilities you're thinking of are Maven and Omnicompetent.

Maven grants free skill ranks in all your skills and cross class skills up to their maximum ranks attainable.

Omnicompetent grants you all skills as class skills, rather than have some skills being cross-class skills.

This is quite a bit different from what you're thinking of.

Personally, I take bits and pieces from Pathfinder and use 3.5 rules for the most part, but I do like the Pathfinder classes and domains.

U_K, given the news of 5E, do you still plan any 4E products other than the Vampire Bestiary?

Hey Khisanth mate!

Khisanth the Ancient said:

U_K, given the news of 5E, do you still plan any 4E products other than the Vampire Bestiary?

Click to expand...

Personally I just want to keep working on 4th Edition. I think the system itself is great. So yes I will have 4E products after the Vampire Bestiary.

THAT SAID, I am dubious as to whether any of those products will be Immortals Tier rules.

Whats more likely is that I'll crack on with some Epic Tier adventures and maybe an Epic Tier Bestiary.

In fairness I should have just done an Epic Tier Bestiary for 4E from the start. The tier is really undersupported.

If 5th Edition comes out and its an improvement, then I may eventually change over. But I get the impression that there will be no Epic Level support for 5E from the start and that such a thing will come a further 18-24 months down the line after 5E is released.

Mr.Satan said:

The abilities you're thinking of are Maven and Omnicompetent.

Click to expand...

If you'll read my post more carefully, you'll notice that I specifically mentioned both of those by name.

Mr.Satan said:

Maven grants free skill ranks in all your skills and cross class skills up to their maximum ranks attainable.

Omnicompetent grants you all skills as class skills, rather than have some skills being cross-class skills.

Click to expand...

Thank you. This tells me that Omnicompetent was specifically the one I was thinking of.

Mr.Satan said:

This is quite a bit different from what you're thinking of.

Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Under the 3.X rules, the difference between class skills and cross-class skills was that every skill point spent on a class skill got you 1 skill rank, whereas every skill point spent on a cross-class skill got you 0.5 skill ranks. Omnicompetent changes the equation so that all skills will suddenly give you 1 skill rank for each 1 skill point spent, no matter which class you actually level-up in. This is precisely what Pathfinder does with skills- every skill point spent gets you 1 skill rank, regardless of whether it happens to be class skill or cross-class. Effectively, every single skill is now a class skill- when compared against 3.X.

Under Pathfinder rules, of course, every class skill now gives you a +3 competence bonus if you have at least 1 rank in it, but this is immaterial to how the Omnicompetent ability worked under 3.X rules.

Mr.Satan said:

Personally, I take bits and pieces from Pathfinder and use 3.5 rules for the most part, but I do like the Pathfinder classes and domains.

Click to expand...

I've delved quite deeply into PF rules, in my quest to update my old 3.X setting to use them. I'm quite happy to leave 3.X stuff behind, myself, and use PF only. But that's me.

paradox42 said:

If you'll read my post more carefully, you'll notice that I specifically mentioned both of those by name.

Click to expand...

I did notice. I was confirming your belief.

paradox42 said:

Thank you. This tells me that Omnicompetent was specifically the one I was thinking of.

Click to expand...

See above...

paradox42 said:

No, it isn't. Under the 3.X rules, the difference between class skills and cross-class skills was that every skill point spent on a class skill got you 1 skill rank, whereas every skill point spent on a cross-class skill got you 0.5 skill ranks. Omnicompetent changes the equation so that all skills will suddenly give you 1 skill rank for each 1 skill point spent, no matter which class you actually level-up in. This is precisely what Pathfinder does with skills- every skill point spent gets you 1 skill rank, regardless of whether it happens to be class skill or cross-class. Effectively, every single skill is now a class skill- when compared against 3.X.

Click to expand...

Actually...it is different. The divine ability Maven gives you free skill ranks. This means you don't have to purchase them at all. The system you refer to requires you to still purchase them. :\

Omnicompetent is similar, however, because it converts all your cross-class skills to class skills.

I think we're agreeing on things, but seeing them from different angles.

paradox42 said:

Under Pathfinder rules, of course, every class skill now gives you a +3 competence bonus if you have at least 1 rank in it, but this is immaterial to how the Omnicompetent ability worked under 3.X rules.

Click to expand...

Yes.

paradox42 said:

I've delved quite deeply into PF rules, in my quest to update my old 3.X setting to use them. I'm quite happy to leave 3.X stuff behind, myself, and use PF only. But that's me.

Click to expand...

I'd do the same, but there are classes that I just can't live without. Many 3.5 classes and prestige classes are so beautifully suited to my purposes.

Upper_Krust said:

Hi Pssthpok mate!



I think D&D definately needs a simplification to be more accessible. I think with 4E they got the monsters right, but the PC side of things needs to be simplified.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Instead of having a laundry list of powers (12 pages for the Fighter with 77 power choices not counting Paragon Paths even) they should have instead done something like the following:

[...]

So there is about 10 pages of text from the 4E Fighters section condensed down to about 1/2 a page.

For Wizards you could have a different set of modifiers affecting Range, Area size etc.

This way you don't need pages upon pages for each class. You just need a few lines of text.

Click to expand...

That would have alleviated a lot of my early gripe with 4E martial classes. The possibility of feats or "subclasses" affecting those modifiers is also enticing.

Even an updated version of the Epic Bestiary with maybe double the monsters would have been cool.

Click to expand...

As long as you included your typical transparent take on monster design and all that, yeah. I still have the hardcover Bestiary from the 3.5 days - that thing was very useful at the level our campaign crested before 4E took the wind out of our sails.

You're probably right, it did nothing to help 3E epic.

Click to expand...

Well, it did nothing to help 3E, period. Grapple and polymorph were cleaned up, but otherwise all I saw were mechanical tweaks - nothing very bold or creative - and cosmetic tweaks - classes were somewhat different, but again nothing bold or challenging to a 3E veteran.

Someone else this thread tried to challenge me on this, but he's entitled to his opinion. I don't really care if he liked PF or whatever. The fact is, it's 3E run through a strainer and redyed. It's nothing new, and it didn't revitalize the core engine of the 3E game.

Maybe who knows. If they just take the modular approach I suggested above then you could simplify ALL classes down to 1 page of text.

Click to expand...

I'd be down with that. I like a good bit of crunch, but something being complicated and something being complex are two different things. I always appreciated your ability to make things complex without it being too complicated.

Right now, I'm betting that 5E will be a bit like the old Players Option series, where each class has about 3-6 pages and each player picks X# of rules, maybe weighed against each other or something, and that's that.

I was reluctant to think WotC could live up to their claim, but the more I think about it, the more I think I could probably live up to it.