Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Bad Axe Games Hosted Forum
[SPELLS and MAGIC] Design Discussion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 5080263" data-attributes="member: 94"><p>They should be one in the same. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I know you do. If PF was consistent in the way that it preserves the niche of spellcasters, while ostensibly bringing mechanical balance, I'd understand that more. So your players will complain that <em>spider climb</em> doesn't let you climb like a spider, but no complaint that <em>finger of death</em> doesn't actually kill you, and no comment at all on the fact that <em>flesh to stone </em>works just like it always did.</p><p></p><p>But back to the point: How did Pathfinder change the RAW for Climbing?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I'm not. If you care to make changes to the RAW to explore the different flavors in which creatures real and fantastic climb, do so. I personally don't see a need for a separate mechanic to describe the way in which spiders, monkeys, oozes, or even snakes may traverse a wall. </p><p></p><p>If we're going to pick nits then you and I both know there's a distinct difference between the way that 6" spiders crawl across a ceiling and 40-foot spiders crawl across a ceiling-- which is to say, of course, not at all.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is an accurate description of the difference between the spell <em>spider climb </em>and the way that the rules dictate that spiders (and monkeys) actually Climb.</p><p></p><p>Under the RAW, the spell makes the subject a <strong><em>better </em></strong>climber than a spider.</p><p></p><p>Does Pathfinder bring that text into the spider description? (My review of the online PF-SRD says no.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Uhh... why not? I guess that's the part I'm not following here. I don't know what rules you're using. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've not looked at its intended level. That discussion has nothing to do with unity of mechanics. Whatever it is that the spell does (or ends up doing) it will certainly be the case that a character trained in Climbing will be better with the spell than without, and better than an untrained climber without. The untrained climber might be better than the trained character depending on what bonus the spell grants.</p><p></p><p>I suppose technically this falls under the purview of "fewer absolutes." Rather than have the spells instantly transport the subject to "infinitely good," a point at which all subjects are equal, I would prefer the spells work within the existing d20 system and-- regardless of what crazy bonuses they end up granting-- <em>preserve </em>the skill gap between the trained and untrained.</p><p></p><p>Yes, even if it is largely negligible in most circumstances. </p><p></p><p>It should be easier to bull rush the spider climbing wizard off the wall than it is to do the same thing to the rogue who has a +15 head start on climbing.</p><p></p><p>Clear?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dude. Deep breath. You're ranting. </p><p></p><p>I don't have a nerf agenda. If the necessary baseline is that wizards are really really good with their spells, my goal is that rogues would be really really really good with spells.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 5080263, member: 94"] They should be one in the same. I know you do. If PF was consistent in the way that it preserves the niche of spellcasters, while ostensibly bringing mechanical balance, I'd understand that more. So your players will complain that [I]spider climb[/I] doesn't let you climb like a spider, but no complaint that [I]finger of death[/I] doesn't actually kill you, and no comment at all on the fact that [I]flesh to stone [/I]works just like it always did. But back to the point: How did Pathfinder change the RAW for Climbing? No, I'm not. If you care to make changes to the RAW to explore the different flavors in which creatures real and fantastic climb, do so. I personally don't see a need for a separate mechanic to describe the way in which spiders, monkeys, oozes, or even snakes may traverse a wall. If we're going to pick nits then you and I both know there's a distinct difference between the way that 6" spiders crawl across a ceiling and 40-foot spiders crawl across a ceiling-- which is to say, of course, not at all. That is an accurate description of the difference between the spell [I]spider climb [/I]and the way that the rules dictate that spiders (and monkeys) actually Climb. Under the RAW, the spell makes the subject a [B][I]better [/I][/B]climber than a spider. Does Pathfinder bring that text into the spider description? (My review of the online PF-SRD says no.) Uhh... why not? I guess that's the part I'm not following here. I don't know what rules you're using. I've not looked at its intended level. That discussion has nothing to do with unity of mechanics. Whatever it is that the spell does (or ends up doing) it will certainly be the case that a character trained in Climbing will be better with the spell than without, and better than an untrained climber without. The untrained climber might be better than the trained character depending on what bonus the spell grants. I suppose technically this falls under the purview of "fewer absolutes." Rather than have the spells instantly transport the subject to "infinitely good," a point at which all subjects are equal, I would prefer the spells work within the existing d20 system and-- regardless of what crazy bonuses they end up granting-- [I]preserve [/I]the skill gap between the trained and untrained. Yes, even if it is largely negligible in most circumstances. It should be easier to bull rush the spider climbing wizard off the wall than it is to do the same thing to the rogue who has a +15 head start on climbing. Clear? Dude. Deep breath. You're ranting. I don't have a nerf agenda. If the necessary baseline is that wizards are really really good with their spells, my goal is that rogues would be really really really good with spells. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Bad Axe Games Hosted Forum
[SPELLS and MAGIC] Design Discussion
Top