What Would You Like To See In Pathfinder Future?

Fuente:

http://tenletter.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/what-would-you-like-to-see-in-pathfinder-future/

Información:

10 July 2009

What Would You Like To See In Pathfinder Future?

Filed under: Dungeons and Dragons, game design, rpg — Tags: future, pathfinder, roleplaying — trashcondor @ 2:27 pm

Over at Paizo I saw a rather active forum thread covering the desired future of Pathfinder rules.

Many people request rules for psionics, for example, or epic-level rules.

Personally I would favor an extensive expansion on the existing core classes. More options on how I can play my rogue, monk, fighter, etc. Here’s a short list of possibilities I think would add a lot:

• Barbarians: more rage powers, ability to “dex-rage” (frenzy) instead of normal rage
• Bards: more bardic performances, and ability to ignore arcane spell progression in favor of divine spell progression (possibly bagging a domain in the process)
• Clerics: move away from good/evil dichotomy; option to reduce spells known and progression in favor of casting spontaneously (like a sorcerer) (yes, essentially a Pathfinder variant of the Favored Soul)
• Druids: option to replace wild shape with having a beast bloodline
• Fighters: optional “training” variants, instead of armor and weapon training – have options to have “war training”, “officer training”, “movement training”, “maneuver training”, etc instead
• Monks: more ki powers, option to have Intelligence (Kung Fu Genius) or Charisma (Fighting Spirit) based monk bonuses (rather than Wisdom based)
• Paladins: option to give up high BAB progression to gain more abilities to powerup the party as a whole (similar to the Bard and Marshal classes); option to give up some benefit to gain paladin spells from level 1 onward
• Rangers: more combat styles (for example “Skirmish”), option to give up some benefit to gain ranger spells from level 1 onward
• Rogues: option to give up sneak attack, but gain spell-casting as a sorcerer of level equal to the sneak attack (i.e. 10d6 sneak attack = cast spells as a 10th level sorcerer)
• Sorcerers: more bloodlines (additionally expand spells and bloodlines to include “psionic” flavored ones)
• Wizards: more schools (additionally expand spells and schools to include “psionic” flavored ones)

Thoughts and comments?

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Patch 3.2 T9 set bonuses and relics

Comments (4)

1. 

   Well, I don’t agree with all your suggestions, but some, I do like.

   Not like:

   Paladin – Just reflavour cleric.
   Wizard/Sorceror – Just make psions and include options for reflavouring to wizards/sorcerors.

   Like:

   Rogue – Check out this psionic rogue variant: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040723b
   Bard – Yes!

   Many of these suggestions saw light in 3.X, often as separate classes. I am undecided as to whether it’s better to have variant classes or completely separate classes.

   Comment by jatori — 10 July 2009 @ 3:07 pm

   Reply
2. 

   [quote]Many of these suggestions saw light in 3.X, often as separate classes. I am undecided as to whether it’s better to have variant classes or completely separate classes.[/quote]

   I think creating a greater range of possibilities within the classes is the best option. Imagine having 3 different alternate class features to choose from for your Rogue – each sacrificing a different benefit to gain new abilities. This allows the customization of your hero beyond just the obvious feats. If some of the choices expand to the point where they may be chosen at multiple levels rather than once-off: the more the better.

   For example: a fighter would be great if instead of “armor training” I could choose “maneuver training”. But this choice shouldn’t just be available once. Each time the fighter would gain “armor training” I would like to be able to chose to gain armor training, or maneuver training instead.

   And with respect to multiple alternate class abilities: imagine a rogue that gives up sneak-attack to gain arcane spell progression, gives up trap sense in favor of lock sense, and chooses to forego rogue talents in favor of increasing BAB progression to that of a fighters.

   I think this should be possible, and (in fact) desirable.

   Comment by trashcondor — 10 July 2009 @ 4:55 pm

   Reply
3. 

   I really like all of your class variations based on different stats than the standard. It allows for a great deal of tailoring in the build and role play options of the PC.

   Comment by Doug Daulton — 10 July 2009 @ 7:17 pm

   Reply

4. [...] abilities: Barbarian Filed under: Uncategorized — trashcondor @ 11:42 pm In a recent post I discussed potential development for future class rules within the Pathfinder rules framework. One [...]

   Pingback by Alternate abilities: Barbarian « tenletter — 11 July 2009 @ 11:42 pm

   Reply