Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder overhaul suggestions, pt. 2

[Scott DeWar]

I just wamt to say that i am now getting the feel of the conflict of "buffs in conflict".

tonight our table top game had an encounter where my lv 6 transmuter / fighter (headed toward swiftblade) had his transmutation specialist ability of phisical atribute enhancement stacked with cats grace and bulls strength. i pretty much need a chart showing str and dex effects on a/c, weapons (melee and ranged) skills, weight capacity, ability mod CMB and reflex saves. then i would have to show the information for each permutation. As he has practiced caster, he gets to stack fighter and wizard levels for cater level. in short, this chart is goiing to have a lot of information showing the verious possibilities. if i get a dispel cas on me, that would mean i would have to refrence to the chart...yadda yadda yadda.

You guys have covered all of what i had to deal with in your previous posts. I just want to say that what every can be justifiably decided upon, Kudos to you for the work in advance. I thank you.

 

[Hella_Tellah]

You mention doing away with body slots altogether, then later say that this spell slots rule could co-exist side by side. I don't understand that dichotomy.

I just mean that, while I don't really care for body slots, there's no reason you couldn't use both rules if you like. I'm fine with a player wearing 10 rings, 8 amulets, a shirt and a vest together, or whatever, as long as it isn't too silly. No wearing two pairs of boots, for instance.

It would certainly change the dynamics between sorcerors and wizards, too. Sorcerors great strength is lots of on-the-fly spells, while the wizards strength is variety. Using this system, would you arrange for sorcerors to be able to handle more or less spell slots?

Maybe so, but I think it's more a matter of spell selection than which classes you look at. Clerics and Druids tend to have more "buffs" up, and Druids often have many more summons, so it's probably more of a restriction on those classes than on arcanists. Hey, there's a nice, unintended consequence: it restricts the Druid's "menagerie"!

I'm not sure what the best number of Spells Active would be, though, so I'll have to give it a test run. I think we'll have the "sweet spot" for Spells Active is when every caster wants just one or two more. I'm running Mage right now, though, so I won't have a chance to try it for a while.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I have always wished for a system that would incorporate that ... battle of wills (wisdom bonus) and knowledge of arce (spell craft and or knowledge:arcane) opposed check.

Use Opposed DS rules (OGC) from Tournaments, Fairs, and Taverns.


RC

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

The Dispel Magic issue seems to boil down to two things - its too complex, and its not necessarily all that fun. The two are related, of course.

How about something that treats Dispel Magic similarly to Dispel Evil, with smattering of the Shield spell? For example - you cast the spell, and it last X amount of time; during that time, you have a bonus to AC and saves versus spells; you can counterspell more easily while this spell is up, and if you need to you can dispel a spell that is targeting you, or that you can touch by expending the magic, as per Dispel Evil.

Thoughts?

 

[tomBitonti]

This might seem too simple, but for War of the Burning Sky, our counterspell-themed inquisitors could cast counterspells as an immediate reaction, but whenever they did they gave up their standard action in their next round. Say it's from 'fatigue' or something.

Ninja!

That's my "committed action" (but it sounds like Magic of Faerun got there first, anyways).

Seems to me that with the adoption of discrete and cyclic initiative, there wasn't a full analysis of what should be allowed.

If your action is on initiative 15, and mine is on initiative 5, seems to me that half of your action overlaps mine.

So why can't I react to your action with a standard or move equivalent action ... with the consequence that my initial action in my subsequent turn must be what I just did?

I call that a "committed action", and I think that it would handle reactive actions pretty well. (That is, for both attacks of opportunity and for counterspells.)

As far as the idea of intercepting a cast spell, I pretty much like the idea of allowing any spell slot to be converted to a counterspell, with modifications for:

*) Countering using a prepared Counterspell: Bonus
*) Countering using a prepared opposing spell: Bonus
*) Countering with anything else: Penalty
*) Difference in caster level: Penalty/Bonus
*) Difference in spell slot: Penalty/Bonus
*) Caster Affinity: Penalty/Bonus (e.g., a Fire Mage countering a FireBall)

I also think that for a Concentration spell, the act of countering is ongoing, and as long as the counter result was not high enough (in either direction) then the spell is "still being cast", and both casters must make concentration checks to continue the attempt to cast/attempt to counter the spell.

Other effects seem interesting, such as being able to "pull" a spell onto yourself, or to cause a spell to be grounded, or for there to be damage, stun, or pushback depending on the counter result.

Thx!

TomB

 

[Kerrick]

The Dispel Magic issue seems to boil down to two things - its too complex, and its not necessarily all that fun. The two are related, of course.

How about something that treats Dispel Magic similarly to Dispel Evil, with smattering of the Shield spell? For example - you cast the spell, and it last X amount of time; during that time, you have a bonus to AC and saves versus spells; you can counterspell more easily while this spell is up, and if you need to you can dispel a spell that is targeting you, or that you can touch by expending the magic, as per Dispel Evil.

Thoughts?

Very interesting. Back in 1E, in the module C5 Bane of Llewellyn, the PCs get a divine aura of sorts right before a battle with demons; it gives them a bonus to AC/saves, but if the demon hits them, it must make a save or be blasted back to the Abyss. I made a spell out of it for 3.5 and a variant fire shield called elemental shield; it grants a bonus to saves vs. the opposing element and reduced damage, or you could end the spell early by channeling the energy into a specific spell effect.

Effectively, the "bonus to AC and saves" is SR, so you could have it grant whatever SR, which stacks with existing SR.