DaveMage
Slumbering in Tsar
I'm pretty sure those are gone. I will verify when I get home.
Pathfinder 1E [Pathfinder] Well done, Paizo! (Pathfinder RPG)
- Thread starter DaveMage
- Start date
I'm pretty sure those are gone. I will verify when I get home.
Synchronicity
First Post
I can verify that paladin and monk multiclassing restrictions are now gone.
Jadeite
Hero
Lawful Bards are now allowed, but rounds per day was one of the changing the final made to the beta (which had the same songs per day as 3.0/3.5).
Because the Bard class totally needed a nerf. *sigh* Yeah, Pathfinder is definitely not for me.
(In every campaign I've been in, the rounds per day thing is a massive nerf. YMMV, but for me, ugh. We tend to drop quickly to 3 players + DM, fight multiple enemies at once and have drawn-out fights, and we're not optimizers so we don't have one-round combats. Level times a day, as long as you sustain it and five rounds after that works in that situation. Rounds per day does not. Ick. Nice job on a method for it that only works for certain kinds of groups. *facepalm*)
Nellisir
Hero
Or just, y'know, get your DM to ignore it. If it's that much of a nerf, I would certainly consider it. I'd at least try it.
Herremann the Wise
First Post
Got my copy this morning and have to say, what a damn fine effort from Paizo!
The quality of production for such a large book is excellent. You can turn it to any page lying flat on a table without it flipping over. The art is excellent and the setting out is crisp, clear and exactly what you would expect.
I think it would be interesting to create a document listing all changes from the PHB 3.5 to the Pathfinder Rules, based on the setting out of the PHB 3.5. This would be an exceptional resource! [I might look at starting something like this up myself]
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
The quality of production for such a large book is excellent. You can turn it to any page lying flat on a table without it flipping over. The art is excellent and the setting out is crisp, clear and exactly what you would expect.
I think it would be interesting to create a document listing all changes from the PHB 3.5 to the Pathfinder Rules, based on the setting out of the PHB 3.5. This would be an exceptional resource! [I might look at starting something like this up myself]
Obviously heh. You can't houserule this back in? Does the success or otherwise of Pathfinder with you and your group depend purely upon this particular rule interpretation of the Bard? I'm assuming not but if so, that's crazy. From what I can see, the Bard gets really nicely rounded out. Lots of flavour, and lots of things to enable the use of those abilities. Perhaps you should look at the whole package first before judging?
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
I searched the PDF. No sign of such a restriction existing any longer. It's very streamlined: do what you want. You'll still have to meet alignment requirements, but otherwise it looks good to go.
I've read the other bard abilities. Most of them do nothing at all for me, are largely variants, or are meh.
Most of Pathfinder is meh to me honestly. The changes do not at all fix what I hate about 3.5, so it's already missing the boat for me. The 'derp' thing with my favourite class is kind of the 'oh give me a break' straw though.
And sure, it could be houseruled. Several problems with that, though:
1. If I'm the player, I have to convince the DM of this and why it's a good idea. I have yet to have a DM who didn't hate bards, my first DM decided that Inspire Courage took a Standard action *each round*. So I'm not liking my chances on that.
2. If I'm the DM... Wait that's not going to happen because from what I can tell Pathfinder hasn't made DMing any less miserable than 3.5 was.
3. If I'm at the point of houseruling major class features, I'm at the point of looking for a system that does what I want better anyway.
Also, a small group of non-optimized characters fighting larger, longer battles is hardly a corner case, or at least no more of a corner case than the large group of heavily-optimized characters fighting single-round battles against one or two monsters.
In fact, Pathfinder's way is worse because while the old system works for *both* cases, the new one only works for the second case. Five or six round battles that are one of several such in a day where we're dungeon crawling is common for me. Say I'm a L6 Bard. Old system, I can perform for all of the four or five battles we're in. Hell, if I go down they've still got several rounds to finish it off before it wears off. New system, 17 rounds == Three and a half battles, assuming an average of five rounds and 16 starting CHA. 18 starting CHA gives me a whopping one extra round.
Now say this is Munchkin McPowergamerLand and we've got six people, all optimized to the hilt, and we rip through four battles a day at L6 in one round each. Both systems here work out exactly the same. Actually unless I win init it's almost pointless for me either way.
Now at L1 this is probably better since, yeah, one use of music is one fight and seven rounds will probably get you two easy early-level fights. But past L3 or so? (And most campaigns I've been in past the first one didn't start at L1, either. 6 or 7 is common. The one other one we did start at L1 was d20 Deadlands rather than D&D so it wasn't even the same classes anyway.)
The old way covers all gaming situations. The new way does not. *shrug*
Does not work for me, as I said before, YMMV, but for me it's yuck and one more reason to just stick with the houseruled version of 3.5 we were already using. (Which has an even more pared-down skill system than Pathfinder, and stole 4e's save attributes to help compensate for how god-awful 3.5's save system is, something Pathfinder doesn't even adress. So we learn a new system, have to houserule it anyway, the 'improvements' are debatable... No thanks. Not for me, not for them either because they wouldn't want to learn all the little changes.)
Assuming anyone can even get me to play 3.5 again in the first place. 4e Bards do Bard so much better for me than 3.x ever did it's not even funny. Hell, 4e *Swordmages* do Bard better for me.
I had kind of hoped that Pathfinder's Bard might get me onto it again since my usual group won't even *read* 4e, let alone play it, but nope. No such look. Not for me. Enjoy it if it works for you, but I'll pass.
Most of Pathfinder is meh to me honestly. The changes do not at all fix what I hate about 3.5, so it's already missing the boat for me. The 'derp' thing with my favourite class is kind of the 'oh give me a break' straw though.
And sure, it could be houseruled. Several problems with that, though:
1. If I'm the player, I have to convince the DM of this and why it's a good idea. I have yet to have a DM who didn't hate bards, my first DM decided that Inspire Courage took a Standard action *each round*. So I'm not liking my chances on that.
2. If I'm the DM... Wait that's not going to happen because from what I can tell Pathfinder hasn't made DMing any less miserable than 3.5 was.
3. If I'm at the point of houseruling major class features, I'm at the point of looking for a system that does what I want better anyway.
Also, a small group of non-optimized characters fighting larger, longer battles is hardly a corner case, or at least no more of a corner case than the large group of heavily-optimized characters fighting single-round battles against one or two monsters.
In fact, Pathfinder's way is worse because while the old system works for *both* cases, the new one only works for the second case. Five or six round battles that are one of several such in a day where we're dungeon crawling is common for me. Say I'm a L6 Bard. Old system, I can perform for all of the four or five battles we're in. Hell, if I go down they've still got several rounds to finish it off before it wears off. New system, 17 rounds == Three and a half battles, assuming an average of five rounds and 16 starting CHA. 18 starting CHA gives me a whopping one extra round.
Now say this is Munchkin McPowergamerLand and we've got six people, all optimized to the hilt, and we rip through four battles a day at L6 in one round each. Both systems here work out exactly the same. Actually unless I win init it's almost pointless for me either way.
Now at L1 this is probably better since, yeah, one use of music is one fight and seven rounds will probably get you two easy early-level fights. But past L3 or so? (And most campaigns I've been in past the first one didn't start at L1, either. 6 or 7 is common. The one other one we did start at L1 was d20 Deadlands rather than D&D so it wasn't even the same classes anyway.)
The old way covers all gaming situations. The new way does not. *shrug*
Does not work for me, as I said before, YMMV, but for me it's yuck and one more reason to just stick with the houseruled version of 3.5 we were already using. (Which has an even more pared-down skill system than Pathfinder, and stole 4e's save attributes to help compensate for how god-awful 3.5's save system is, something Pathfinder doesn't even adress. So we learn a new system, have to houserule it anyway, the 'improvements' are debatable... No thanks. Not for me, not for them either because they wouldn't want to learn all the little changes.)
Assuming anyone can even get me to play 3.5 again in the first place. 4e Bards do Bard so much better for me than 3.x ever did it's not even funny. Hell, 4e *Swordmages* do Bard better for me.
I had kind of hoped that Pathfinder's Bard might get me onto it again since my usual group won't even *read* 4e, let alone play it, but nope. No such look. Not for me. Enjoy it if it works for you, but I'll pass.
