|
Post by Sentar(Spade) on Nov 1, 2013 4:21:12 GMT
Now that GM's can control what players fight to a much higher degree we can make a necromancer fight a large group of Paladins. The OP Slumber pickaxe group could be made to fight things that don't sleep.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Magistrate Datenshi on Nov 1, 2013 4:36:33 GMT
Well, while there are some OP 3rd pt stuff, I hope some gets allowed, simply because its unlikely to be broken unless its a full caster (like wizard). And its fun for the person who might wanna use the specific 3rd pt feat of class, and doesnt hurt other players.
|
|
Azx
Knight of The New Order
I'M BACK BABY!
Posts: 136
|
Post by Azx on Nov 1, 2013 14:23:05 GMT
3.5 has a lot of really good classes and prestige classes, like Dragon fire adept it just needs some added abilities to make it balanced but I think it would be a cool class to play.
|
|
|
3rd party
Nov 1, 2013 14:39:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by Twilight Magistrate Datenshi on Nov 1, 2013 14:39:40 GMT
3.5 are pathfinder are backwards compatible. But unless they allow us 3rd pt, no way theyd even consider 3.5
|
|
|
Post by not just as planned on Nov 1, 2013 18:29:04 GMT
How do you guys feel about creating a 3rd party request section? Similar to the current proposal section, but strictly for allowing 3rd party features. Maybe a GM vote where in order for the 3rd party feature to be added it must passed by the majority of GMs or without opposition from any GM. I support this idea right here... that way players coulden't bring it up AS they approve there character, and it could be pre-approved beforehand to smooth it out. But I think bringing 3.5 material is too much personally... (if it was allowed... first thing id do is get my copy of TOB and make a Swordsage...)
|
|
Wyatt
Blackwater Pirate
Posts: 214
|
Post by Wyatt on Nov 1, 2013 18:49:38 GMT
still say we need to keep this simple at least for now.
how about once we have a working system then we can talk about adding all the useless bells and whistles after?
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Magistrate Datenshi on Nov 1, 2013 18:58:09 GMT
Actually, there is a conversion of ToB being made for PF... by a 3rd party. But as I said, unless someone uses something clearly OP (there's one class I know in particular, that can cast better than a Wizard), then there shouldnt be much problem. And I dont think it'll be "too much work" for GM's seeing as they dont currently have all 1st party memorized anyways. 2 Examples of how 3'rd pt isnt so bad: 1) Compare Tower Shield Specialist (1st party) with Warshade (3rd party). I really doubt anyone ever seen either in action. So both will need to be looked up if they are used. So its not creating more work. 2) Compare this class: Gladiator (3rd party) which is a fighter, with a more "showy" nature, to Words of Power (1st party) which is a whole new system for magic. Which do you think will be easier to work with? Edit: Wyatt, simple? Useless? 3rd party isnt complex. And if people want it, it must not be that useless. Unless it actually harms you in some way, whats the harm in allowing it? Also, the player will have to tell the GM when their character is being approved, what their general direction (like planning to make a necromancer, or planning to be able to do good burst damage, or focus on summoning specific things). This way the GM may disallow certain things. Edit again: I do like Notju's idea. To perhaps have a google doc, that lists all allowed 3rd party stuff, and if someone wants something new, it can be added there, and other GM's can put a note next to it, saying if they feel it needs some changes or some such (Though most dont).
|
|
Wyatt
Blackwater Pirate
Posts: 214
|
Post by Wyatt on Nov 1, 2013 19:28:03 GMT
I'm not saying its complex, to be honest I've never used 3rd party party stuff my issue is not with it being OP or not. It is with just putting unnecessary extra work on the GMs I know it doesnt seem like a lot of work to you but these little things add up and a lot of our GMs are over worked as it is.
which is why I saying when the system is smoothed out and we either have more GMs or less over worked GMs we can consider it.
|
|