Can’t I just cast like everybody else?

On paper, the Alchemist looked interesting – bomb-throwing, funny-sounding infusions, lots of custom rules.  Basically, it’s a replacement Bard – a limited arcane caster (who doesn’t *really* cast as such, he brews) who operates as a support character with some combat capabilities delineated later.   I skimmed all the classes and the Alchemist was the one I decided I wanted to playtest.

In practice, it gave me a headache.  I understand the urge to build a non-casting caster, but I ended up having to study for some time just to figure out how to make the class work.  (Not study to optimize, just to play, and I’ve played a lot of classes).

Mutagens – wouldn’t touch them.  I’m sure some players will want to build a self-only casting physical-stat booster who wades into melee despite a medium BAB, simple weapons and light armor – but not me.   (Also, I think there are other classes that probably do this better).

The few options to build a party-support character seemed weak – blade poison isn’t that great after low levels and being able to cast my spells into little infusions so other characters could drink ‘em later seemed clumsy at best.

So I built a Mad Bomber.  The Bomb options are kind of neat, though I wish they were a little more divided into Discoveries that Stack and Discoveries that Don’t Stack.  As it is, part of your Discovery stacks, but not the rest … headache.  Bomb damage is about the same as a Rogue’s sneak attack, but is a tad easier to deliver since it’s a Touch Attack and doesn’t require special conditions.  On the other hand, for most of your Alchemist career you can throw one Bomb as a standard action and are kind of wimpy.  I spent the level 10 Playtests wandering around trying to be relevant and getting killed.  I’m pretty sure my level 7 Ranger in our usual Campaign could take this guy at level 10.

That said, in the level 15 playtest I became a B-52.  I could throw bombs equal to my BAB, and with Rapid Shot and Haste (assuming both are legal) I could throw 5 bombs a round – at that level, 40d6+45, all touch attacks, with me needing to roll a 2+ with all but the last bomb against the big demons we were killing.  Considering I could throw various damage types, I could literally carpet-bomb big enemies and kill their sidekicks with spash damage.  At the moment it felt cool because I could finally do something useful, but in hindsight, that’s a tremendous amount of damage output.  (I can’t keep it up long because I only had 24 bombs per day, but still … until I run outta bombs, it’s evil.)

Casting was frustrating.  Because I hadn’t taken the ability to make my personal spells usable by others, I literally could do nothing to help my friends in battle and often couldn’t be effective myself, because I couldn’t hang in melee, had to get close to toss bombs, and couldn’t buff or heal my friends when they needed.  Even if I had been able to infuse my ‘spells’ for use by others, they still had to waste actions drinking them.  Any other buff caster would be better.  I did my most useful actions UMDing wands to help my allies, which was lame.

Recommendations and Thoughts:

I did like the class concept, even though it’s not very high-fantasy – still, a mad bomber is a fun idea, and though I didn’t use it, the Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde mutagen build was at least amusing.

Make NO bomb discovery stack with any part of any other.  Make all the things that modify Bomb abilities that stack into feats – so I can get the increased splash radius or smoke or rapid-fire or whatever as feats.  (I didn’t need many feats, because few of them help me throw bombs, and I’m not REALLY a caster …)

Please, please make the Alchemist a standard caster.  It’s OK to know some magic in order to perform Alchemy.  If you cast like an underpowered wizard, you could use Metamagic feats and items and would be governed by all the ‘normal’ magic rules.  This would make for a much shorter, less complicated character description which can concentrate on special abilities and bombs and not the intricacies of casting without being a caster.  This would make it easier to be a party support character – and much, much more useful without being overpowered.

The Alchemist is enough of a skill-monger to sub for a Rogue, if they could disarm magical traps.  Just sayin’.

Throwing one bomb per Standard action is too weak and throwing at full BAB is nuts if you go for rate-of-bombing.  I’m not sure if there is a proper compromise for this.

And now for the rest of the party:
The Summoner:

A souped-up Conjurer or an uber-Druid – the Summoner is a cool character concept.  Basically, it can pull some magic and a lot of Summoning, plus it has a seriously heavy ‘pet’ that’s a mutable outsider – basically build-a-monster that is your Summoner’s loyal servant – called an Eidolon.

Oh, my.  After the playtest, we all agreed our Summoner was easily the most powerful character on the battlefield even though the Player hadn’t bothered to buy his 10^th level gear and only had a single magic item at 15^th.  This character never personally engaged in combat.  There were some rounds he was magically dominating the battlefield and the Eidolon wasn’t even participating.

First, the Eidolon is WAY too complicated.  I heartily dislike it as character ‘pet’.  I recommend you remove from the class entirely.  The Summoner is powerful enough with spells and their Summon Monster Spell-like ability.

If the Eidolon can’t be gotten rid of, please consider making ‘Eidonlon Master’ it’s own class – because, really, the guy controlling it doesn’t NEED spells of his own – or, at the very least, making it a ‘track’ of Summoner ALTERNATIVE to Summon Monster(Sp); having both of these was just amazingly powerful.

I liked the idea of the Summoner, but would modify it.  First, I’d make the Summon Monster(Sp) creatures individuals – you’re summoning the same monster(s) every time, so you build a relationship (and might be able to upgrade) your critters.  We thought it’d be cool if, for example, at 1-4 you can summon one Elemental, then at 5-8 two types, then 9-12 three, and so forth.  By 16^th level you could summon whatever elemental type you needed, and perhaps might have upgraded your extraplanar allies a bit with feats or items.  Seemed like a cool class different enough from a Druid to make them worth playing.

Overall, cool character concept, but the Eidonlon and SM(Sp) combination is ugly.

The Inquisitor:

Imagine a smoothed-out multiclass between Cleric and Ranger (with a dash of Paladin) and you’ve got something like an Inquisitor.  Limited casting (more Bard, not Pally), Cleric-ish selection of weapons, and some cool abilities.  Could sub for a Ranger or Pally or light support caster.

This class seemed pretty good from my side of the table.  He needed a Battle Buddy to really use his powers, but did well in Melee and later on tossed some handy spells.   We didn’t notice any abilities or skills that seemed over or underpowered, though anything ‘Teamwork’ seemed a bit weak.

The Witch:

Basically another heavy-caster class, like a Wizard or Sorc; the Witch (A Witch!) has a few special abilities and less of a direct-damage casting list.

Not too shabby – like most power casters, struggled a bit to hit her stride, but contributed a LOT to the battles and was generally liked – except the NAME.  First, ‘Witch’ makes everybody assume a female character, and second, ‘A Witch’ causes spontaneous Monty Python and the Holy Grail quoting, which chews up game time every time it happens. 

The Cavalier:

A dedicated mounted fighter focused on lance charges and with banners to boost his allies, the Cavalier is distantly related to the old 1st Edition Cav.

Oh, the poor Cavalier.  Of all the classes we tested, this was the only one I think we’d reject completely.  The Cavalier is WAY too dependent on horses and charging.  The poor Cavalier was the most prone to be killed or badly wounded.  Fighting a dungeon crawl without a mount was crippling.

I played a Cavalier back in 1^st edition and loved him.  Right now, there’s really no reason not to play a Fighter instead.

Suggestions (radical):  Repurpose this class.  Were it me, I’d make them a non-magical buffer like a Bard who can fight well in melee – Cavaliers Lead the Way or something like that.  Possibly Morale boosting abilities for all allies in 30’ on a Charge OR when set to Receive a Charge.  (Radius increases when mounted or something).  Morale bonuses to Save if they make a save or Crit if they Crit.  Their mount and allies mounts should be able to charge further.  The ability to take a Monster Mount at high levels.

Their abilities – whatever they are – need to work on foot and mounted, or they swap abilities when on foot or mounted, or as a last resort, give them two Cavalier tracks, one specializing in being mounted, the other for being afoot.

Finally, if you’re going to tie most of their combat power to a mount, you’ve got to make sure they can keep their mount with them.  What happens when the Cavalier has to adventure underwater?  In a narrow hallway?  I’d let them magically summon their horse.

The Final Word:

OK.  I’m a High-Fantasy, Low Magic kind of player in general, a roleplayer who rarely min-maxes and doesn’t much care for multiclassing for optimization.  That said, there’s little among these classes that appeals to me.  I’d ban Summoners outright from my campaigns without major changes to their Eidolon and power level.  I doubt many would play an Alchemist or Cavalier without minor changes to the first and major to the second.  Right now the Inquisitor and Witch would fit into my Campaign setting and games just fine.  Wish we’d gotten to test the Oracle …

Mainly, though, all these classes are COMPLICATED.  Some needlessly so.  I realize every class can’t be simple, but Pathfinder has enough shared mechanics in combat, magic and monsters that creating new classes shouldn’t require quite so much mental gymnastics.  I’m not asking for dumbed-down classes, just elegance in gameplay, even if it takes more playtesting and more time.

I’m sure the other guys will chime in with their thoughts, then they’ll send them on to Paizo.  I’m looking forward to seeing the final product!

My RPG group – a bunch of players who’ve been operating together for more well over a decade – share a really beautiful custom-built world, with each major segment built by one or more players.  We’ve been having fantasy campaigns in this world for years now, each adventure building the history of the world, or filling out an unexplored area.  Heck, it’s even got it’s own Wiki so we can attempt to keep track of it all.

A few weeks ago, we decided to kick the timeline forward twelve years, and run a Grand Campaign.  This campaign will run for a year, and will have as many different GM’s as needed – but the same characters.  So, for example, I’ll kick the campaign off, and run for 4-6 sessions, then hand off to another GM and pick up playing my character.  Nobody will have to run longer than they feel like, and there should always be somebody else ready to run their segment.  Adventures don’t have to be linked, but over time I’m sure they will be.

Because some of the guys have more time as GM than others, I’ve imposed some pretty draconian limits on the characters.  Fixed stats – 17, 15, 15, 13, 13, 11.  (You can move one point from one stat to one other stat).  Fixed gold – you can’t have more than the 3.5 DMG says you can have *as personal gear*.  (You can spend excess on a castle or a personal traveling circus, just not on a talking magic sword).  So far, everybody seems to be adapting to the restrictions fine – everybody is looking forward to playing a single character for such a long time period.

Strangely, our group has never played characters over level 16.  This campaign is designed to change that, by allowing you to play your hero from level 1 to level 20 (or maybe beyond).  I’m looking forward to that.

Further updates as we get into the Campaign.  This should be interesting.

It’s time to bring in the Mentor.

Everybody needs a reason to go on a dangerous Quest.  Your players will have more buy-in to the storyline if they feel like something is in it for them.  Of course, some players don’t engage much with the role-playing part of the story, and others are very reluctant heroes who need a good push out the door.

That’s where the Mentor comes in.  The classic mentor figures are guys like Obi-Wan Kenobi and Gandalf; wise old Wizards who can tell the young hero what he needs to do – and maybe train him a little bit, or give her the special item that’ll give a much-needed edge later on.

They don’t always have to be old wizards.  The Mentor could be the King, or a parent, or anybody with wisdom to share about the coming trial.  (The Ranger who last went to the Mountain of Shadows to get the Pearl Orchid.)  Even a bard with a good story could help out – give the heroes that last bit of advice and a shove of motivation to get them moving along.

The Mentor is your device to give the heroes a compelling reason to take up the dangerous quest; to change their minds if they refused the adventure, to give them advice and make sure they’re properly equipped for the trial to come.  The Campaign worlds we’ve created over the years have usually had plenty of Mentor figures built in; often the same Mentor would appear in different campaigns, giving a new band of heroes that extra nudge out the door.

Now, if all else fails, you can simply use an authority figure for the mentor – the aforementioned monarch, or a military leader, or one of the gods.  That’s your last resort to get the heroes moving – but it’ll work.

Now that they’ve accepted the quest, they’ll need to cross over into the adventure proper – I’ll cover that in Part Five.

The heroes answer ‘Why should we?”

The Gamemaster is thinking ‘because if you don’t, you’ll just sit here in the tavern all night?’ … but that won’t get the heroes motivated to take up your quest.  Don’t worry, you didn’t do anything wrong, they’re just being proper heroes.

Whether your realize it or not, most heroes in Western epic stories say ‘no’ when they’re first given the Quest, whatever it is.  Did Frodo jump at the chance to walk to Mordor with the Ring?  Did Luke forget all about his family and leap at the chance to run off with Ben Kenobi?    (Concidentally, this is why the boastful Beowulf feels wrong to a modern audience – back then, you had to brag about your reputation to people who didn’t know you.  Western storytelling has changed in 1,200 years)  Your players are just trying to play heroes the way they’ve seen them played on the big screen or in various splendid books.

So – you have to be ready for this.  All your players are really asking for is a REASON why they should care.  You could plan these things in advance – the Paladin, for example, could be engaged to the damsel in distress.  Now not only is he going, he’ll work to talk the other players into the adventure.  Or the Rogue could be in debt to the local crime lord, and desperate for both money and a way out of town.  If you haven’t planned these things in advance, you could spring them on the heroes after they’ve refused the quest.  Remember that every player is going to want his character to be hooked as an individual – everyone always sees themselves as the hero of their own story.  Play to that if you can.

Sometimes you won’t have prepared backstory for every character, or you’ll have players who don’t do that level of roleplaying development, or you’ll just want to shove the campaign along so you can get to slaughtering orcs for silver coins before midnight.  That’s when you bring in the Mentor – which I’ll address in Part Four.

A giant hook descends from the sky, siezes the Hero, and drops him someplace far more exciting.

Well … not literally.  Though that might work.

After the characters have been established in their normal, everyday world, it’s time to yank them out of it.  Ideally, you’ll have come up with a good enough catalyst to get your heroes moving, or at least introducing the idea of an adventure to them.

There’s several methods I’ve seen over the years to accomplish this.  Remember, your characters want a reason to get moving – they don’t want to be railroaded into following the storyline.

Part of Something Bigger:  The heroes could be part of a military outfit, religious order,  a corporation, or a street gang.  Regardless of what it is, all the heroes are included, and they all answer to someone who can just tell them what to do.

Family Ties:  The heroes are part of a family that obligates them to act.  This can be as simple as the patriarch requiring them to do a deed, or a kidnapped relative, or the tribal headman ordering his braves to go steal horses.

Reward:  The most common idea is appealing to greed – the players will be well paid for their labors.  This works quite well for some heroes, but others aren’t motivated by money, or are so wealthy they don’t see risking their lives for your cause (this happens a lot with veteran heroes).

Something Else:  Depending on the environment and the heroes that your players have built, they may have been kind enough to include their own hooks.  Revenge and vendetta are always fun.  Occasionally you’ll have romance or some other kind of quest.  These are always useful, because they motivate your heroes strongly to push the quest – which they might not do for mere money.

Now, there is a good chance your intrepid heroes will initially say no – that’s part of western heroic structure.  I’ll cover that in Part Three.

Want your campaign to feel epic without saving the world (again)?  Try the structure I’ll outline below the fold.

Most stories follow a kind of macro-pattern.  Guys like Joseph Cambell and Christopher Vogler have analyzed these stories and come up with an outline that most heroic tales follow.  I’m borrowing from their hard work to present a general pattern for an adventure.

Its my belief that a good story-based campaign can be played in about a dozen adventures.  It’s long enough to establish good characters, villains, and build up to a climactic ending – but not so long as to feel like you’ve seen and done everything there is to do.

I’ll be breaking this into parts, but not every part should be it’s own session (though it could be).  Three or four might be covered in a single session, or one phase might take several sessions to resolve.

The first thing in your campaign is an establishment of things as they are – what Vogler calls the Ordinary World.  All those characters your players just made – are they from the same small town where nothing ever happens?  Street kids in the world’s biggest city?  Mercenary brats?  Establishment of the way things are matters, because it gives the heroes something to contrast their later adventures with – and it gives their characters memory.

Another possible hook this establishes is a ‘home’ to return to at the end of the adventure.  All players want to feel like the hero – that’s part of why they’re playing.  Being able to have your character return to his starting point and demonstrate all the changes and improvements they’ve made while out having adventures is a nice reward.

Naturally you should configure this phase of things to the relative power of the characters.  If they are inexperienced kids just off the farm, then their world should reflect this.  If they’re already powerful heroes, they might exist in a more complex world with their own responsibilities and expectations.  Once you’ve established the way things are, you’ve primed the characters for phase two – the carefully prepared adventure hook.