[Pathfinder] Burnt Offerings

[CanadienneBacon]

CB, on Paizo's website there's a whole book...an alternate 3.5e PHB basically...that details the Pathfinder rules, which are basically 3.5e rules with some tweaks...though in some cases fairly significant tweaks.

Thank you for the prompt head's up. I'll download the free version and will give it a cursory look, but reading through an entire rules supplement may prove to be outside the scope of what I willing to attempt for this game. I've time today to do this task and will do so right away, so you may expect a firm yes or no on the Pathfinder beta rules from me within a few hours.

 

[Ambrus]

A PC blatantly visible as a dragon probably wouldn't mesh well with the setting, but a PC either fully dragon yet able to totally conceal his or her dragon features, or with partial (well-concealed) dragon traits might prove interesting.

Hm. An interesting challenge build-wise. Golds, silvers and bronzes eventually gain the ability to assume alternate forms and so can pass as humanoids and animals, but those only kick in at higher levels; 4th at the earliest IIRC. There are some classes' special abilities that could also disguise a dragon, but again those would only kick in at later levels.

Another disguise option would be to use a magic item. A hat of disguise could probably change the appearance of a quadruped dragon (with its wings folded tightly along its back) sufficiently for it to pass as a cat if tiny-sized, a dog if small-sized or a riding dog if medium-sized. Naturally PCs don't normally start with such expensive items (a hat of disguise costs 1,800 gp), but it could be on loan; perhaps from a distant parent's hoard or a from a friendly and helpful religious or arcane institution in the vicinity. The hat's cost could be later reimbursed with the proceeds from adventuring.

Aside from that, the only suggestion I could offer to salvage the concept would be to try a stealth approach. That could be accomplished either through endeavoring to keep out of sight of the populace at large or by instilling false assumptions in the same. The former approach would likely involve playing a very small dragon (like a tiny-sized copper) and by hiding most of time; perhaps by nesting in another PC's backpack when out and about. The latter approach could be accomplished by trying to pass as a wizard/sorcerer PC's exotic familiar or pet.

Let me know if any of this sounds interesting/workable for you.

 

[Rhun]

Thank you for the prompt head's up. I'll download the free version and will give it a cursory look, but reading through an entire rules supplement may prove to be outside the scope of what I willing to attempt for this game. I've time today to do this task and will do so right away, so you may expect a firm yes or no on the Pathfinder beta rules from me within a few hours.

As someone who just barely designed their first Pathfinder PC using the Beta (for a game of Renau1g's actually), I can say that while it isn't TOO different from 3.x rules, there are quite a few changed in how things are done. Character design took quite a bit longer. I haven't seen all the other changes in actual play yet. What I have seen of the rules I do like though.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

Ambrus -- a reimbursable hat of disguise is acceptable. Passing a tiny or small-sized metallic dragon off as a knight's cohort or as a wizard's familiar might also work, plus anytime I can foster bonds between players that are likely to result in stronger ties to the game and steady posting, I'm happy to do so. Having a non-disguised dragon hide is probably the least attractive option from both a DM and a Player standpoint--you'd be too far from the action and neither of us would be likely to enjoy the work associated with distant affiliation to the main party. Likewise, the other players would probably prefer that all players be present within the party.

I'd like to know what class you're considering, though.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

I'm skimming the 410-pg Pathfinder Rulebook Beta Playtest ruleset right now and am up to pg 14. I note several key differences already: point-buy creation, racial ability score modifiers, and class features.

There's no way to make both the 3.5 PHB and the Pathfinder beta rules compatibile with one another in terms of character creation; it seems to me that a person choses one or the other but not both as allowable sourcebooks during character creation. I therefore pose the question to you lot--which book do you prefer to use when you sit down to create your character?

 

[Ambrus]

A dragon PC, as with all monster progressions, doesn't normally have any class. Heh heh...

"Dragon" is its class; it gains hit dice, BAB and save increases, skill points, feats and its more racial draconic abilities as it increases in level. What it gains and at which level depends on the chosen subrace. A 1st level dragon PC normally has a 1d12 hit dice, +1 BAB, +2 to all saves and one bite attack (dealing damage according to its size). Spell-like abilities, breath weapons, additional attacks and flight are gained incrementally at later levels. The option to multiclass into other base classes only arises when the dragon PC reaches certain benchmark levels (i.e. those levels at which it's in sync with the Monster Manual's standard array of abilities for a dragon of a given age category (i.e. wymling, juvenile, very young, etc).

So, for example, a 6th level bronze dragon might first reach the status of wyrmling and then, upon reaching 7th level have the option to continue advancing as a bronze dragon or to multiclass into some other base class, such as paladin or cleric. If it chooses to continue on as a bronze dragon it won't again gain the option to multiclass until it reaches 12th level, at which point it'll be a very young bronze dragon.

If you want to know what role a dragon fulfills within the party, in my experience most dragons are much like rangers; they serve well as stealthy scouts and mobile dual-wielding melee fighters.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

"Dragon" is its class [...] If you want to know what role a dragon fulfills within the party, in my experience most dragons are much like rangers; they serve well as stealthy scouts and mobile dual-wielding melee fighters.

I'm clearer now on what you're interested in playing, which is a good thing. I hadn't been certain whether you wanted to play a full-on dragon or one of the dragon-kin races I've seen in various supplements. I'm going to put you on hold for the moment while I read through the enormity that is the Pathfinder beta ruleset, and field questions from others. Whether a dragon PC fits in with the party will largely depend upon what other character concepts the others float my way and whether I think I can feasibly work in a dragon into the game. I'm not opposed to the idea, I just want to get a feel for what other concepts are presented. The fastest way I can think to kill a game (other than DM absenteeism) is for players and/or their characters not to get along. Party and player chemistry is a key issue.

 

[Shayuri]

Well, I'm open to either 3.5 or Pathfinder, though I find Pathfinder a bit more interesting...perhaps because it's still somewhat novel.

If you chose 3.5e though, I would probably change my character pitch however. My goal with a sorceror was to see how it played in Pathfinder, where the rules are significantly different for that class. Sorcerors starting at level 1 in PBP tend to take a loooooong time to really flower, due to the very limited spell selection and complete absence of any other class abilities.

Going from level 1 to 4 in a PBP can literally take a year or more of gaming, and then you get a grand total of 1 2nd level spell.

That said, the game still seems neat, and you seem like an attentive and well-written GM, so I'd still be interested in playing.

 

[Ambrus]

Yeah, I meant an honest to goodness metallic dragon; that creature of legend with the biting teeth, rending claws, armored flesh, eldritch breath and virtuous heart. That's why I appreciate Dragon Magazine #320; it finally gave players the option to dispense with those wannabe dragon-kin poseurs and play a real dragon.

I understand that dragon PCs aren't everyone's cup of tea, though neither are gnomes oddly enough. So, no problem. I'll stay tuned to see which way the wind blows. If it doesn't work out perhaps I'll pitch a different concept. Thanks for the consideration.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

I've skimmed the Pathfinder beta ruleset.

For ability points, race/class, and skills/feats during character creation, we can use either the 3.5 PHB or the Pathfinder beta ruleset, but not both. For equipment, combat, and spells and magic, we can probably overlay one supplement upon the other and continue to use both, but if the consensus is to incorporate both, I will more than likely stipulate a preference for one book over the other so that we may base the game on firmer footing.

I'm still in the process of making up my mind on the subject of whether or not to hold fast with the 3.5 PHB or run with the beta ruleset, so now's the time for you to speak up with your preference. Happy contented players make for better gaming for everyone, so player preference will certainly receive heavy consideration. I'll check back in late this evening to tally opinions. There's no sense in letting the decision linger longer than that, not if we wish to commence play in any reasonable time frame.