Comments for page "Upcoming Ideas"

Re: LOL

Wed, 04 May 2011 02:05:32 +0000

That does pose a problem witht he flat -3 which overall ends up stronger but for the first few levels ends up weaker, perhaps 'ranger level halved or -3 whichever is more'?

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 20:57:09 +0000

I remember over a year ago before Therafim set up shop, some fool told me that they wouldnt let Warlock have Serpent's Tongue Invocation (which we have here) because it gave them scent.

They literally said that it was stepping all over ranger because "Rangers can track, and its basically all they have" -which was laughable because personally I've always looked at Rangers as THE archer or dual wielding class, thats what they've got. Just an anecdote.

SO I suppose giving ranger something it already has anyway earlier might not be bad but I guess the thought is (possibly) that ranger is a full BAB class and that maybe druid needs it earlier.

LOL

Tue, 03 May 2011 15:12:41 +0000

So…I'm not planning on going deeper than ranger 4, which means with a feat I'd no longer be able to pick between wolf and the +4 dinosaur with the +2 to animal companion level feat. Also, I have favored enemy arcanists, and no input on favored terrain.

For what it's worth from a person who has played a Paladin but does not here.

Tue, 03 May 2011 13:49:33 +0000

One of my biggest issues with the paladin was the requirement of wisdom for spell casting. Requiring such always meant that a paladin had 3 Necessary stats to stack: Strength (for Damage and weight allowance), Constitution (for Hit Points and Fortitude saves), Charisma (for Lay on Hands, Divine Grace, and smite). Then they needed to have a minimum of a 14 Wisdom (ability to cast spells of all four levels of paladin spell casting, and Will saves). This makes 4 Necessary stats in total, meaning that they are in fact more MAD than a monk, as a paladin might also have wanted Dexterity (for AC, Initiative, and Reflex saves). This of course in my opinion is a ridiculous requirement for a class that is so easy to lose the class features of. But, once again this is really all personal opinion. As for the limited boost to their weapon's special abilities in place of a mount, I am always going to vote yes for this ability on the basis that there is hardly any mounted combat in Therafim.

As for the Ranger, I have always felt that favored enemy was an awesome ability within the scope of the frequency of encountering the enemies you choose. With the way Therafim is run, you aren't very likely to run into the same sort of enemies with any amount of frequency. Adding the Favored Terrain bonuses I think will be a nice boost, in addition to allowing them a more useful animal companion.

While we are on the subject of animal companions, I believe a Paladin should also operate as a druid -3 for advancement of it's mount's special abilities for those that do in fact select the mount. However they should still be restricted to the standard mounts for a Paladin. Further, I believe that we should allow (as with the druid) selection of more powerful mounts as the druid is allowed for animal companions (i.e., a Pegasus that would operate as a paladin mount at a lesser progression) with. But this is because Therafim does not allow for use of Leadership and by extension the normal rules that might be available to a Paladin wishing for a mount other than a horse.

I am all for these changes, I believe they will make these two classes more attractive to play.

My 2 cents

Tue, 03 May 2011 13:22:49 +0000

I think the options can work pretty well, personally. Weapon bond I dig, especially.

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 13:21:32 +0000

Changing a few numbers makes them better/worse at what they were already doing. So it doesn't really address the things they couldn't do before, because they'll still be stuck in that same loop of inability, pitting HP vs HP, AC vs AC, and AB vs AB.

Anyway, it's a step in the right direction, and why not give ranger a companion at lv1 anyway? Going to step on Druid's toes? Boo hoo, it's not like they don't have other tricks.

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:15:18 +0000

Changing a few numbers and abilities often changes the whole feel of a class, not gimping the animal companion so hard will certainly help. Full progression animal companion doesn't QUITE make sense as Ranger's don't get the ability at level 1 but half ranger level is simply abusive to poor Rangers. besides, the terrain bonus could be quite nice, selected properly, which will also help.

Paladins: I'll look at the variants, being that there are other classes that can be basically chaotic good paladins I may or may not recommend them simply for clutter.. we'll see and thank you for bringing them up.

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:05:56 +0000

The weapon bond works out to being +6 total, and limited in its scope, Its limited in duration which seem to balance out the issues it might have, However it is just an idea for an alternative to Mounts.

The terrain bonus is really good, It may REPLACE the favored enemy or simply augment it, as Rangers are rather weak comparative to others.

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 10:13:33 +0000

Just changing a few numbers doesn't help much, but if you're going in that direction. Why not give the ranger a -full- animal companion? It's not like they get lv9 spells.

As for the Paladin, unsure, making them less MAD wouldn't be a bad thing, although I would personally like to see Paladin variants from UA introduced to the game for CG Paladins at least. Otherwise it might as well just be replaced by Crusader.

(no title)

Tue, 03 May 2011 02:20:40 +0000

Ranger lvl -3 is probably fine. Terrain bonus is good.

Cha makes Paladins less MAD. Dunno about weapon bond. (might save them some cash though).