A Paladin's Fall

My paladin had taken a vow of celibacy. Not the feat from the “Book of Exalted Deeds,” mind you. It was simply something my character had done in-character, with no mechanical benefit. The villain in this particular campaign was an enchantress. It was a lame self-insert character by our GM, but the group tried to put up with it. In our last session I got separated from the rest of the party while we were hunting the enchantress. She jumped out at me, and cast Dominate Person. Once I failed my saving throw, and was under her power, she tried to seduce me. I told the GM that, since this was against my nature as a celibate man, I ought to get a new saving throw at a +2 bonus to resist. Do you know what she said to me?

“Deep down, all men just want to have sex with women, no matter what they say.”

She denied me the right to a new saving throw, and went on to describe my character and her’s having sex. Once she was done, she said that since I had broken my vow of celibacy, I lost all of my paladin powers.

So how can I get back at her for this?

-Paraphrased from a tale told by one of the Anon’s on /tg/.

Every gamer knows the rules. A paladin swears an oath. That oath demands that they do good, and fight evil. Any paladin who willfully breaks their oath will be forsaken by the gods who grant them their holy might. Their powers will be stripped from them, and they will go from being one of the most powerful melee combat classes, to being a fighter without any bonus feats. This fall from grace leaves the Paladin next to useless; worse than that: it represents a fundamental failure of the paladin to uphold the ideals to which they’ve committed their lives. It’s the kind of life-shattering failure which might actually make a person consider becoming a blackguard.

Playing a paladin means holding your character to a higher moral standard. Those who play the class take on an additional challenge for themselves. Not only must they survive the dungeon, save the captives, defeat the villains, and recover the treasure; they must do it all without compromising an ironclad code of ethics. I’ve written in the past about how I believe a Paladin should be played. In my next two posts, I’d like to discuss how I believe a game master should handle a paladin character. Because, after all, what is the purpose of a GM if not to challenge his or her players?

It’s always dangerous to generalize, but I think it’s safe to say that most players who play paladins want to feel noble. They want to feel as though they are the righteous fist of their god, meting out justice one moment, and mercy the next. In other words, people who play paladins want to feel like they’re playing a paladin. And as GMs, it’s our duty to facilitate an environment where they can feel that way. But we can’t simply hand it to them, any more than we can hand out free experience or treasure. We can try to, but when we hand rewards to our players for free, all we accomplish is diminishing the value those rewards have in our players’ eyes. If being an upright defender of all that is good and true is never difficult, then how can it be interesting?

But there is a danger in constructing this manner of challenge. Far too many GMs approach it as a question of how they can make a paladin fall, rather than asking how they can challenge their player. The example at the start of this post is obviously an extreme case. That GM is not only a bad at running a game, but is a pretty awful person to boot. It’s not an isolated case, though. If you’ve spent any time on gaming forums I imagine you know what I’m talking about. Complaints of game masters who force a paladin character to fall are disturbingly common. Sometimes spells such as Dominate Person are involved. Other times, the paladin is put into a situation where they’re forced to commit an evil act by circumstance. Still other times, a paladin falls for doing something the player didn’t even realize they could fall for—something a strict interpretation of the rules would not indicate they should fall for. Regardless of the exact method involved, all of these cases have the same root cause: a really terrible game master.

So the question becomes, “How do we challenge a paladin’s morals, without crossing the line into shitty game mastering?” And for that, I’ve come up with four possibilities.

Make evil the most obvious option. For any given problem, there are numerous solutions. But there will always be on solution which is most obvious. Someone without imagination might not even be able to think of another solution—but a paladin does not have the luxury of lacking an imagination. When the mind-controlled peasants have the players cornered, the rest of the party may give up and choose to kill the poor dominated folk. But the paladin must stand firm, and notice that the wall is weak enough to smash through, or that the second floor balcony is within jumping distance, or that the gem hanging from the chandelier is glowing the same color as the villager’s eyes.

Make evil the easiest option. Even when non-evil options are apparent, they may not always be easy. When the chaotic neutral bandits surrender, it would be easy to simply slay them, or to bind them and let the wolves have them. But a paladin cannot injure a foe who has yielded, not even indirectly. The paladin must make some manner of accommodation, whether it be taking them all the way back to the last town to face judgment, or placing a Mark of Justice spell on them.

Make evil the recommended option. Most often, the options available to a group of characters are implicit. The GM describes a room filled with monsters, and the players figure out for themselves what their options are. Sometimes, though, the players receive directions from NPCs, or even seek out NPCs to give them advice. If this advice requires an evil act, then it’s up to the paladin either to figure out alternatives on their own, or to find another source of advice. For example, if the destruction of an evil artifact requires it to be submerged in the blood of babies, a paladin might choose to instead seal the artifact away, or to seek another sage who knows an alternative method for destroying the item.

Make evil a Justifiable option. A paladin who is lax in their pursuit of justice may be led astray by small evil deeds with appear to serve the cause of righteousness. If a blackguard infiltrates the party disguised as a paladin, the villain may be able to convince the paladin to commit larger and larger evil deeds, all in the name of the greater good. The trickery is in convincing the paladin that the evil deeds are justifiable, rather than in convincing the paladin that the evil deeds are good.

Of course, there is one final element which is important to keep in mind when GMing: never, under any circumstances, try to force your players to take a certain kind of action. No matter how cool you think it would be. No matter how important it is to your ‘story,’ it is never acceptable for a GM to attempt to force a choice. We control the entire world. The demons and the devils, the celestials and the very gods themselves bend to our whim. The only thing the players control is the choices their own characters make. If you really want to make those choices yourself, then maybe you should be writing fiction, rather than running a game.

On Wednesday I’ll write in greater detail about what a paladin’s oath entails. Let me know in the comments if you can think of any more more good ways to test a paladin’s moral convictions.

No More Overzealous Paladins

Life isn’t straightforward. It isn’t black and white. The stories of vile villains and righteous crusades that we were weaned on are fairy tales. But heroes? Heroes are very real. They’re not perfect, and there’s no army of them, but they exist. They are the naive idealists without any grasp of how the world works. They are the battle hard cynics who fight on to keep the darkness from encroaching for another day. They are the unknown soldiers who die alone in the dark, with nothing to comfort them other than the knowledge that they have done what is right. Heroes fight losing battles, they are manipulated, and too often receive nothing–not even success–for their trouble. Yet heroes fight on, because some battles need to be fought.
These are the incorruptible, the charitable, the fearless. These are the paladins.
-Anonymous /tg/ contributor

I am tired of seeing paladins consistently portrayed in an un-paladin like manner. In recent years, I don’t think I have seen a single paladin–either in a game or in some other media–who didn’t suffer from a painful overzealousness. Paladins are played as assholes who object to the very concept of tolerance. They look down on anyone who doesn’t adhere to their strict (often arbitrary) moral codes. And even a slight suggestion that laws are being broken or evil acts committed will cause such a paladin to react with force. A sizable portion of the time, the paladin is so over zealous that he or she serves as an antagonist to good characters. In other cases, paladins grow so overzealous as to be actively evil according to any rational definition of the alignment.

It’s not that I don’t get it. We’ve all dealt with this kind of paladin in real life. The door to door religion salespeople, the condescendingly self-righteous believers, the snarling fundamentalists demanding that one group or another be denied civil liberties on the basis of a religion. In the real world, people with an absolute sense of right and wrong based on their religious beliefs are often brutish and unkind. Those willing to go out into the world and ‘fight’ for their religion often choose to do so by trying to bring everyone who doesn’t agree with them down. I am an Atheist, I have no reason to defend religion whatsoever. But the needless association of in-game religion to real-world religion needs to stop.

Pathfinder and D&D are games of magic and monsters. Games where gods actually exist, and frequently interact with the material world in obvious ways. In real life, a woman who kills 10 people and claims god told her to do it is crazy. In Pathfinder, the authorites would find out which god the woman is talking about, find a cleric of that god, and have that cleric ask their god why those 10 people deserved to die. If the woman were, in fact, crazy, then the cleric could use the powers granted them by their god to simply raise the dead. Whether you are religious or not, I think we can all agree that religion in a fantasy world is fantastical. Not only does it grant magical powers, but the gods who head fantasy religions are beings which can be reached and spoken to with even low level clerical spells.

Like the religions they serve, paladins are fantastical. With the rare exception of those who have fallen, paladins are paragons of virtue. They never walk past a person who is hungry without stopping to feed them, nor could they walk past a person who was cold without giving away their cloak. This is not a matter of duty–though a paladin might disagree. Paladins act always to help those in need because they want to soothe every iota of suffering possible. And when a paladin stands to fight, it is not simply to defend their honor or that of their god. Paladins do not fight for kings or queens, nor do they fight for money or prestige. When a paladin draws steel, it is because they believe they stand between innocents, and evil. It is because the only way to soothe suffering is to defeat that which causes it–be it man or beast.

I think the best way to demonstrate this point would be to relate a story of a paladin played correctly. This story has been floating around the 4chan sub forum /tg/ (for Traditional Games) for a number of years now. It is one among many such stories, though for the life of me I cannot find any others which I want to share. I’ve edited the story to work in a non-image board format. I believe it demonstrates the paladin archetype with actions better than I can demonstrate it with words.

My Warforged paladin was alone with the villain atop his tower. The villain had wings, and could fly away at any time, but since I was alone he chose to taunt me.
“Have you ever stopped to think about why you protect others?”
“On occasion, why?” I replied.
“It’s all programmed in, you know. You care about humans because you were built by humans and programmed to care about humans. You believe in everything you do because they chose for you to believe it. Look at yourself! They made you so that you like being helpful and protective, and it’s all a lie! Join me, and I can free you from it all. From the shackles they put on you. You can be a pure and perfect being, immortal and superior, with all the power you’ve ever wanted.”
“Yes, but isn’t that desire programmed in, as well? Even if none of my emotions are true, they feel true. Even if my cause isn’t really mine, it feels just. All you can do is exchange one lie for another. I’ll keep the one that makes everyone else, the ones with real emotions, happiest.”
With that, my character leaped forward and grappled the villain. I knocked him from the tower and rode him down to the rocks below, using my weight to prevent him from flying.
Just thought I’d share my characters last moments with you.
-Anonymous /tg/ contributor

Paladins are not self righteous. They are not over zealous. They are not eager to spill blood for their gods. They aren’t perfect, but nor do they suffer from the weaknesses which often characterize the “forcefully religious” in the real world.

What paladins are is goodly and just. They are heroes, and I would like to see them portrayed as such.

Wizard Spell Research Variant

Sir William Fettes Douglas The Alchemist 19th cent.

Wizards are the scholars of Pathfinder. Other spellcasting classes, such as the sorcerer, cleric, or druid, draw their powers from their ancestry, their gods, or nature itself. The unique flavor of wizards is that they are the scientists of a magical world. Their power comes from hours of study, and dutifully logged research. At each level, wizards automatically learn two new spells which represent research performed between adventures. A wizard can also learn new spells by studying the spellbooks of other wizards. The only real limit on the number of spells a wizard can know is however many books the GM will let him get away with carrying.

This versatility is one of the great draws of the wizard class. Unfortunately, the nearly limitless ability to expand their spell repertoire also allow wizards to completely overshadow the other classes. This uncontested dominance has plagued the game ever since D&D 3rd edition’s release. Over time, balance has improved through lowering the effectiveness of some spells, and increasing the abilities of other classes, but wizards are still considerably overpowered in Pathfinder.

Editions ago, when wizards were still called magic users, this was not as much of an issue. I’m not exactly an expert on older versions of D&D, but my understanding is that not only did wizards level at a slower rate than other classes do, but their abilities were also significantly less comprehensive. In Pathfinder, the idea is that anything which can happen in the game world can potentially be achieved by players. If there are mighty magic users who can cast spells powerful enough to raise continents out of the sea, then players should be able to look forward to similar abilities at some point. Obviously this creates much more powerful casters, but I don’t think I would want to give either of these things up. I like that ever class levels at the same rate, and I like that nothing is ever completely out of reach of player characters. I would, however, like to see wizards brought more in line with other classes. It’s a problem which is often floating around the periphery of my awareness. I haven’t come up with a solid solution, but recently I struck upon an idea which I think is flavorful, interesting, and goes a small way towards helping with balance issues.

As I’ve posted about before, I’ve been reading a few first edition D&D modules. Alas I’ve been too busy to really make a dent in the small stack of them that I have, but one thing I’ve noticed is the big to-do which is made about NPC spellbooks. Any time a magic user appears in a module, the author makes note of where the magic user keeps his or her spellbook, and what spells are in it. Magic users often seem to go to great lengths to hide their books. It seems that in 1st edition, stealing finding and stealing a spellbook was considered a great prize. And why shouldn’t it be? In first edition, as in Pathfinder, getting your hands on someone else’ spell book means that–after a little study–all of that person’s spells can be added to your own collection.

I toyed with this idea for awhile, not really sure what I wanted to do with it. I could start making spellbooks a bigger part of my games, but all that would do is make any wizard players more overpowered than they already were. I jotted the idea down in one of my notebooks for future reference, and promptly forgot about it for a few weeks. That’s when I read a post by Paul over at Blog of Holding called 4e Spells as Treasure. I find it amusing that many of my best ideas come after reading Blog of Holding, since it most often focuses on 4th edition D&D, a game which I find personally quite distasteful. In this post, Paul discusses the possibility of including scrolls which have improved versions of spells in treasure hordes. Wizards could transcribe the spells into their books, and forever be able to cast a slightly better version of a common spell. This set me to thinking:

What if wizards only learned spells by finding them?

It wouldn’t be difficult. Simply drop the 2 spells wizards learn automatically with each new level. Since those spells are explained as research performed between adventures, all a GM need say is that spell research in the game world is significantly more time consuming and difficult than in the standard Pathfinder game. Players could still research spells on their own, but doing so would need to be handled with the GM, and would probably have significant costs associated with it. As Paul writes, “DMs and players can go crazy with rules for spending money on research, libraries, and labs.”

Using this house rule, characters would no longer be able to learn spells independently from the game world. Players never like to see their characters become weaker, but once they accepted this way of doing things, I think it would make spell acquisition a much more involving and entertaining process. Gaining two new spells instantaneously with each level is fine, but it’s an abstraction which reminds everyone that they’re playing a game. Instead, every time players encountered a wizard, they would be engaged in trying either to befriend her so they could learn from her, or defeat her so they could steal her secrets.

This house rule also provides the GM with useful tools for controlling their game world. Many spells make a GMs job significantly more difficult, such as the various permutations of polymorph, flight spells, teleportation spells, invisibility spells, and worst of all, divination spells. And while I think it would be inadvisable to simply block players from ever finding these spells, this rule does give the GM a throttle with which to control their inclusion in the game. Overland Flight, for example, might never appear in the game until an enemy wizard uses it in a level 14 adventure. If the players then earn the spell by defeating their foe and finding his spellbook, it’s still just a 5th level spell. But the GM is able to prevent it from effecting the game until they’re ready for it, 5 levels after it would normally be available to characters.

Another benefit of this house rule is that treasure hordes become much more interesting. My experience with D&D is that most GMs include two things in treasure piles: coins, and gear they want their players to use. I did this myself for many years, so I understand the desire to simplify player rewards. Artwork, weapons which won’t be used, and even gems seem like they’re simply obstructions to game play. All the player will want to do is find out how much gold he can get in exchange for these items, and sell them as soon as they can. But simple treasure hordes become boring very quickly. Players can only get excited about a pile of coins and a replacement for their weapon with an extra +1 on it so many times. Including the spellbooks of long dead magic users, or even just scrolls containing a new spell, will go a long way towards getting players more excited about what they find.

It’s just a thought at this point. I haven’t had an opportunity to implement this rule in a game yet. When I do I’ll be sure to take copious notes on player reactions and update the blog on how it went.

On Character Generation V.S. Character Building

Yesterday I wrote regarding the general consensus I’ve observed in the OSR community regarding player agency and game master guidance. On that issue the OSR community is very much opposed to the emphasis on GM guidance they perceive to be more present in modern games than in older ones. And, while their criticisms have merit, I ultimately disagree.

Today’s post is similar. It again relates to the OSR community, this time relating to character creation and progression. The consensus is that the forms of character generation used in older role playing games are superior to systems of character building present in more modern RPGs. I’ll explore this in more depth below, but first I’d like to define these two terms as I understand them.

Character Generation is quick, simple, and requires a minimum of knowledge on the part of the character. Many character generation systems actively discourage GMs from allowing their players too much access to the rules, because knowing what the rules are will limit what the player thinks they can do. Often these systems are not much deeper than rolling dice for your basic statistics and picking a class. Generating a character is a great way to get into the game quickly, with a minimal amount of time spent on other things.

Character Building, by contrast, can be a very intensive process. Ability scores tend to be generated less randomly, with many of the most modern systems simply using a point-buy as the default. Players have a multitude (some might even say a deluge) of options available to them to customize and specialize their character’s abilities. Character building systems offer greater depth to a player interested in customizing their character.

These are less dichotomous than simple labels would imply. There are gradations between the two, as well as alternatives to either system. Traveler’s ‘lifepath’ system is both amazing, and unlike anything described above. However, in most games (particularly those closely related to Dungeons and Dragons) some variant of character generation or character building is used.

As a matter of personal preference, when I’m a player, I’m very attached to the character building model. That isn’t to say I don’t enjoy the speed, simplicity, and unpredictability of character generation. However, when Zalekios finishes a hard day’s work being a horrible person, and the GM goes home, I’m still on a role-playing high. I want more. Unfortunately, as a player, there’s not a lot more for me to do. The only thing I have control over is my character.

Which is why Zalekios often has written and diagrammed plans prepared for the next gaming session. It’s why I designed my own character sheet layout for him, I’ve made character sheets for NPCs in his backstory and sent them along to my GM in case he ever wants to use them. It’s why I’m level 12, but already have my character sheet ready-to-go for when I hit level 13. The fact of the matter is that I enjoy fiddling with my character.

Having said that, the OSR community is correct. Character building is harmful to RPGs.

When I think back over my career as a game master–a great deal more extensive than my career as a player–I have a hard time coming up with any of my players who enjoyed building their character. Many, if not most, have needed me to help them with updating their character sheet for every successive level. And that includes the group in which I purchased Player’s Handbooks for the entire party. Most people are far more interested in playing the game than they are in deciding where to put their skill points. Or at least most people I’ve played with feel that way. Anecdotal evidence is not hard evidence, after all.

This doesn’t mean that complex character building needs to go away. I enjoy it, and I know for a fact that many others enjoy it as well. But if we want our hobby to grow, then we need to make our favorite games more accessible. We need to engage people who are less interested in putting points into acrobatics, and more interested in leaping across a gaping chasm without caring why they landed safely. This is too big to house rule. It needs to be built-in to future systems.

I propose a theoretical system which offers players a choice between character generation and character building. Those players who want to spend their evenings pouring over rulebooks looking for the perfect combination of skills and talents should be able to do so. While players who don’t want to, shouldn’t have to. They should be able to roll their character ten minutes before the game and be ready to go.

This is a difficult, if not impossible task. In order for such a system to function, characters rolled using the shorter method will need to be just as effective overall as other members of the party built by dedicated players. Yet simultaneously, players who spend hours building their characters must not be made to feel as though their efforts have gone to waste. I think this would be best achieved by making a “general purpose” and “special focus” distinction. Whilst a generated fighter would be good at all the things fighters are good at, a built fighter might excel in fighting casters, or taking damage, or sundering weapons, while being less adept in other areas.

Considering the fact that games such as D&D and Pathfinder are unable to maintain class balance in the systems they’ve already got, my theoretical system seems like a pipe dream. I’m confident, though, that with sufficient ingenuity it can potentially be achieved. I fully intend to devote some of my attention to the problem. Until this magical system makes itself manifest, however, we’ve got to make due with what we’ve got.

I’m presently working within Pathfinder to try and devise a stopgap solution. I want to work out a method of character generation & leveling which functions quickly and simply. My current criteria for the system are:

-Characters created using this method must be reasonably well balanced with characters who are built within pathfinder. I’m never going to be able to make a formula for creating Pathfinder characters which will be able to rival min-maxed characters, so I won’t try. All I want is for a party of casual players to be able to contain both built and generated characters without there being an obvious disparity in power.

-The method must be able to easily create a character of any level, not just first level. And it must maintain its ease of use throughout the leveling process.

-Any mechanisms used in this method of quick character generation should be easy to commit to memory. At the very most it could require a single page printout to run effectively.

I’ve made some minor progress. The difficult items like feats, spells, and class abilities such as rogue talents are still hurdles for me to make a jump check at. However, I did come up with a quick method of generating skills that I like.

Each class grants x + Int Modifier skill points each level. Select a number of class skills equal to x + Int Modifier. These are the character’s skills. The modifier for any check is Level + 3 + Relevant Ability Modifier.

It’s a start.

Pathfinder: First Thoughts, Part 3 (Classes)

Earlier this week my assessment of the core classes presented in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook ended up running long, so I split it into two parts. The last six classes (From Monks to Wizards) are covered here. If you want to read about any of the other core classes, the previous post is just a click away.

Monk

Monks have received a lot of small buffs. Their flurry of blows now starts at -1/-1 and ends with the best attacks at 18/18, whereas in 3.5 it began at -2/-2 and ended at 15/15 for the best attacks. The AC bonus is also slightly improved, ending at +5 instead of +4. Some class abilities, such as fast movement, also come a level earlier than they did in 3.5.

Part of the improvements to monks are the large number of advanced unarmed combat feats. And while these feats are not monk exclusive, they’ve obviously been designed with monks in mind. Monks even receive a number of these feats for free as bonus feats while they level. As an example, at level 1, Monks get “Stunning Fist” as a bonus feat, which stuns the target for 1 round on a successful attack.

Not surprisingly, Monks also receive a number of bonuses to their Combat Maneuvers. Combat Maneuvers are one of the biggest improvements of pathfinder, replacing a number of more complicated systems in 3.5. Most notably, the justifiably loathed grapple rules.

Paladin

Without question, the largest improvement to the Paladin class is that the class’s character portrait no longer looks completely ridiculous. Seriously, compare the two:

I think there’s a reason Alhandra was never included in any other drawings, in any other D&D book that I’m aware of. What the fuck kind of armor is she wearing? It’s just hanging there on that piece of twine. And her hair is some kind of throwback to the 1980s. Shallow as it may be, this picture alone turned me off to paladins for a long time. Seelah really makes the class look good.

There’s actually a lot to talk about with paladins. In 3.5 they had 8 (out of 20) levels in which they received no class abilities. In Pathfinder, that number has been reduced to 0.

One of the big changes is the new class-defining ability, Mercy. A little bit like the Barbarian’s Rage Powers, Mercies are abilities which modify the Paladin’s Lay on Hands ability. They are selected from a list every few levels, and the paladin can add all of those effects (every one she has) anytime she lays on hands. Most of the mercies do things like remove fatigue & remove disease (replacing the “Remove Disease” ability which 3.5 paladins eventually got on a weekly basis.)

At the same level a 3.5 paladin received “turn undead,” Pathfinder paladins unsurprisingly receive “Channel Positive Energy” as a cleric does.

At 5th level, instead of getting a mount, the Paladin gets “Divine Bond.” This is another ability which gives players a choice between the classic 3.5 class skill, and a new ability of similar power. In this case, the choice is between a special mount, and the ability to call the upon the power of your god to empower your weapon–to greater and greater effect the more paladin levels you take.

Perhaps taking a page from Blizzard, Paladins also posses a number of “Auras” now. I won’t go into them in detail, but most of them are active simultaneously so long as the Paladin is conscious. As examples, Aura of Resolve grants +4 morale bonuses on saves to the Paladin, and anyone within 10 feet. And Aura of Justice allows the paladin to expend two uses of Smite Evil to instead grant Smite Evil to all allies within 10 ft.

At level 20, the Paladin can actually banish evil outsiders with the user of her smite evil. Which, to me, is a fantastically flavorful ability to give the class. The idea that my Paladin could knock a demon back into hell with her sword is just badass.

Ranger

Rangers received one of my favorite buffs of any of the pathfinder classes: favored terrain.

I’m sure anyone familiar with 3.5, upon hearing the name of the ability, has already figured out what it does, and realized just how much it was needed. But allow me to give the specifics.

At 3rd level, a ranger may select a type of terrain from the Favored Terrains table. The ranger gains a +2 bonus on initiative checks and Knowledge(Geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival checks when he is in this terrain. A ranger traveling through his favored terrain normally leaves no trail and cannot be tracked (though he may leave a trail if he so chooses.)
At 8th level, and every five levels thereafter, the ranger may select an additional favored terrain. In addition, at each such interval, the skill bonus and initiative bonus in any one favored terrain (including the one just selected, if so desired) increases by +2.

Yes. Yes. Ten thousand times yes. A million times yes. This is perfect for rangers. Thank you, Paizo.

Ranger HD has been increased from 8 to 10, which I fully approve of. If Aragorn was a ranger, they deserve as much HD as a fighter gets for sure.

Rather than an animal companion, players can choose between an animal companion, or the ability to grant half their favored enemy bonus to allies within 30 feet. I do like the idea of Rangers having animal companions, but I like having options, so bravo on this one as well, Paizo.

The “Combat Style” paths available to Rangers in 3.5 (Dual Wielding, or Ranged) has been replaced by “Combat Style Feats.” Which is a small list of feats which the ranger can select from every few levels. Again, it would be possible to use this ability to do the same thing 3.5 offered, but you also have the option of doing something a little more personal for your character.

Rangers also have a cool new ability called “Quarry.” Essentially, it allows them to designate a target, and essentially swear to kill/capture/something that target. The ranger gains bonuses on tracking their Quarry, attacking their Quarry, and critting against their quarry.

At level 20, Rangers gain the ability to potentially one-shot a favored enemy once per day.

Rogue

Rogues are my favorite class, easily. I don’t get to be a player as often as I would like, but I can count the number of times I’ve played a non-rogue on my fingers. On one of my non-rogue characters, I even had to multiclass into Rogue, because the GM was having trouble designing challenges for me due to the break in pattern.

First change to the class is that it’s bumped up from D6 HD to a D8. Woo!

Rogues were already a class which got a new ability at very nearly every level, but Pathfinder has still mixed things up a bit.

The biggest change to the class are Rogue Talents. In 3.5, starting at level 10, and every 3 levels thereafter, the Rogue was able to choose from a list of special abilities which functioned a little bit like rogue-only feats.

In Pathfinder, the Special Abilities have been renamed Rogue Talents, you get your first one at level 2, and you get a new one every 2 levels after that. This is a massive boost for the class.

A few abilities which Rogues used to get as they leveled have been turned into Rogue Talents to balance out this buff. But, as with many other classes, it’s not hard to build a rogue based on the 3.5 progression model.

Sorcerer

As I mentioned with the Cleric, Spellcasters were the big problem in 3.5, with regards to class balance. After the first few levels, they simply outpaced the other classes. So for the most part, casters haven’t been buffed. Both Sorcerers and Wizards have had their HD increased to D6, and gotten a few more options for themselves. But beyond that, they are largely the same.

Sorcerers have lost the ability to summon familiars. They can, if they like, take a feat which would allow them to regain this talent.

The big change with Sorcerer’s is Bloodlines. In the 3.5 fluff for the class, it said “Some sorcerers claim that the blood of dragons courses through their veins.”

Paizo apparently thought that was a good idea, because every Sorcerer now selects a “Bloodline.” These indicate what kind of crazy creature fucked one of the sorcerer’s ancestors, thereby granting them their powers.

The bloodlines are extremely varied, and very cool. Everything from “Aberrant” to “Undead” is represented in the choices, and every one of those comes with a large variety of character options.

To discuss just one of those here, below is some information from the “Elemental” bloodline.

*Knowledge(Planes) is granted as a class spell.
*Bonus spells at odd numbered levels based on whatever type of element the sorcerer is related to.
*Bonus Feats (for scheduled bonus feat levels) include dodge, empower spell, improved initiative, lightning reflexes, and others.
*You can change elemental spells to match your chosen element. (ie. Fireball becomes Iceball)
*Bloodline Powers:
*–Elemental Ray: Starting at first level, you can release an elemental ray as a standard action. Deals 1d6 +1/2lvl damage of your element type.
*–Elemental Resistance: At 3rd level, you gain resist 10 against your energy type. At level 9, it becomes 20.
*–Elemental Blast: At 9th level, you can blast a 20ft radius with your elemental type, dealing 1d6 damage per level.
*–Elemental Movement: At level 15, you gain a type of movement based on your element. Air elementals, for example, get Fly(60)(Average)
*–Elemental Body: Immune to sneak attacks, crits, and any damage from your element type.

Now that I think about it, that’s actually a pretty huge buff compared to the 3.5 Sorcerer class. >.>

Wizards

Wizards are exactly the same, except for two small changes.

First, Wizards now get a choice. They can either have a familiar, or if they prefer, they can have a “Bonded Object,” such as a staff, talisman, or wand. If the wizard has a bonded object, then they MUST have that object in order to cast any spells. And, once per day, it can be used to cast a spell which the Wizard did not prepare.

The other small difference is school specialization. Wizards can still opt out of specializing in a school if they wish. The 3.5 bonus of specializing is retained, though the 2 sacrificed schools are no longer “banned.” They simply cost 2 spell slots to prepare.

Specialists also gain some small bonuses from specializing. Nothing on the level of a Sorcerer’s bloodlines. But, for example, an Abjurist gains 5 energy resist against an energy type chosen every morning, which increases to 10 resist at level 11, and a complete immunity at level 20. They can also create a protective shield in a 10 foot radius which lasts a number of rounds equal to their INT modifier, and they also eventually gain energy absorption 3.

And that’s it! That’s all the Pathfinder classes, and what I think of them when compared to their 3.5 counterparts. The improvements are, almost without exception, huge improvements. I cannot wait to switch over to Pathfinder for the next game I run.

I’ll be taking a small break from my Pathfinder: First Thoughts series. Soon, though, I’ll move on to the other chapters of the book.

Pathfinder: First Thoughts, Part 2 (Classes)

As promised, here are my thoughts on the alterations made to the various classes between D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder. Recurring themes will include: increased power, particularly to non caster classes; increased variability, allowing players more involvement in their own progression; and fewer boring levels.

Barbarian

The first thing I noticed is that Illiteracy has been removed. This is one change which I’m not particularly fond of. Being illiterate was an interesting bit of flavor for the barbarian which, in the end, hurt them very little if they were playing with a party. And if it was a problem for a player, then 2 skill points out of 4+Int every level is hardly the end of the world. But this is the kind of thing which can be houseruled in & out of a game easily.

“Rage Powers” are the big new thing for Barbarians in Pathfinder. They’re part of the increased versatility which is enjoyed by all of the core classes. Essentially, Rage Powers are similar to feats which can only be used while the Barbarian is in a rage. Abilities include automatically confirming critical hits, immunity to sickness, and battle cries terrifying enough to leave enemies shaken.

The amount that a Barbarian can rage has also been fiddled with. In 3.5, the number of times per day which a Barbarian could enter a rage was determined by level (1/day at 1st level, 2/day at 4th, 3/day at 6th, and so on.) The amount of time the Barbarian could rage was 3 + CON. Pathfinder has improved on this system thus:

Starting at 1st level, a barbarian can rage for a number of rounds per day equal to 4 + her Constitution modifier. At each level after 1st, she can rage for 2 additional rounds. […] A barbarian can enter rage as a free action. […] A barbarian can end her rage as a free action and is fatigued after rage for a number of rounds equal to 2 times the number of rounds spent in the rage.

So, simply put, you used to use this ability X times per day for a short amount of time. Now you have a large amount of time which you can start & stop using at will, but that time needs to last you the whole day.

Overall, the class has been improved.

Bard

Fuck you. I like Bards.

Bards, like all the classes which had either a D6 or a D4 HD in 3.5, have had their HD bumped up a notch. Which means bards now have D8 HD. To be honest, I wasn’t sure how I felt about this for awhile, fearing that the game had lost some flavor by making classes with low HP more beefy. However, when I consider the D8 HD classes which Rogues & Bards are joining with this change (such as clerics, and druids) I can’t honestly say that I feel they have any good reason to be beefier than Rogues and Bards.

So raised HD is tentatively approved.

The big bard change is the sheer number of bardic music abilities. The list took up less than 1 full page in 3.5, and now covers almost 3 pages. All of which a bard can access as he levels up.

Like all spellcasters, a Bard’s level 0 spells no longer have a daily limit, which is fun, though it really doesn’t significantly alter the power level of the class from what I’ve seen.

Bards have also received four completely new abilities. Versatile performance allows a bard to use a perform check in place of a related skill check (for example, he could use a Perform (acting) check in place of a Disguise check.) Well Versed helps resist other Bard’s music. Lore Master allows a bard to take a 10 or 20 on Knowledge checks. And finally, “Jack of All Trades” allows a bard to use any skill, even those which require training.

Cleric

As a spellcaster, Clerics were among the most overpowered classes in 3.5, eventually dwarfing other classes as levels progressed. As such, they’ve actually suffered from the noticeable nerf of no longer being proficient with heavy armor. Medium Armor and a shield is the best a cleric can do now, without taking additional feats.

One huge change for the cleric, which I absolutely love, is the removal of Turn / Rebuke undead. Those abilities have been turned into feats, and in their place, Clerics now have “Channel Energy.”

Just as before, clerics choose Positive or Negative energy. Only now, rather than being restricted to targeting that energy towards undead creatures, it comes out as a massive AoE which deals Xd6 points of energy damage/healing to a radius of 30ft. And there are a veritable truckload of feats which modify the ability so it can affect different alignments, elemental traits, or other miscellaneous things.

Additionally, cleric domains now have a much larger affect on the player. Instead of granting very limited abilities, and one aditional spell per level, a cleric’s selection of domains can now significantly alter the abilities of the character. For example, clerics of the Animal Domain can speak with animals, gain an animal companion as a druid would, and treat knowledge (nature) as a class skill. (class skills is another much improved system which I’ll talk about when I do the skills chapter.) And to top it off, they’ve retained the 3.5 “domain spell” system.

Druid

Druids were a class that I was almost entirely unfamiliar with in 3.5. None of my players ever played one, I never felt like playing one, and I never had need of an NPC druid. I will do my best to compare the two.

The Animal Companion class ability has been made into an option, with the other option being the player’s choice of one of several nature-related cleric domains. This is a theme repeated several times with other classes. Many of the defining class abilities of 3.5 have been made less important, with the player being able to select an alternative ability in its place.

The progression of Wild Shape has been modified. It now becomes available one level earlier than before, and uses-per-day increase at a more staggered rate. In the end, a Pathfinder Druid will be able to use Wild Shape more often than a 3.5 druid. And, at level 20, it becomes an at-will ability.

Other than that, the druid appears very much the same.

Fighter

Oh my goodness FIGHTERS! FIGHTERS! The forgotten child of 3.5, the class only fools would play due to how horribly underpowered they became compared to nearly every other class. It has been reborn in Pathfinder, and I can’t wait to roll one.

First off, Bonus Feat frequency has been increased significantly. When combined with the increased rate of standard feats, a fighter now receives feats at every single level.

Since bonus feats was the only thing available to fighters at all in 3.5, this change alone would be an improvement. But the wise men and women who designed Pathfinder didn’t stop there. They knew the Fighter needed more. And boy did they give fighters more:

Bravery – Every 2 levels, a fighter gains an additional +1 to saves against fear. They will look into the gullet of Cthulhu and just grit their teeth.

Armor Training – While wearing armor, the fighter reduces the armor check penalty, and increases the max dex bonus. Unlike most scrubs who wear armor, the Figher now knows how to look good doing it!

Weapon Training – Essentially this is the Favored Enemy system Rangers use, but for weapons instead. Pick a weapon, get +1 on attack and damage rolls with it. A few levels later, pick another weapon to get the bonus, and the previous weapon you picked goes up to +2 on attack and damage.

Armor Mastery – At level 19, fighters get Damage Reduction 5/-

Weapon Mastery – Pick a weapon type. All weapons of that type auto-confirm all crits, and their critical multiplier is increased by 1. Also, can no longer be disarmed.

Fighters are, by far, the most improved class in Pathfinder.

This post is really starting to get long, so I’m going to end on that high note of fighters. I *think* should be able to finish all the classes in the next part, and then finish the rest of the book in another 2 parts or so. But we’ll see…I keep writing far more than I intended.

Thanks so much for reading!