Dreamscarred Press - Tzocatl, The First Language: Open Playtest

[Fax Celestis]

I am pleased to announce (as I have quite heavily hinted in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?377769-Temictli-Tzitziquiltic-Amoxtli-Nonotzaloc-Ichtacacalaquia)) that I have been working on a new subsystem for Pathfinder under Dreamscarred Press' oversight loosely based upon the concept of Truename Magic from D&D 3.5's Tome of Magic. I say loosely because while the project began as a skill-based magic system, we quickly came to the conclusion that wouldn't be very controllable and would end up with the same issues that the poor, poor Truenamer had. So it's undergone some revision. Think of the Advocate, presented in the playtest document, as sort of a Warlock/Swordsage hybrid with Psychic Warrior elements. That's probably the best 3.5 approximation of how the class works, though there's no real analogue.

The playtest document is available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIVTdwRrASuHInOQbNrDl2xQIliWutjNzJn0uxFV1w/edit?usp=sharing You can leave comments on the document itself or on this thread: I will see both and make any changes as necessary to the final document.

The playtest includes (for now, this may be expanded later):
A new base class: The Advocate, who changes the universe through the power of his words.
A new archetype: The Paladin of the Holy Word, a holy knight who exchanges his spellcasting ability for a limited ability to speak edicts.
A new prestige class: The Rhetorical Blade, a warrior who fights with his razor-sharp wordplay.
25 new feats: Ranging from suffixes that alter edicts as they are spoken, to benefits for speaking the true name of your weapon.
49 edicts: Words of esoteric power spoken by an advocate that invoke his will upon the world around him.
28 litanies: Mantras spoken by an advocate that provide long-term personal effects.

This is not the entirety of the final product. There is more completed or still being worked on: this is merely "phase one".

I hope you'll still be able to taste ice cream after playtesting this material. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?192865-Why-is-True-Naming-Broken&p=10657640#post10657640) I know I'm still able to, but maybe I have some sort of weird racial immunity.

I appreciate your support and your feedback, and wish you the best with the playtest!

[TheIronGolem]

An INT-based paladin! Sweet!

[Fax Celestis]

An INT-based paladin! Sweet!

If that's all that comes out of this, then I have succeeded. :smallbiggrin:

[Turion]

Litany Against Fear

http://picture-cdn.wheretoget.it/mzu0v7-i.jpg

Just for that, color me interested. :smallbiggrin:

[Seerow]

I feel like the DCs for your Tzocatl checks are a bit high, possibly a hold over from when the class was based on a skill check instead of a set roll.

As it is you are getting 1/2 level + int mod as a bonus to a d20 roll. At level 20 you might have +20-22 on the roll, meaning you can just barely ever succeed on a check for a Grand Master Edict, and on an average roll you'll only pass the base DC of a Master Edict by 3-5. And just doing some quick ctrl+f searching I am seeing Master Edicts with stuff asking you to beat the DC by 10, and Grand Master Edicts with Cadences asking you to beat the DC by 15. a DC55 check to get Grandmaster+15 doesn't even seem possible.


Maybe there's some feats or magic items in the works intended to boost this up. Or maybe that check is supposed to still be a skill check with the 1/2 level as a bonus to it and I'm majorly misunderstanding (adding another +23 on top of the 1/2 level would go a long way to making these DCs seem more doable), but with how I understand it you could probably stand to cut the overall DCs in half across the board and be fine.



Having said that, I really like what you've done here, taking a system as broken as True Naming and maintaining, even enhancing, the flavor, while giving it better defined mechanics and its own distinct subsystem. I really like the overall design, I just feel like the tuning is out of whack for one of the core mechanics at the moment.

[Fax Celestis]

I feel like the DCs for your Tzocatl checks are a bit high, possibly a hold over from when the class was based on a skill check instead of a set roll.

As it is you are getting 1/2 level + int mod as a bonus to a d20 roll. At level 20 you might have +20-22 on the roll, meaning you can just barely ever succeed on a check for a Grand Master Edict, and on an average roll you'll only pass the base DC of a Master Edict by 3-5. And just doing some quick ctrl+f searching I am seeing Master Edicts with stuff asking you to beat the DC by 10, and Grand Master Edicts with Cadences asking you to beat the DC by 15. a DC55 check to get Grandmaster+15 doesn't even seem possible.


Maybe there's some feats or magic items in the works intended to boost this up. Or maybe that check is supposed to still be a skill check with the 1/2 level as a bonus to it and I'm majorly misunderstanding (adding another +23 on top of the 1/2 level would go a long way to making these DCs seem more doable), but with how I understand it you could probably stand to cut the overall DCs in half across the board and be fine.



Having said that, I really like what you've done here, taking a system as broken as True Naming and maintaining, even enhancing, the flavor, while giving it better defined mechanics and its own distinct subsystem. I really like the overall design, I just feel like the tuning is out of whack for one of the core mechanics at the moment.

I posted on the other thread my Tzocatl check expectations table. I'll repost it here for ease of viewing:


And my baseline assumptions:


Level½ LevelBase IntInt Item BonusWish BonusEffective Int ModOther Mods
11180040
21180040
31182050
42192050
52192050
63192052
73192052
84204072
94204072
105204072
115204072
126214074
136216084
147216084
157216084
168226194
1782262104
1892263106
1992264116
20102365126


Without appropriate recitation litany active

LevelExpected LowExpected AverageExpected High
161525
261525
371626
481727
581727
6112030
7112030
8142333
9142333
10152434
11152434
12182737
13192838
14202939
15202939
16223141
17233242
18263545
19273646
20293848


With appropriate recitation litany active

LevelExpected LowExpected AverageExpected High
161525
261525
371626
481727
581727
6112030
7112030
8142333
9142333
10152434
11152434
12213040
13223141
14233242
15233242
16253444
17263545
18354454
19364555
20384757


Also keep in mind that failing the check does not mean the edict doesn't activate: it just means you can't use any cadences, emphases, or suffixes on the edict.

[Seerow]

The recitation litany is really what I was missing there. Though I'm not entirely sure where the +2-6 "other mods" are coming from still. That said, I'm not a fan of that litany, as it basically forces you to have that litany known and active the majority of the time if you plan on using your edicts effectively. It just seems like unless you want to punish players for not going the one true way, it'd be more effective to either drop the DCs or boost the base check to 1/level and get rid of the 'other' boosters.

I get that failing the DC doesn't hurt you, but those cadences are a big deal, and a player optimizing to get them will dramatically outperform someone who doesn't. If the point of moving away from a skill based system was to have tighter control over the range those numbers could be, I don't get the point of reintroducing a bunch of little stacking things to add to it, instead of putting the majority of people on the same level to start.

[Fax Celestis]

The recitation litany is really what I was missing there. Though I'm not entirely sure where the +2-6 "other mods" are coming from still. That said, I'm not a fan of that litany, as it basically forces you to have that litany known and active the majority of the time if you plan on using your edicts effectively. It just seems like unless you want to punish players for not going the one true way, it'd be more effective to either drop the DCs or boost the base check to 1/level and get rid of the 'other' boosters.

I get that failing the DC doesn't hurt you, but those cadences are a big deal, and a player optimizing to get them will dramatically outperform someone who doesn't. If the point of moving away from a skill based system was to have tighter control over the range those numbers could be, I don't get the point of reintroducing a bunch of little stacking things to add to it, instead of putting the majority of people on the same level to start.

The Recitation litanies are mutually exclusive (you can only have one), so they're basically forced specialization a la psion. The "other mods" column is from equipment that's not in the playtest doc.

How would you feel about dropping the Recitation bonus from +9 to +6, and dropping grandmaster edict DCs from 40 to 35? That'd put them closer to the +6 guideline that the other edicts follow (Apprentice are DC 15, Initiate are 6 higher than that at 21, Master are 6 higher than that at 27, Grandmasters would be 8 higher than that at 35, rather than 13 higher at 40).

[Taveena]

WOO!
... Okay. Constructive stuff now.

At the moment, Burst of Light creates a... well, an indefinitely lasting ball of light that dazzles people FOREVER. Needa clarify that it replaces the other effects.
"In addition, any feat that has Skill Focus (Linguistics) may be selected as a bonus feat."
Presumably this is missing the line 'as a prerequisite' after (Linguistics)?
Does Command of Imbuement's Esoterica stack with Greater Magic Weapon/Command of Imbuement? "Actual enhancement bonus" is a bit vaguely defined. Maybe just the enhancement bonus is increased by one? (And how does it work with weaponlike spells and effects?)
Do Dancing Blades get their bonus damage from magical item enhancements, or is it just the very base damage?
This isn’t criticism but I just LOVE the fact Forbid Action’s Esoterica makes people catch on lightning. It’s silly but it’s amazingly effective.
Frost Ray is still an attack roll to hit even if it turns into a Line. Not a huge problem, just a little weird.
Mantra of Focus presently doesn't work very well with Psionic Meditation, either obseleting or being obseleted by the feat.
Can Recitation of Flames be used with iteratives?
Does Soliloquy of Hatred’s effects replace the damage or are they in addition to it?
Does Truenamed Weapon replace the weapon’s previous abilities? I presume the enhancement bonus won’t stack.

[Anlashok]

Agree with Seerow about the numbers being too fiddly. Even with the table, which seems to assume a decent amount of optimization, your check is at best just keeping pace with the DC. Which puts a lot of emphasis on a good d20 roll.

Also think a lot of the edicts are too vanilla. For all its problems Truenaming at least was able to make stuff that sounded exotic and mysterious. That's probably a beta thing though. As is however, it just feels like less predictable magic

But between the above and below complaint I'm realizing that this system would work really well as some sort of flavor of Chaos magic.

Also. No advocate capstone? Boo.

[Extra Anchovies]

The Recitation litanies are mutually exclusive (you can only have one), so they're basically forced specialization a la psion. The "other mods" column is from equipment that's not in the playtest doc.

How would you feel about dropping the Recitation bonus from +9 to +6, and dropping grandmaster edict DCs from 40 to 35? That'd put them closer to the +6 guideline that the other edicts follow (Apprentice are DC 15, Initiate are 6 higher than that at 21, Master are 6 higher than that at 27, Grandmasters would be 8 higher than that at 35, rather than 13 higher at 40).

Why are they not at the +6 pattern to begin with? Wizards don't take longer to get from eighths to ninths than they do from sevenths to eighths; irregular progressions are fairly uncommon. Sure, it makes the Grandmaster Edicts a good deal easier to use, but this is an 18th-level character that's using them. They shouldn't have too much trouble.

ETA:

Also. No advocate capstone? Boo.

Indeed. They need something good at the end of the build to encourage folks to stay in-class. Maybe an at-will Gate ability? Oh! Or something that lets them teleport to another person's location whenever that person says their name!

[Fax Celestis]

At the moment, Burst of Light creates a... well, an indefinitely lasting ball of light that dazzles people FOREVER. Needa clarify that it replaces the other effects.Fix'd.


"In addition, any feat that has Skill Focus (Linguistics) may be selected as a bonus feat."
Presumably this is missing the line 'as a bonus feat' after (Linguistics)?Fix'd.


Does Command of Imbuement's Esoterica stack with Greater Magic Weapon/Command of Imbuement? "Actual enhancement bonus" is a bit vaguely defined. Maybe just the enhancement bonus is increased by one? (And how does it work with weaponlike spells and effects?)Technically, yes, but it probably shouldn't. I'll try to figure a way to make a non-stacking clause.

Do Dancing Blades get their bonus damage from magical item enhancements, or is it just the very base damage?Doesn't "If the weapon is enchanted, it retains any enhancement bonus or special properties it may have." cover that?


Frost Ray is still an attack roll to hit even if it turns into a Line. Not a huge problem, just a little weird.That is weird. Fixed.

Mantra of Focus presently doesn't work very well with Psionic Meditation, either obseleting or being obseleted by the feat. I'm not sure I care. Considering it either requires six levels of advocate or giving up your own action to help your friend, it's an action exchange, not an action enhancer: that is, I'm using my standard to make you better. Compare it to haste.

Can Recitation of Flames be used with iteratives?Yes. I'll add clarifying text, though "as a thrown weapon" should cover it.

Does Soliloquy of Hatred’s effects replace the damage or are they in addition to it?It says, "Roll your damage as normal."

Does Truenamed Weapon replace the weapon’s previous abilities? I presume the enhancement bonus won’t stack.Truenamed Weapon can only be used on a masterwork non-magical weapon. "Benefit: Choose one weapon for which you have already selected the Weapon Focus feat and that you own. The weapon must be of masterwork quality but non-magical, and it must be an item that you have personally used for an extended period of time."

[Fax Celestis]

Or something that lets them teleport to another person's location whenever that person says their name!

Go read the Say My Name and the And I Am There feats.

EDIT:
Indeed. They need something good at the end of the build to encourage folks to stay in-class.
You don't think access to Master and Grandmaster esoterica is worth it?

[Squirrel_Dude]

There are too many playtests and betas and alphas going on at the same time, and they're all of potentially really interesting things.

This is the best kind of problem.

[Seerow]

I'm not sure I care. Considering it either requires six levels of advocate or giving up your own action to help your friend, it's an action exchange, not an action enhancer: that is, I'm using my standard to make you better. Compare it to haste.


I'd say it's much weaker than haste, which is a longer duration, affects multiple allies, and provides more generally useful bonuses. But maybe that's just because I haven't played enough psion characters to really appreciate the Focus.


How would you feel about dropping the Recitation bonus from +9 to +6, and dropping grandmaster edict DCs from 40 to 35? That'd put them closer to the +6 guideline that the other edicts follow (Apprentice are DC 15, Initiate are 6 higher than that at 21, Master are 6 higher than that at 27, Grandmasters would be 8 higher than that at 35, rather than 13 higher at 40).

I think that would go a ways towards making it seem better. Grandmaster can afford to have slightly a bigger jump due to the bigger jump in Int that comes online from Wish/Tomes around that same level.

I have some other thoughts on the matter, but first, I am still trying to figure out where the +2/4/6 bonus specified in your baseline math comes from. Is this a class feature I missed, or a feat? A different litany? A magic item? Because that bonus actually does make things line up much more nicely in general, but I can't figure out for the life of me where it comes from.

[Fax Celestis]

I'd say it's much weaker than haste, which is a longer duration, affects multiple allies, and provides more generally useful bonuses. But maybe that's just because I haven't played enough psion characters to really appreciate the Focus. True, but it's also usable practically at will, rather than haste's limited version per day.


I think that would go a ways towards making it seem better. Grandmaster can afford to have slightly a bigger jump due to the bigger jump in Int that comes online from Wish/Tomes around that same level.

I have some other thoughts on the matter, but first, I am still trying to figure out where the +2/4/6 bonus specified in your baseline math comes from. Is this a class feature I missed, or a feat? A different litany? A magic item? Because that bonus actually does make things line up much more nicely in general, but I can't figure out for the life of me where it comes from.

There's a scaling magic item that's not in the playtest doc, comes in +2/+4/+6 versions. I'm considering it basically analogous to gloves of dexterity +2 or whatever.

I'll look at dropping the Grandmaster DCs to 35 and the recitations to +6, see what kind of math expectations that changes.

[Extra Anchovies]

Go read the Say My Name and the And I Am There feats.
Oooh, you actually did (sort of) port it over! :smallbiggrin: I don't see much utility in taking And I Am There due to the 1/week use limit, but Say My Name can be good for spying.

EDIT:
You don't think access to Master and Grandmaster esoterica is worth it?
I'll admit, that bit was mostly just me setting up for the Conjunctive Gate reference :smalltongue:

[Fax Celestis]

Oooh, you actually did (sort of) port it over! :smallbiggrin: I don't see much utility in taking And I Am There due to the 1/week use limit, but Say My Name can be good for spying.

There are a couple other feats that build off the Say My Name feat. I like feat chains that make sentences: you can totally write on your character sheet "Say My Name, And Be Afraid, For I Am Great And Terrible, And You Shall Fear Me" on your sheet and have it actually mean something.

[Seerow]

Meh.

My general feeling is that without too much specialization (basically just focusing on high int) you should be able to meet the DCs on an average roll at the level it becomes available. Specialization in the form of litanies or specialized lexicon (which I feel like could grant a bonus to the checks, either taking over or supplementing the litany bonuses), or magic items that aren't +int, should be bonuses on top of that.

Right now what you have is a system that isn't rewarding, but is an example of the worst sort of D&D treadmills, where you have to invest all of your resources just to keep up with expected values. Which is really disappointing when you've put so much work into giving interesting things to do when you can go above and beyond the baseline. What you've done is make it so that specialization feels more like getting a bonus for using them, rather than a requirement to have a chance at success.


Take my opinion worth a grain of salt, because I'm not the designer, but this is what I'd do:
1) Roll that +2/4/6 into the class at the appropriate levels. It makes the numbers nicer and makes sure the characters are able to hit the higher DCs as they come online.

2) DCs are set as 15/20/25/35. Grand Master gets a higher jump because your bonus jumps higher. Comparing to your non-litany numbers, this has you passing your DC on an average roll without specialization beyond boosting int. Without specialization you still need an above average roll to get your cadence bonuses, but that's okay.

3) Specialized Lexicon gains a scaling +1-6 bonus to checks with your lexicon of choice. To make it easy, make the bonus the same as the number of specialized lexicons known. This can either replace or supplement the specialized litany bonus. These bonuses make you much more likely to get a couple cadences for an on-level edict.

4) Same thing for magic item and/or feats that boost the check. Rather than being factored into the baseline DC math, those boosts should be considered (and priced) as something intended to give you an extra cadence.


Basically 1 and 2 are saying, make things that come for free and apply to all checks the assumed average that DCs are set for. 3 and 4 are saying that specialization and/or expenditure of resources are a boost beyond that, allowing the character to reliably get cadences even on their top level abilities. Because right now the only way to get cadences on your top level abilities is having a magic item, a specialized litany, and rolling like 15-20.

[Fax Celestis]

I can see what you're saying. I'll mess around with it a little, see what I can come up with.

[LarwisTheElf]

Since no one has made this joke yet, I will.



The Rhetorical Blade, a warrior who fights with his razor-sharp wordplay.


http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0761.html

[Fax Celestis]

Gotten a little bit of feedback about the Iciu suffix (speak as a swift action), levying the same concerns I had making it initially: the opportunity cost for using it is practically nothing, even though the cadence cost is 10. As it stands now, there's a failsafe built into it:


If you attempt to speak an edict using this suffix but fail to beat the base Tzocatl DC by enough to purchase this ability, your swift action is still used up but the edict has no effect.

but it's sort of uncomfortable and wonky. Would the system be damaged by flat-out removing the Iciu suffix?

[Prime32]

I'm not really a fan of the paladin archetype's fluff, particularly how it's based on Int rather than Cha... The paladin seems like the guy who should be speechmagicking through sheer conviction, chutzpah and divine authority rather than esoteric knowledge.

Like, you confront the Big Bad and he starts gloating about how his evil plan is already in motion, and you are mere insects before a god, and-
"SILENCE!" the paladin shouts, and suddenly the villain finds himself unable to speak.

[Vhaidara]

Keledrath likey. Much Likey. Will look more tomorrow after class.

[Erik Vale]

I'll look over it later, but how does it the first language to words of power?
A quick skim reveals that they can 'cast' forever, which makes my conductive shotgun side squee again.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm not really a fan of the paladin archetype's fluff, particularly how it's based on Int rather than Cha... The paladin seems like the guy who should be speechmagicking through sheer conviction, chutzpah and divine authority rather than esoteric knowledge.

Like, you confront the Big Bad and he starts gloating about how his evil plan is already in motion, and you are mere insects before a god, and-
"SILENCE!" the paladin shouts, and suddenly the villain finds himself unable to speak.

This was a decision I wrestled with, but I felt that ultimately, leaving the paladin with a Charisma focus didn't make enough of a difference: it was just "paladin without spellcasting but with edicts". Switching it to int meant there was a meaningful change in how the class worked beyond just the casting type.

[Milo v3]

This was a decision I wrestled with, but I felt that ultimately, leaving the paladin with a Charisma focus didn't make enough of a difference: it was just "paladin without spellcasting but with edicts". Switching it to int meant there was a meaningful change in how the class worked beyond just the casting type.

I agree with Prime, the paladins flavour seems rather defined by it's charisma.
And it looks like quihualmayauhque is the new Fus Ro Dah.

[Prime32]

This was a decision I wrestled with, but I felt that ultimately, leaving the paladin with a Charisma focus didn't make enough of a difference: it was just "paladin without spellcasting but with edicts". Switching it to int meant there was a meaningful change in how the class worked beyond just the casting type.Is there any way you could tie in an ability that lets you swear oaths for combat bonuses, maybe in place of Smite Evil? (e.g. "I swear I will defeat you!"; "I swear you will not pass through here!"; "I swear I shall not die today!") Or make edicts and social skill checks as part of the same action?

[Fax Celestis]

I could probably wrangle something like that together. I'd probably go with the replacement of smite evil, actually.

[Prime32]

Hmm... maybe they can add a verbal component to Lay on Hands to use it at range, or to Channel Energy to allow selective targeting. With some edict mechanics that hinder using it multiple turns in a row.
Maybe they get a bonus on Tzocatl checks against evil creatures.
Maybe they can use Imperative of Emulation to force a true alignment change or grant atonement.

[deuxhero]

Give the truespeech monster ability instead of constanst tongues. It does the same thing, but you don't need to worry about writing about how you restore it if it is dispeled ect (plus the name is fitting)

[Ironsides]

I know you said that you didn't want the Tzocatl to use a skill but perhaps you could add a new wrinkle to Linguistics (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/linguistics). Maybe you could add a scaling bonus to her DC roll like she gets a +1 to her roll for every 3 languages the she knows. The fluff would be that every language is a reflection of the first language and the more languages she knows the better her understanding of that first language becomes. I looked at the PFSRD and there is 34 languages though 2 of them were secret languages (Drow Sign Language and Druidic). This would fit the fluff of the class and would provide a slowly scaling bonus to the DCs. If you wanted the scaling to be faster or slower you could make it +1 for 2 languages known or even +1 for 4 languages known. Also skill focus items would not help this scaling at all because they do not increase your languages known.



Just my 2 cents.

[deuxhero]

ACG introduced a few items that actually give languages known, but that's easy enough to patch around.

[Novawurmson]

I am completely derping right now. Where is the actual information about how to make a Tzocatl check? Is it a caster-level check? A skill check?

[Milo v3]

I am completely derping right now. Where is the actual information about how to make a Tzocatl check? Is it a caster-level check? A skill check?
The Tzocatl Training class ability, 1d20+1/2 level+int mod.

[Novawurmson]

The Tzocatl Training class ability, 1d20+1/2 level+int mod.

Danke. I was going a little crazy.

[Taveena]

I'm not sure I care. Considering it either requires six levels of advocate or giving up your own action to help your friend, it's an action exchange, not an action enhancer: that is, I'm using my standard to make you better.
An action enhancer which - if your check isn't high enough - does exactly nothing. Reducing it to a standard when they can do it as a move... while it should be an exchange, if they have Psionic Meditation - which is EXTREMELY necessary if you actually expend Psionic Focus with any regularity - you're trading a standard action for - depending on your check - no benefit, no benefit, saving (and thus granting) them a move action.

Trading your Standard action for their Move action seems a terrible trade and doesn't come online for a long time. It's SLIGHTLY better if you're trading your standard for TWO move actions but by the time you can make DC 39 checks I'd hope to be pulling off better tricks than that.
It can't really be used as a substitute for the feat, either. I guess if your Psionic buddy who didn't take the feat because they never use metapsionics REALLY needs to regain it quickly AND you're right next to them AND you've got nothing better to do with your Standard/Swift...

That's very situational.

(Apologies for the various things I misread and/or missed in my earlier reading.)

[Sayt]

Rhetorical Resistance working against Holy Word and Word of Chaos, but not Dictum or Blasphemy is odd.

[stack]

So, will there be a suffix to let you overcome silence? Otherwise that one effect shuts down the class pretty hard.

Also, can you be under the effect of the smultiplevinstances if the same edict with different cadences, such as getting blind sense and a perception bonus or an armor and a shield bonus to AC?

[Fax Celestis]

Bunch of changes made per discussion on the DSP forums. Changes are highlighted yellow.

[Psyren]

Will the playtest be extended? I'd really like to devote sufficient time to both this and to Occult Adventures but there are only so many hours in the day :smallfrown:

[Fax Celestis]

Will the playtest be extended? I'd really like to devote sufficient time to both this and to Occult Adventures but there are only so many hours in the day :smallfrown:

"Extended"? There's no deadline at this time. I'm...prrrrrobably only about half done with the book.

[Seerow]

Blade Barrage changed the cadences to require you to beat the DC by 1 more than you subtract to activate the cadence. Is that intended?

ie you have to beat the DC by 4 to subtract 3 to gain an extra blade. Was this a mistake and the amount you subtract was intended to go up as well to match it, or is it intended that the DC is effectively one higher for these cadences?

(Haven't finished reading yet to see if the later abilities follow the same pattern or not)


Edit: Also typing that out made me realize that cadences on edicts with more than one cadence should probably get specific names, if only to make discussing what cadence you are using/talking about more clear.


Edit 2: Command of Flight got its duration nerfed to 1 minute, but cadence still boosts by 10 minutes per 3.

Edit 3: The new line in Demand Object seems to go against the flavor of the ability entirely. "I demand you hand over that jewel right now!" "Well I am oddly compelled to give you an item, but I like my jewel. Have this copper piece instead" "That isn't what I asked for!"

At the very least it should have a cadence to force the target to give the item of your choice instead of theirs. But more likely that should be the base effect.

Edit 4: Do objects in pathfinder still take reduced elemental damage? 7d8 fire damage won't break hardly anything in 3.5 between getting damage halved and applying hardness. If PF treats it the same way, Exploit Defect should have some way to bypass the hardness, or at least not deal half damage.

[Fax Celestis]

Blade Barrage changed the cadences to require you to beat the DC by 1 more than you subtract to activate the cadence. Is that intended?

ie you have to beat the DC by 4 to subtract 3 to gain an extra blade. Was this a mistake and the amount you subtract was intended to go up as well to match it, or is it intended that the DC is effectively one higher for these cadences?

(Haven't finished reading yet to see if the later abilities follow the same pattern or not)

Edit 2: Command of Flight got its duration nerfed to 1 minute, but cadence still boosts by 10 minutes per 3.Nope, that's bad editing on my part. Fixing now.

[Seerow]

Made a couple more edits above in case you missed them.

Mandate of Agony requires a Reflex Save to avoid falling prone. It seems to me with the fluff being resisting falling prone from the pain, that a Fortitude save is more appropriate there.

Mantra of Focus now has a Cadence that does nothing when the target has psionic meditation. (Baseline effect is with psionic meditation they can recover as a swift action. The cadence lets you subtract 6 to let someone with psionic meditation recover as a swift action. Should be shifted up to free, or removed as an option altogether). Also this is the first Edict I've noticed that doesn't have an Emphasis. I'll be keeping an eye out for more like that now, but if it is intended they all have one, here you go.

Rhabdomanic Hack (in addition to being an obnoxious name :P) got a chance to its Esoterica only apply to specific uses of UMD. This seems like character sheet clutter and needless complexity. Is there anything that getting that +2 to UMD for other uses would have caused problems with that the restriction was needed?

Subvert Confidence - I don't get the point of using a status effect that is one of the few that will stack, and not let it stack. It allows a will save, lasts 3 rounds, and has a mechanic built in that makes you want to wait a round between uses. This strikes me as something that got changed as a kneejerk reaction to someone from the Paizo forums complaining, rather than actually needing to be weakened. On the other hand, the free dispel is a pretty big deal. That should probably be changed to only work on creatures who failed the Will save. As it's currently worded I think that's what you were going for anyway, but isn't the way it seems to work by RAW.

Whisper of Distraction - Wow a buff to swift action? This one edict makes you every rogue's best friend forever. Also, this should totally get a cadence to remove the mind-affecting descriptor. I know I've seen a few other edicts with that, and this edict doesn't have any cadences at all.

Word of Thunder-Post nerf I'm not sure what the point of this ability is. At higher levels when you can reliably hit DC21, you have better and more reliable options for stunning. At low level, you're dealing literally 1d4 damage fort negates with no side benefit. I'd rather use a crossbow.



General Note: I'm noticing a lot of the cadences for increased damage are pretty conservative. A check scoring 4 higher for 1d6 damage? On a grand master ability where I need a natural 20 to get that high? It leaves a lot to be desired.

[Fax Celestis]

Subvert Confidence - I don't get the point of using a status effect that is one of the few that will stack, and not let it stack. It allows a will save, lasts 3 rounds, and has a mechanic built in that makes you want to wait a round between uses. This strikes me as something that got changed as a kneejerk reaction to someone from the Paizo forums complaining, rather than actually needing to be weakened. On the other hand, the free dispel is a pretty big deal. That should probably be changed to only work on creatures who failed the Will save. As it's currently worded I think that's what you were going for anyway, but isn't the way it seems to work by RAW.
I was mostly worried about successive applications and fear stacking, though come to think of it, that would fall under the spell stacking rules and would overwrite instead of escalate.

[Ssalarn]

So, kind of random here, but, seeing that your own chart assumes a player will be maxing their INT when they take this class, 4 + INT skills actually seems like a lot for the class. You're taking a pretty solid caster chassis and then opening up skill facility right on par with most dedicated skill monkeys. I don't think anyone is ever going to claim that extra skill points broke their game, it just seems a little incongruent .

I also notice that the DCs for a lot of abilities basically assume that you're going to be min/maxing your character, which I'm not a fan of. I'm really kind of shoe-horned into certain choices ifI want to stay competitive. I'd like to see the base DCs set to a progression that assumes I'm an average player whose GM thought I might be interested in the class, and I put a 16 in INT, didn't dump stats, and am playing in an AP with irregular loot gain where I may not have items on demand. Basically, the class feels pre-tuned to high system mastery, and I worry that for anyone else it's just going to seem like a terrible class.

In Ultimate Psionics, Path of War, and Akashic Mysteries, the classes were all pretty well balanced at a point where there was a reward for system mastery, but even new players could pick them up. Path of War and Akashic Mysteries in particular are extremely forgiving to new players and feature a pretty robust baseline. I once described them as "pre-optimized" where if you had a scale of 1-10 with 1 being a Rogue built by a first time player with no particular intuitive grasp of the system and 10 being god-mode wizard, the Path of War and Akashic classes start at 4 and end at 7. They fill a nice area where system mastery has rewards without breaking the system and poor system mastery still nets you a functional character. I worry that Tzocatl's current scaling means you're either a 1 or an 8, with very little middle ground.

[Fax Celestis]

So, kind of random here, but, seeing that your own chart assumes a player will be maxing their INT when they take this class, 4 + INT skills actually seems like a lot for the class. You're taking a pretty solid caster chassis and then opening up skill facility right on par with most dedicated skill monkeys. I don't think anyone is ever going to claim that extra skill points broke their game, it just seems a little incongruent .

I also notice that the DCs for a lot of abilities basically assume that you're going to be min/maxing your character, which I'm not a fan of. I'm really kind of shoe-horned into certain choices ifI want to stay competitive. I'd like to see the base DCs set to a progression that assumes I'm an average player whose GM thought I might be interested in the class, and I put a 16 in INT, didn't dump stats, and am playing in an AP with irregular loot gain where I may not have items on demand. Basically, the class feels pre-tuned to high system mastery, and I worry that for anyone else it's just going to seem like a terrible class.

In Ultimate Psionics, Path of War, and Akashic Mysteries, the classes were all pretty well balanced at a point where there was a reward for system mastery, but even new players could pick them up. Path of War and Akashic Mysteries in particular are extremely forgiving to new players and feature a pretty robust baseline. I once described them as "pre-optimized" where if you had a scale of 1-10 with 1 being a Rogue built by a first time player with no particular intuitive grasp of the system and 10 being god-mode wizard, the Path of War and Akashic classes start at 4 and end at 7. They fill a nice area where system mastery has rewards without breaking the system and poor system mastery still nets you a functional character. I worry that Tzocatl's current scaling means you're either a 1 or an 8, with very little middle ground.

Yeah, I think I'm going to be revamping to work with Seerow's suggestions above (DCs move to 15/20/25/35, kill the bonus from the recitation litanies and the item), it's just a bit large-scope for me to change on the playtest doc in my spare time while I watch my sick kid.

[Fax Celestis]

Edit 4: Do objects in pathfinder still take reduced elemental damage? 7d8 fire damage won't break hardly anything in 3.5 between getting damage halved and applying hardness. If PF treats it the same way, Exploit Defect should have some way to bypass the hardness, or at least not deal half damage.

I'm switching this to sonic damage, which makes more sense and should solve the issue anyway.

DC/recitation alteration implemented.

[Seerow]

I'm switching this to sonic damage, which makes more sense and should solve the issue anyway.

Sounds good


DC/recitation alteration implemented.

Looking at your updated table at the bottom, it looks better. Only real complaint is since you replaced the +2/4/6 item with a +2/3/4, it seems like the Grandmaster Edict DC slightly outscales even the optimized speaker. Reverting that to +2/4/6 would get you:

Unoptimized:
Level 1: +4 vs 15
Level 6: +9 vs 20
Level 12: +16 vs 25
Level 18: +24 vs 35

Optimized:
Level 1: +6 vs 15
Level 6: +11 vs 20
Level 12: +18 vs 25
Level 18: +26 vs 35

Honestly something like +2 at level 6 increasing to +6 at level 18, without a bump for level 12 may be more in line. Then you get:

Unoptimized:
Level 1: +4 vs 15
Level 6: +9 vs 20
Level 12: +14 vs 25
Level 18: +24 vs 35

Optimized:
Level 1: +6 vs 15
Level 6: +11 vs 20
Level 12: +17 vs 25
Level 18: +26 vs 35

Which puts the unoptimized character at a minor disadvantage (45% chance of success) at every milestone and the optimized character at an advantage (55% chance of success) at every milestone. The progression is less pretty than increasing as every tier unlocks though, so that is an argument in favor of 2/4/6 and just letting characters have that slight edge in the Master Edict range. Either way the end bonus should be 6 to let it keep up with Grand Master Edicts (Alternatively you could drop grand master edicts all the way down to 30, and drop the bonus entirely, but that makes things awkward at level 6 when your check has only improved by 3 and the DC just jumped by 5).


On a similar note, I notice all the specialization Litanies got changed to give different effects. I think that having litanies/feats/items that boost your Tzocatl check are fine, and should even be included, my main argument was against including them in the baseline math for setting your DCs. If someone wants to go above and beyond to get an extra +10-15 on their check, it's not like your Edicts are lacking for cadences to use that on.

[Fax Celestis]

Oh, I agree. I just didn't like how the recitation litanies were turning out. Either you used them and rocked out, or you didn't and you sucked.

EDIT: and done, on the master orator bonus.

[danzibr]

Agree with Seerow about the numbers being too fiddly. Even with the table, which seems to assume a decent amount of optimization, your check is at best just keeping pace with the DC. Which puts a lot of emphasis on a good d20 roll.
Yeah. This systems doesn't seem very friendly to the casual gamer.

[Fax Celestis]

Yeah. This systems doesn't seem very friendly to the casual gamer.

It should be a lot better with the changes I've just made.

[Drackstin]

maybe you should just change the check to d20+3/4 level+int, i think that would make everything balanced and you should have to worry about a bonus from something else, and it would scale better.

[stack]

The radical option would be removing attributes from the equation entirely, making a predictable level-based progression independent of optimization. Intelligence would still impact save DCs of course and you could keep the minimums for each level of edict. Then you get the same from you attribute that a caster gets, save bonus slots which don't apply.

[Lord_Gareth]

I'm switching this to sonic damage, which makes more sense and should solve the issue anyway.

DC/recitation alteration implemented.

Pathfinder altered sonic damage, and it no longer inherently bypasses hardness. You have to state it explicitly.

[Fax Celestis]

Pathfinder altered sonic damage, and it no longer inherently bypasses hardness. You have to state it explicitly.

OH REALLY? -_-

Alright. I'll add that.

[Fax Celestis]

Okay, added two archetypes to the playtest doc, the Stalwart Speaker for the Fighter, and the Acolyte of the First Word for the Monk.

Working on porting changes from the playtest so far back into my master doc, and will likely push out some new edicts and litanies within the next few days. Thanks for the support, guys.

[Gemini476]

Forbid Action
Lexicon protection [electricity]; Level grandmaster
Casting Time 1 round
Range 25 ft.
Target one creature
Duration ten minutes or until discharged; see text
Saving Throw Reflex half and Fortitude negates; see text; Spell Resistance yes
Base Tzocatl DC 35

[...]

Cadence: If you beat the Tzocatl DC by at least 15, you may subtract 15 from your Tzocatl check result. If you do so, this edict’s duration changes to “permanent (D)”.

[...]


Expected Results (Optimized)




Level



Expected Low


Expected Average


Expected High


Notes




20



30


39.5


49







I think you may need to update some of those DCs.

[Fax Celestis]

Yeah, high-end Grandmaster (and some Master) cadences need to get adjusted down. I just haven't touched that one yet.

[Gemini476]

Although do note that since the Supplication of Perfection gets active at Grandmaster levels you get +2 to all Tzocatl checks whenever you want to, so it's still technically possible for someone to have a Permanent (D) Forbid Action effect on them.

(Incidentally, is it intentional for the Esoterica of that litany to not stack with the litany itself?)

[Fax Celestis]

Although do note that since the Supplication of Perfection gets active at Grandmaster levels you get +2 to all Tzocatl checks whenever you want to, so it's still technically possible for someone to have a Permanent (D) Forbid Action effect on them.

(Incidentally, is it intentional for the Esoterica of that litany to not stack with the litany itself?)

Yes, it is intentional. It also won't stack with tomes/manuals/wishes.

[Gemini476]

Yes, it is intentional. It also won't stack with tomes/manuals/wishes.

Then you should change the bonus from Insight to Inherent, since the latter is what tomes/manuals/wishes give!

[Fax Celestis]

Then you should change the bonus from Insight to Inherent, since the latter is what tomes/manuals/wishes give!

...how do I always confuse those? Enh. I'll leave it as Insight.

[Prime32]

Okay, added two archetypes to the playtest doc, the Stalwart Speaker for the Fighter, and the Acolyte of the First Word for the Monk.By modifying each monk class feature separately you're severely limiting the number of archetypes that can be stacked with AotFW - you can't even use Qinggong Monk to trade out Quivering Palm. Plus you didn't modify Stunning Fist, so that's still Wis-based, as are some of the class features you could potentially gain through archetypes.
Rather than modifying, you could just add a class feature saying that monk class features which normally run on Wis now run on Int instead. Maybe "feats with Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite" too, since there are a lot of them with Wis-based DCs, Wis-based damage, etc. But then there's also monk items based on Wisdom...
(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/specific-magic-weapons/hurricane-quarterstaff)
I supported Cha-based paladins for fluff reasons, but maybe Wis-based monks would be a good idea purely for the sake of clearer mechanics.

[Fax Celestis]

By modifying each monk class feature separately you're severely limiting the number of archetypes that can be stacked with AotFW - you can't even use Qinggong Monk to trade out Quivering Palm. Plus you didn't modify Stunning Fist, so that's still Wis-based, as are some of the class features you could potentially gain through archetypes.
Rather than modifying, you could just add a class feature saying that monk class features which normally run on Wis now run on Int instead. Maybe "feats with Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite" too, since there are a lot of them with Wis-based DCs, Wis-based damage, etc. But then there's also monk items based on Wisdom...
(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/specific-magic-weapons/hurricane-quarterstaff)
I supported Cha-based paladins for fluff reasons, but maybe Wis-based monks would be a good idea purely for the sake of clearer mechanics.

The ability that switches monk abilities from WIS to INT might be more expedient, but I'm worried about phrasing it properly to not make it do things I don't want it to.

[Gemini476]

The ability that switches monk abilities from WIS to INT might be more expedient, but I'm worried about phrasing it properly to not make it do things I don't want it to.
Well, what is there that you absolutely don't want it to do, what is there that you do want it to do, and what is there that you might not intend but would be alright with anyway?

As-is the only things that it changes from Wis to Int are the AC Bonus, Ki Pool, and Quivering Palm.

Carmendine Monk did that minus the Ki Pool and plus Stunning Fist, and Kung Fu Genius just straight-up replaced Int for Wis for all "special Monk abilities that normally rely on Wisdom".

[Fax Celestis]

I'm mostly worried about corner cases where I say, "All features of the Monk class that key off WIS are now keyed off INT", and someone using an archetype to gain, like, spellcasting that changes the key ability or some similar weirdness.

[Gemini476]

I'm mostly worried about corner cases where I say, "All features of the Monk class that key off WIS are now keyed off INT", and someone using an archetype to gain, like, spellcasting that changes the key ability or some similar weirdness.

...Could you give any hypothetical examples to show what you mean, there? 'Cause all I'm seeing is some hypothetical archetype that turns the Monk into a Cleric-lite instead turning it into something like the Wizard-lite. Stat-wise, that is.

[Prime32]

I suppose one alternative would be to change more of the class, so that archetypes are less of an issue in the first place. I figure you could tie monks to kiai or kuji-in (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuji-in), having them shout phrases as they attack for greater effects. Possible things you could get out of this:

Deal extra sonic damage with your attacks.
Replace Stunning Fist with an immediate action "edict of stunning" that can be used after you hit an opponent with an attack.
Replace Flurry of Blows with the ability to make edicts as they attack.
Replace Flurry of Blows with an edict that lets you deliver a single powerful unarmed strike, similar to Vital Strike or Pummeling Style.
Add optional somatic components to an edict to increase its power.
Apply suffixes to your attacks.

Or you could give them variants of Truenamed Weapon that apply to their unarmed strike and/or skin.

[Fax Celestis]

...Could you give any hypothetical examples to show what you mean, there? 'Cause all I'm seeing is some hypothetical archetype that turns the Monk into a Cleric-lite instead turning it into something like the Wizard-lite. Stat-wise, that is.

I dont' really have an example. It's more of a protection against a future corner-case. Like if there's some new hybrid base class somewhere down the line that has "Marysue levels count as monk levels for the purposes of determining effects and features, and can take monk archetypes when applicable."

[Drackstin]

i would say look at the wording of winter witch PrC, and maybe Scarred Witch Doctor alternate class for witch, they might have the wording you're looking for.

[Ironsides]

Is this the wording you are looking from the Scared Witch Doctor?

"Constitution Dependent

A scarred witch doctor uses Constitution instead of Intelligence when determining the highest level of spells she can cast, her spell save DCs, number of spells known at 1st level, and any effects of her hexes normally determined by her Intelligence."

[stack]

So, will there be a suffix to let you overcome silence? Otherwise that one effect shuts down the class pretty hard.

Also, can you be under the effect of multiple instances if the same edict with different cadences, such as getting blind sense and a perception bonus or an armor and a shield bonus to AC?

I saw a response to the first question on the DSP board, have I missed statements regarding the second?

[Fax Celestis]

As spell-like abilities, edicts are subject to the same limitations as traditional magic: as such, the spell stacking rules come into play, specifically "same effect with differing results":
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

[Fax Celestis]

Rhetorical Resistance working against Holy Word and Word of Chaos, but not Dictum or Blasphemy is odd.

This should be fixed now.

[Fax Celestis]

Okay, so I just updated the playtest document with the Knight-Scholar base class, a couple more edicts, and a bunch of feats.

I am also now accepting direction for (or wholesale submission of) archetypes and prestige classes that mesh with Tzocatl.

I am particularly interested in hearing about what you think the class is missing, whether it be edicts or litanies that do a particular thing, feats to shore up certain things or allow you to substitute a Tzocatl check for something else, or items in general.

Thanks for the help thus far, guys: it's made a lot of difference (as I'm sure you can see by the surfeit of yellow highlighting on the doc).

[Fluffy Viking]

Just a quick question on the Knight-Scholar. It has medium armor proficiency, yet the Intelligent Defense feature requires light or no armor for it to benefit. Was that intentional or just an oversight? Otherwise, looks really good!

[Fax Celestis]

Just a quick question on the Knight-Scholar. It has medium armor proficiency, yet the Intelligent Defense feature requires light or no armor for it to benefit. Was that intentional or just an oversight? Otherwise, looks really good!

That's a typo: it originally only had light armor, but I gave it medium to help differentiate it from the advocate.

[Fluffy Viking]

Ah, alright. I just wanted to double check. Now to find a game that I can playtest it lol.

[Sayt]

I feel like the Knight-Scholar needs a bonus feat before 6th level. As it stands, it's a more or less frontliner and the only combat feat it can take at first level thats worth a damn that comes to mind is Improved Initiative.

Yaotlalia and Itlacoa make up for that to a degree, but those are limited per day, and I kind of feel it should be one activation for both?

Int mod as a resistance bonus to saves could be huge, and generally obviates the need of cloaks of resistance. Perhaps too much?

War Cry being a Insight mod to hit seems...weird? That fact that it's a War Cry seems like it should be morale bonus, as you're bolstering their morale. If you're actually providing them insight into combat, I'd rename it to something like "Grant Vicious Advantage"

Edit:I also think there's room for a PRC/Class/Archetype dealing with runes as 'written' Tzocatl

[Fax Celestis]

Yaotlalia and Itlacoa make up for that to a degree, but those are limited per day, and I kind of feel it should be one activation for both? I could make it one for both I guess?


Int mod as a resistance bonus to saves could be huge, and generally obviates the need of cloaks of resistance. Perhaps too much? Paladins get CHA to saves earlier level and in a form that stacks with a cloak of resistance, and no one has a problem there.

[Milo v3]

I could make it one for both I guess?

Paladins get CHA to saves earlier level and in a form that stacks with a cloak of resistance, and no one has a problem there.

Probably because CHA is The Dump Stat, while INT is used for skill points and apparently everything Tzocatl.

[georgie_leech]

Probably because CHA is The Dump Stat, while INT is used for skill points and apparently everything Tzocatl.

It's buried far in enough that I don't think anyone is going to be dipping solely for it though. 5 levels is enough to make it a significant part of a build, not just something to poach off of.

[Sayt]

I'd like to revise my previous statement about the KNight-Scholar (Though not the bit about really liking it)

It feels way, way to SAD. It gets int to Saves, AC, Attack and Damage. My concern is that it only needs Good Int and moderate Con to function. Strength, Dexterity and Wisdom are all beneficial, but optional as long as they're not dumped hard.

I'd consider dropping the durations on Yaotlalia and Itlacoa down to half-int mod, or maybe a flat number of round and maybe even making them one word of power that pumps To hit and damage, because as it is, they get switched on one at a time at the start of the fight, and last for the whole fight. Compare to magus's arcane accuracy, which is similarly priced, but only gives to hit for one round. Now, Arcane accuracy is, IMO, decent but not amazing.

Alternatively, considering do something alike to the harbinger, it eventually gets always on int to hit and damage, but staggers the introduction over a fair few levels.

Just my two cents.

[NamelessNPC]

Maybe this has already been asked, but can you use a suffix to modify a litany? For example, use Cetl to change Litany of Dragonfire to a cold breath. The description of litanies seems to imply it ("litanies are special edicts") but I'm not sure if that is the way it's meant to work

[Fax Celestis]

Maybe this has already been asked, but can you use a suffix to modify a litany? For example, use Cetl to change Litany of Dragonfire to a cold breath. The description of litanies seems to imply it ("litanies are special edicts") but I'm not sure if that is the way it's meant to work

Yes, you're supposed to be able to. I need to clarify how exactly that works, since suffixes are "on speaking, if you beat DC by X", but litanies don't have a base DC as part of their activation.

[Ssalarn]

Probably because CHA is The Dump Stat, while INT is used for skill points and apparently everything Tzocatl.

Still, it has as much synergy with the Paladin as INT does with the Knight-Scholar. Paladins get extra Lay on Hands (more hit points), extra spells, better DCs, better saves, more AC and accuracy from Smite, and it supports their only meaningful class skill, Diplomacy.

As pointed out, the Paladin bonus also stacks with cloaks of resistance instead of replacing them.

Given it not coming online until 5th level, I really don't see an issue with it.


On an related note, I've been comparing the Advocate to the Occultist from the Paizo playtest and it's been.... Interesting. The Occultist is a 4 + Int, 3/4 BAB, 6 level spellcaster with gobs of implements he can "charge up" for crazy effects, many of which don't actually require him to expend focus. The Occultist is undeniably a pretty middle-of-the-road Tier 3 class, but when you actually look at what his INT translated into Focus can do for him, it's pretty comparable to what the Knight-Scholar can eke out of it. As to his comparison to the Advocate, it really comes down to spell and implement/school selection for the Occultist as to how favorably he holds up. Most Occultist builds are a notch below the Advocate, some are a notch above. The Occultist has the really weird result of actually getting better use out of traditionally weaker school choices and less out of the traditionally more powerful ones; his Conjuration Focus and Resonance powers are sadly underpowered, but Illusion is surprisingly solid.

[Abithrios]

Thanks for doing this, it looks awesome. A couple of things seem just a bit odd.

Int based paladin archetype seems a bit odd, but having edicts based on different ability ability scores could cause some odd interactions in multiclass Tzocatl characters, so it is probably a good design decision. I find it weirder though, that the paladin is less brave than normal and has no healing until high level, and then it cannot be shared.

Also, I think it is odd to include Tzocatl checks on permanent, spammable effects. Am I supposed to take a 20 on Dragonfire Litany? It would only take 4 minutes to do so by starting the litany and measuring how hot the fire is (an easily observed quality if breath weapons work anything like real fire).

And I Shall Live has a typo (subject verb agreement on dies).

Speaking of that last one, full sentence feat chains are, without any doubt, one of the greatest innovations in game design in our time. :smallbiggrin:

[Gemini476]

Also, I think it is odd to include Tzocatl checks on permanent, spammable effects. Am I supposed to take a 20 on Dragonfire Litany? It would only take 4 minutes to do so by starting the litany and measuring how hot the fire is (an easily observed quality if breath weapons work anything like real fire).

Dragonfire Litany specifically isn't a problem.

While dragonfire litany is active, you gain the ability to breathe a 15 ft. cone of fire as a standard action. Creatures caught within the cone take fire damage according to your Tzocatl check (made as part of your standard action to breathe).


However, more generally that might be a bit of an issue. It only takes two minutes to Take 20 for Litany of Daggers, for instance.

Although the checks themselves are relevant in cases where you want to use a swift action to change Litany mid-combat. Like, for instance, if you had the Litany of Mercy active more or less by default but then you ran into a room full of zombies and decided that maybe the Litany of Resilience might be a bit more immediately useful.

[Fax Celestis]

Is that weird, by the by? Should I just make it based on your Tzocatl mod?

[Gemini476]

Is that weird, by the by? Should I just make it based on your Tzocatl mod?
Taking 20 only really comes up for litanies that you're likely to have up constantly or as part of pre-buffing, too be honest. Otherwise they mostly just work like slightly less consistent stances.

Although come to think of it, the same goes for all edicts in general. If you have something with a sufficiently long duration, there's no downside to taking twenty so your minion permanently has a contingent thundercloud over their head or whatever.

I'm not really sure in which cases it would be problematic, to be honest.

[Abithrios]

Dragonfire Litany specifically isn't a problem.


However, more generally that might be a bit of an issue. It only takes two minutes to Take 20 for Litany of Daggers, for instance.

Although the checks themselves are relevant in cases where you want to use a swift action to change Litany mid-combat. Like, for instance, if you had the Litany of Mercy active more or less by default but then you ran into a room full of zombies and decided that maybe the Litany of Resilience might be a bit more immediately useful.
I missed that line in DFL. Litany of Daggers is also vulnerable to taking a twenty, but I think it would take 4 minutes to avoid the -5 anti spam penalty.

Truenamed weapon takes longer to take a twenty, but doing so with a low positive modifier would have very obvious results based on the roll--either your sword is on fire or it isn't. It would probably take about 1-3 days of downtime to do so for the feat, depending on if you need to undo the ritual between attempts and how much testing you do per attempt.


Is that weird, by the by? Should I just make it based on your Tzocatl mod?

"Just take a twenty on long duration buffs" sounds like the sort of advice this forum will give if the rules are not changed in significant and relevant ways. This will create a difference in power based on how long is spent prebuffing.

Whether you consider it a bug or a feature is a design decision you have to make. I made the comment because that is the sort of design decision that could easily be made accidentally due to an oversight, and you should probably look into the balance implications of allowing people to take a twenty on long duration buffs.

If you decide it is a bug, basing it on modifier is the only way I can think of to avoid it without vast changes to the system (e.g. uses per day or consequences for failure) or causing vast amounts of confusion and internet arguments (e.g. a line that says "You cannot take a twenty on this Tzocatl check", with no satisfactory explanation as to why not). There is probably some other option out there, and basing it on modifier may have exploits of its own which I lack the system mastery to find.

On the other hand, as Gemini476 points out, there might not even be any problems with allowing it. Unfortunately, I do not have enough sense of balance, especially in PF, to offer an informed opinion.

[Gemini476]

(e.g. a line that says "You cannot take a twenty on this Tzocatl check", with no satisfactory explanation as to why not)

I'd just like to note that that would be really dumb since the purpose of Taking 20 is so that you don't get players just rolling and rerolling checks until they get a 20 manually. You'll need some kind of consequence for that to not work. (Although as noted it would take four minutes to take 20 and two to "take 15", I suppose. That's probably something to note in a sidebar. Also, maybe consider allowing taking 10 in situations where you aren't threatened. No need to have a bunch of extraneous dice rolls.)

[NamelessNPC]

Isn't taking 10 or 20 something you can only do with skill checks?

[Gemini476]

Isn't taking 10 or 20 something you can only do with skill checks?
Most of the time, yes.

However, it's also a convenient statistic simplification when you have a somewhat binary situation that you roll a d20 to succeed at. Taking 10 is just (slightly less than) the average result of a d20, and if you instead of Taking 20 just spent twenty times as long rerolling and rerolling your Tzocatl check until you get a natural twenty... well, statistically that's pretty much the same thing. Except you're not annoying the rest of the players as much.

Basically, allowing people to take 20 leads to less tedious gameplay. Taking 10 is more arguable, but given that Tzocatl encourages you to roll by giving you additional benefits for high rolls it kind of balances out?

[Fax Celestis]

What if I alllowed take 10 when not threatened for litanies, but not edicts?

[weckar]

The only real problem I have with this, as I have had with most of DSPs recent forays into 'completing' the PF subsystems, is that they are WAY too fluff-heavy. That is all.

[Fax Celestis]

The only real problem I have with this, as I have had with most of DSPs recent forays into 'completing' the PF subsystems, is that they are WAY too fluff-heavy. That is all.

I'm not exactly sure how it could have less fluff, considering the playtest doc has practically none.

[Ssalarn]

I'm not exactly sure how it could have less fluff, considering the playtest doc has practically none.

Agreed. While there are certainly themes to the recent stuff (Tzocatl's implicit native American background, Akashic's Silk Road themes), Andreas actually tends to have us throttle back anything that implies a specific campaign setting or world type to make the systems as easily integrated into a campaign as possible. Note that Middle Eastern or South American naming conventions are a bit different than saying "All Viziers come from fantasy Egypt and all Advocates must come from fantasy South America".

[weckar]

Well, I may have overstated a bit, but the naming conventions do seem to pigeonholes the feel of characters a bit, as you can hardly remove yourself from such ability referrals at the the table.

[Ssalarn]

Well, I may have overstated a bit, but the naming conventions do seem to pigeonholes the feel of characters a bit, as you can hardly remove yourself from such ability referrals at the the table.

I get that. It's kind of along the same line as people who hear "cleric" and automatically translate it to "healer", even though really you may be playing an "antipaladin" on the cleric chassis. Someone may hear "advocate" and attach their own understanding of that word to your completely different concept, or hear "tzocatl" and assume you're an Aztec-looking shaman when the character you envisioned is a suit-wearing city-dweller. I, personally, don't see that as being too likely to be an issue, but I get where you're coming from.

There are reasons we make the choices we make though. We'll often choose a particular culture or region to draw inspiration from for a variety of reasons, including things like whether that particular culture/region was the original source of myths or concepts that our idea is based on, whether or not that culture has been supported or explored in other sources, and sometimes to just give a new subsystem that "hook" that catches the eye and hints at the ways it might be different.

I know in Akashic Mysteries, despite the fact that the classes are the Vizier, Guru, and Daevic, their actual abilities and the names of their veils are all pretty region neutral. Something I'll personally do to kind of set my character apart, is instead of referring to him by his class, I'll refer to his Path/School/Bloodline/Philosophy/Archetype/etc. So instead of introducing my Vizier, I might introduce my Seer/Crafter/Ruler and instead of introducing my Cleric, I might introduce my Necromancer/Crusader/Theologian; that way instead of whatever general baggage they might associate with Vizier, they refer to me by the more mechanically relevant portion of who my character is.

[weckar]

That is a clever way to go about it. Also avoids me having to put a pronunciation guide under everyone's nose :smallbiggrin:

[Ssalarn]

That is a clever way to go about it. Also avoids me having to put a pronunciation guide under everyone's nose :smallbiggrin:

I recently wrote a class called the Battle Lord for Amora Games. I gave pre-built characters to my group with their roles written in where the class title would normally be, so they had a Scout, Medic, Soldier, and Artillerist in the group. No one found out until after the playtest that they were all playing different paths of the same class. They kept thinking I was writing a bunch of new classes using some undisclosed power source :P

Similarly, my fiancee once played an archer Sohei with a pegasus mount and introduced herself to the group as a "scout". Everyone in the group thought she was a Ranger for like 4 levels (we started at level 7, I believe) until a barghest barbarian shattered her bow and pulled her off her mount, forcing her to throw out a flurry of unarmed strikes during her attempt to escape. Our friend Steve looked at her and asked "You took a feat for Improved Unarmed Strike for your Ranger?" and she tells him "Monks get it for free." His perplexed look was kind of priceless.

I also played a "drow priestess" once who was actually a Summoner with the Spider Summoner feat and an eidolon designed to look and play like a yochlol (lots of tentacles).

Long story short, I've always found it's more helpful for players to introduce their characters by what they do, rather than by what class they picked to do it with.

[Fax Celestis]

I recently wrote a class called the Battle Lord for Amora Games. I gave pre-built characters to my group with their roles written in where the class title would normally be, so they had a Scout, Medic, Soldier, and Artillerist in the group. No one found out until after the playtest that they were all playing different paths of the same class. They kept thinking I was writing a bunch of new classes using some undisclosed power source :P

Similarly, my fiancee once played an archer Sohei with a pegasus mount and introduced herself to the group as a "scout". Everyone in the group thought she was a Ranger for like 4 levels (we started at level 7, I believe) until a barghest barbarian shattered her bow and pulled her off her mount, forcing her to throw out a flurry of unarmed strikes during her attempt to escape. Our friend Steve looked at her and asked "You took a feat for Improved Unarmed Strike for your Ranger?" and she tells him "Monks get it for free." His perplexed look was kind of priceless.

I also played a "drow priestess" once who was actually a Summoner with the Spider Summoner feat and an eidolon designed to look and play like a yochlol (lots of tentacles).

Long story short, I've always found it's more helpful for players to introduce their characters by what they do, rather than by what class they picked to do it with.
That's absolutely wonderful. Oh man.

[Abithrios]

Is that weird, by the by? Should I just make it based on your Tzocatl mod?
I have thought about this a bit more. I still have no other solution to this issue. I think basing a wide variety of buffs on modifier seems like a good idea. When I utter Eternal Armament, the current rules make me recalculate my attack bonus, which will probably be different than what it was last fight. This increases the amount of math that needs to be done at the table. Table math can be much reduced if there is at least a variant rule that lets me treat my Tzocatl check as x+Tzocatl modifier at least sometimes.

Then I can just write the number on my character sheet and be done with it.



What if I alllowed take 10 when not threatened for litanies, but not edicts?

Given that there are degrees of success, but no actual failure, I think the x should probably be above 10. The expected value (mean) of speaking an edict tends to be better than the median result, so taking a 10 is typically worse than rolling. (btw, I am not referring to the fact that the average of a d20 is 10.5). It would probably make more sense to let someone treat their roll as somewhere in the 11-15 rather than a 10. You would have to do the math to determine the best number that balances the math.

At the very least, a side bar should explain how long it takes to take a twenty.

Other things:

Studied Edict smells like the sort of feat that will get argued about a lot on the playground. I am not sure whether they will decide it is useless or overpowered or both, but probably not neither. With that in play, the wording of every esoterica has to be even more rock solid than otherwise.

For example, if I get the esoterica for war cry to pick up the feat Rapid Shot, then studied edict, I could see it argued that I get another extra shot when I use the feat. Another interpretation is that I get a second combat feat. A third is that I get nothing.

That is just the first trick I could think of. I am sure there are others out there. I would suggest getting rid of the consolation prize for those who have the esoterica already, and anything that has studied edict as a requirement instead requires knowing the esoterica.

As a side note, the power of the esoterica seem to be all over the map. One grants a fighter bonus feat and another is worse than skill focus (buff), giving a smaller bonus, which doesn't scale with skill points invested, only applies to a single type of bluff, and is an insight bonus, which the book hands out like candy.

That will probably get a lot more attention in a later stage of development.

[Fax Celestis]

Just a quick update: Still working on this, been bogged down with holidays and sick kids. Lots of notes on paper to move to digital, which I'll be doing shortly.

[Roadie]

As somebody who just stumbled onto this, I like everything about it except the use of the name "Tzocatl".

For some reason the words of power themselves don't both me, but using "Tzocatl" in ability names when everything else is given in more genericized English terms ("words of power", "Knight-Scholar", etc) rubs me wrong. It seems like it would fit better if it was mechanically referred to with something like "First Speech", then in ability descriptions or background fluff the Tzocatl name was mentioned.

[Extra Anchovies]

As somebody who just stumbled onto this, I like everything about it except the use of the name "Tzocatl".

For some reason the words of power themselves don't both me, but using "Tzocatl" in ability names when everything else is given in more genericized English terms ("words of power", "Knight-Scholar", etc) rubs me wrong. It seems like it would fit better if it was mechanically referred to with something like "First Speech", then in ability descriptions or background fluff the Tzocatl name was mentioned.

I am very strongly in agreement with this.

[Fax Celestis]

Really? I mean, I guess I can see that, but how is it different than, say, a...hm, I can't really come up with a counterexample. I could call it the "First Language" in mechanical text and refer to the checks as "diction checks" or something. That might get rid of the "Base Tzocatl DC" thing that isn't really a DC problem while I'm at it, if I just call it a "Diction check".

[Ssalarn]

Really? I mean, I guess I can see that, but how is it different than, say, a...hm, I can't really come up with a counterexample. I could call it the "First Language" in mechanical text and refer to the checks as "diction checks" or something. That might get rid of the "Base Tzocatl DC" thing that isn't really a DC problem while I'm at it, if I just call it a "Diction check".

I think the issue is that it feels a bit like the current layout lacks cohesion a bit. Words like Advocate, Knight-Scholar, etc. imply a western European theme that jars with the otherwise South American theme implied by the other terminology involved in the subsystem. I don't know that you need to strip Tzocatl and other such references out, but the other terminology should really be updated to match; basically there's some dissonance in the theme and going one way or the other would help clean that up. While making everything uniform to the precedent set by the class names and changing Tzocatl to diction is probably the easiest way to make a generic and accessible supplement, I'd actually be really disappointed to see the change. I'd rather it go the other way with more South American references worked into the naming structure (at least in theme, if not actual language).

[Extra Anchovies]

Hm. Maybe you take the primary names of things more towards the South American naming conventions, and then provide a sidebar or something with a list of alternate European-themed names for stuff? For example, the default name of Tzocatl would be, well, Tzocatl, but you'd give First Speech as an alternative name for people who want a more generically adaptable fluff.

[Fax Celestis]

Unrelated to current convo: just made a bunch of edits to the playtest doc per Jaid (on the DSP forum) and Zaq's (you know, the truenamer guy) suggestions.

[stack]

I think the issue is that it feels a bit like the current layout lacks cohesion a bit. Words like Advocate, Knight-Scholar, etc. imply a western European theme that jars with the otherwise South American theme implied by the other terminology involved in the subsystem. I don't know that you need to strip Tzocatl and other such references out, but the other terminology should really be updated to match; basically there's some dissonance in the theme and going one way or the other would help clean that up. While making everything uniform to the precedent set by the class names and changing Tzocatl to diction is probably the easiest way to make a generic and accessible supplement, I'd actually be really disappointed to see the change. I'd rather it go the other way with more South American references worked into the naming structure (at least in theme, if not actual language).

I'm I favor of the more generic names; I can't pronounce, spell, or remember the South American ones.

[Milo v3]

Considering me and my players haven't ever successfully pronounced even the word Couatl correctly once, I would be rather happy with their being non-aztec names.

[Ssalarn]

Another option would be using English words for South American ideas. My cultural savvy is a little weak in this area, but if you used naming conventions that convey the feeling you're looking for (more Jaguar Warrior, less Knight-Scholar) than you can keep the theme while cutting out the difficult to pronounce words.

Something like:

Instead of Advocate, Sunspeaker (again, cultural savvy low, so this just an example of what I'm getting at).

and language like "First Speech, or Tzocatl in the tongue of its earliest practitioners, is...."

That would let you simultaneously strengthen the theme, and increase the accessibility.

[Seerow]

I'm I favor of the more generic names; I can't pronounce, spell, or remember the South American ones.

So much this. I had a lot of trouble with Veilweaving (specifically the new races related to that) due to similar issues. Having names that are easy to remember and pronounce is a really big deal in a game where most of your interactions are vocal, and being able to memorize your abilities is a big part of what keeps the game going. There is a good reason that you use "Mandate of Agony" as your ability name instead of "Nictoliniz". That same logic should apply across the spectrum of the material.

[Abithrios]

Really? I mean, I guess I can see that, but how is it different than, say, a...hm, I can't really come up with a counterexample. I could call it the "First Language" in mechanical text and refer to the checks as "diction checks" or something. That might get rid of the "Base Tzocatl DC" thing that isn't really a DC problem while I'm at it, if I just call it a "Diction check".

"Incarnum"

Personally, I think having a strange name for the system is fine. On the other hand, I cannot tell from the name of a metaedict feat whether it changes the elemental damage of the edict to osmium damage or keeps eavesdroppers from identifying your edicts by covering your words with the moos of a thousand cows.

[Extra Anchovies]

Another option would be using English words for South American ideas. My cultural savvy is a little weak in this area, but if you used naming conventions that convey the feeling you're looking for (more Jaguar Warrior, less Knight-Scholar) than you can keep the theme while cutting out the difficult to pronounce words.

Something like:

Instead of Advocate, Sunspeaker (again, cultural savvy low, so this just an example of what I'm getting at).

and language like "First Speech, or Tzocatl in the tongue of its earliest practitioners, is...."

That would let you simultaneously strengthen the theme, and increase the accessibility.

Seconding this idea.

[LordErebus12]

Seconding this idea.

Im thirding this idea, on the grounds of being unable to read or pronounce 80% of what names you've created/translated.

[stack]

I like advocate and knight-scholar better, but I'm already on record about the whole naming thing. I'd rather see the whole mayaincatec theme for a setting or adventure path than for a subsystem. I am all about refluffing, but names are a bigger conceptual barrier for some. The Akashic names I can get my head around, these not so much.

[JusticeZero]

Also going to agree with those who dislike the int on the Paladin for fluff mismatch reasons. As much as I'd like to see an Int Paladin, I don't see anything that sells it here. Changing to spoken instead of magic is big, and if that isn't enough, you can swap some other Paladin abilities to language based ones, or switch them from Lawful GOOD to LAWFUL Good, and maybe slap the whole fall garbage down. Maybe flip them to having a truth detection ability that is language dependent, and resistant to any effects with a spoken component.
As an aside, make sure that it translates well to antipaladin. Too many good align stuff makes it a bit hard to make villains.

[LordErebus12]

I wish there was an archetype that allows characters to scribe offensive words with this language on the battlefield from afar, acting similarly like landmines.
EDIT: Runechanter?

[Fax Celestis]

I wish there was an archetype that allows characters to scribe offensive words with this language on the battlefield from afar, acting similarly like landmines.
EDIT: Runechanter?

Actually making some paths for the Advocate currently. This might make it into one. I've got the one as-is now, one that binds the souls of outsiders (kind of like the demonbinder prestige class (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070430a&page=3)), and one that inscribes edicts and has Kabbalistic golem minions. This might slot into the latter nicely.

[Abithrios]

Actually making some paths for the Advocate currently. This might make it into one. I've got the one as-is now, one that binds the souls of outsiders (kind of like the demonbinder prestige class (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070430a&page=3)), and one that inscribes edicts and has Kabbalistic golem minions. This might slot into the latter nicely.

Those sound like cool ideas, but I sure hope you are not planning to make the outsider binding one always EEEVUUUL like the link provided. I am not sure if I could spend "damnation points" with a straight face. Also, "you sacrifice your immortal soul for the instant power of the Abyss" is already played out as a concept, especially considering making it overpowered in exchange for some fluff penalty after you die would be considered a bad thing.

[Ssalarn]

Those sound like cool ideas, but I sure hope you are not planning to make the outsider binding one always EEEVUUUL like the link provided. I am not sure if I could spend "damnation points" with a straight face. Also, "you sacrifice your immortal soul for the instant power of the Abyss" is already played out as a concept, especially considering making it overpowered in exchange for some fluff penalty after you die would be considered a bad thing.

I'd like to see more "Becoming a slave to the lawbound forces of heaven, you sell your soul for celestial might", and the chance to spend "redemption points" :smallbiggrin:

[Fax Celestis]

Those sound like cool ideas, but I sure hope you are not planning to make the outsider binding one always EEEVUUUL like the link provided. I am not sure if I could spend "damnation points" with a straight face. Also, "you sacrifice your immortal soul for the instant power of the Abyss" is already played out as a concept, especially considering making it overpowered in exchange for some fluff penalty after you die would be considered a bad thing.

Well, here's a little bit of what I have planned:


Lecture of Sheltering (Sp): At first level, a concordat learns the lecture of sheltering as a bonus litany. She may use this litany even though she has no other litanies known and does not gain the litanies feature until fourth level.

This class feature replaces the advocate’s specialized lexicon class feature. A concordat never gains the specialized lexicon class feature.

Soulbinding (Su): Starting at second level, a concordat learns how to bind the souls of outsiders to their bodies by speaking an outsider’s true name, gaining some of their powers. Activating this ability requires a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity. As part of activating this ability, a concordat makes a special Tzocatl check and consults the below table:
Tzocatl Check ResultSoul Available
12 or lessLemure
13Lantern archon
14-15Hell hound
16Hound archon
17-18Nightmare
19Kyton
20-21Succubus
22Lillend
23-24Vrock
25Bebilith
26-27Cauchemar
28Barbed devil
29-30Ghaele azata
31Nalfeshnee demon
32-33Astral deva
34Planetar
35-36Marilith
37Balor
38-39Pit fiend
40 or moreSolar
A concordat may select a lesser result if so desired.
When bound to a soul, the concordat gains several subtypes and abilities, per the below descriptions:


Astral Deva - placeholder for now, insert abilities
Balor
Barbed Devil
Bebilith
Cauchemar
Ghaele Azata
Hell Hound
Hound Archon
Kyton
Lantern Archon
Lemure
Lillend
Marilith
Nalfeshnee Demon
Nightmare
Pit Fiend
Planetar
Solar
Succubus
Vrock

This ability replaces the advocate’s esoterica class feature. A concordat never gains the esoterica class feature.


Lecture of Sheltering
Lexicon protection (litany) [see text]; Level apprentice (litany)
Casting Time 1 swift action
Range personal
Target you
Duration permanent until dispelled or until a new litany begins

While lecture of sheltering is active, you are treated as if under the effects of protection from evil, except the alignment it works against is any alignment more than two steps away from your own. For instance, if you are Lawful Good, lecture of sheltering only provides protection from evil’s benefits against Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral, and Neutral Evil creatures, while if you are Chaotic Neutral, it only provides protection from Lawful Good and Lawful Evil creatures. This limitation is for all benefits of protection from evil, including the protection against mentally controlling effects protection from evil normally provides.

If you are True Neutral, lecture of sheltering instead provides these benefits against Lawful Good, Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, and Chaotic Evil creatures.

This litany shares your alignment descriptors: if you are Lawful Good, for instance, it has both the lawful and good descriptors.

Esoterica: If you select this esoterica, lecture of sheltering also provides its protective benefits to any of your allies for as long as they remain within 10 ft. of you. Creatures that leave the area and come back are not protected.

[Abithrios]

Well, here's a little bit of what I have planned:

So far, so good.

Unrelated question, if a character gets Tzocatl Training from more than one class, do the levels stack or do they have different Tzocatl modifiers from the separate sources?

[Fax Celestis]

So far, so good.

Unrelated question, if a character gets Tzocatl Training from more than one class, do the levels stack or do they have different Tzocatl modifiers from the separate sources?

They stack. Most of them include "effective advocate level" casing, which should make that apparent, but probably not obvious. I'll be sure to slot that in.

[Milo v3]

I'm currently writing up a few Magic Schools for each Dreamscarred Press subsystem using Inner Sea Magic's school subsystem, but I'm unsure what to call the some of the school "types".

Anyone know a term that would be fitting for places of learning for Tzocatl?

[PsyBomb]

Been a while, but posting here for this is worth it.

I am opening up a MythWeavers Pathfinder game meant to be purely for playtesting. Anyone who wants to volunteer and play a Tsocatl user (especially an Advocate) can go ahead and sign up, the more the merrier. Anyone else who wants to keep tabs on it and to comment in the Spectator section is more than welcome to do so.

Game is at http://www.myth-weavers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=32485&tg=49954
Roll20 for the game will be at https://app.roll20.net/join/633729/luZnyg

[deuxhero]

Anyone know a term that would be fitting for places of learning for Tzocatl?


A (Roman) forum? Podium? Auditorium?

[Extra Anchovies]

Possibly an Odeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odeon_(building))? They're more for singing, but whatever.

[Psyren]

Possibly an Odeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odeon_(building))? They're more for singing, but whatever.

You could even get into one for 5 silvers! Get it? Get it? Please kill me.

[Extra Anchovies]

You could even get into one for 5 silvers! Get it? Get it? Please kill me.

Sorry, I'm missing the reference. Won't kill you until you explain, please :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

Sorry, I'm missing the reference. Won't kill you until you explain, please :smalltongue:

5 silvers = 5 cents = a nickel. Nickel + odeon...

*slinks away*

[Fallenreality]

5 silvers = 5 cents = a nickel. Nickel + odeon...

*slinks away*

I... I feel unclean after a pun like that.

[Milo v3]

5 silvers = 5 cents = a nickel. Nickel + odeon...

*slinks away*

Unfortunately, 1 gp = $20 according to d20 modern so 5 silvers would be $2. Twodollarodean? Sounds like a super cheap alien from MiB or something.

[Vhaidara]

Okay, I finally got around to reading through while making my advocate for PsyBomb's playtest. One thing I would request is a separation in the short list by Lexicon, which would make it much more easily searchable.

I'm going to try my hand at a blast-focus destruction advocate, with some creation backup.

[Vhaidara]

Question about the Esoterica for Recitation of Flame: Does it apply to the fire damage of RoF (making it 1d6+2xInt mod)?

EDIT: Also, I just realized how pointless it currently is, since it is the only source of fire damage I can see in Tzocatl aside from Dragonfire Litany...
Still might use it, just to have a default action that actually does a reasonable amount of damage.

[Fax Celestis]

Question about the Esoterica for Recitation of Flame: Does it apply to the fire damage of RoF (making it 1d6+2xInt mod)?

EDIT: Also, I just realized how pointless it currently is, since it is the only source of fire damage I can see in Tzocatl aside from Dragonfire Litany...
Still might use it, just to have a default action that actually does a reasonable amount of damage.

Yes, it does. The esoterica doesn't care about the source.

Just FYI: I'm not dead, still working on this. Got sick, parents took me and the kids to Disneyland for Christmas, holidays, regular job being, well, holiday season...you know, stuff. Teaser of things I'm going to add to the playtest soon: reasons to take Subvert Oath (AKA: "I manipulate your truename and now you have a monk vow or other oath for a duration. Oh, and the universe thinks you just violated your oath. Eat me.").

[Vhaidara]

Playtest has already raised a question:
War Cry provides an insight bonus. The name sounds more like something that would provide a morale bonus. Bug or Feature?

[Fax Celestis]

Playtest has already raised a question:
War Cry provides an insight bonus. The name sounds more like something that would provide a morale bonus. Bug or Feature?

Feature, otherwise it would play havoc with stuff like the Imperious Bloodline's Heroic Echo.

[Yue Ryong]

...I'm not sure how to feel about this. On one level, I love Truenaming (both as a roll-led mechanic & fluff-wise)... on the other I get all twitchy about any language magic that doesn't have at least some level of offensive naming. When I want to wizard (which is admittedly relatively rare), I want to Sparrowhawk it up.

[Zaq]

I'm glad that you took a lot of my suggestions into consideration, but I have to pipe up about Soliloquy of Hatred and Soliloquy of Risk. They have the old Truespeak DC problem: the Tzocatl DC goes up by 1 per level (10 + target's HD), but your Tzocatl mod only goes up by 1 per 2 levels. It gets harder and harder to succeed as you go up in level, and unlike with Truenaming, you can't just scrounge around for weird exotic bonuses to keep pace. (There's no Paratzocatl Assembly, after all.) You definitely need to do something to address that, whether it's fixing the DC, removing the Tzocatl check, or just scrapping those two litanies, because they just won't work as intended.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm glad that you took a lot of my suggestions into consideration, but I have to pipe up about Soliloquy of Hatred and Soliloquy of Risk. They have the old Truespeak DC problem: the Tzocatl DC goes up by 1 per level (10 + target's HD), but your Tzocatl mod only goes up by 1 per 2 levels. It gets harder and harder to succeed as you go up in level, and unlike with Truenaming, you can't just scrounge around for weird exotic bonuses to keep pace. (There's no Paratzocatl Assembly, after all.) You definitely need to do something to address that, whether it's fixing the DC, removing the Tzocatl check, or just scrapping those two litanies, because they just won't work as intended.

Yeah, I'm going to fix those. I just am not sure how I want to make those work. I don't want it to be an always-on effect, and I don't want it to be zomg-extra-rolls against a ridiculous DC.

[georgie_leech]

Yeah, I'm going to fix those. I just am not sure how I want to make those work. I don't want it to be an always-on effect, and I don't want it to be zomg-extra-rolls against a ridiculous DC.

It works for making the check itself; why not have it go up by 1/2 HD?

[Kaidinah]

Hi. New to this thread.

I was wondering if the Advocator, Knight Scholar, archetypes and future classes also have their names translated into the same language the edicts, words of power and such are.

[Axebird]

Is this project still alive? I haven't heard anything new for a long time.

[Doomeye56]

Not dead, just in a state of hibernation while Fax Celestis works things out.

[hiryuu]

This all looks great - I'll be playing an Advocate in an upcoming campaign.

I do have to ask, though, where's the Charisma-based speaker?

As for places of Tzocatl learning? I nominate "kiva (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiva)." Sure, it's not exactly their purpose, but it works, you know?

[meemaas]

There isn't one yet. This project has gone on hiatus from what I understand because the developer had some personal concerns come up. I suggest playing extensively and noting your concerns when he comes back.

[Fax Celestis]

There isn't one yet. This project has gone on hiatus from what I understand because the developer had some personal concerns come up. I suggest playing extensively and noting your concerns when he comes back.

...which should be any day now. Hi guys. Disclosure: I had a death in the family and have not particularly been having good times financially the past few months, so this has sort of gotten backburnered, but I have a plan and a schedule I'm sticking myself to and I'm going to get this done. So, that said, I'll compile and put up a clean playtesting doc soon, as the current one is literally covered with editing markup.

[hiryuu]

...which should be any day now. Hi guys. Disclosure: I had a death in the family and have not particularly been having good times financially the past few months, so this has sort of gotten backburnered, but I have a plan and a schedule I'm sticking myself to and I'm going to get this done. So, that said, I'll compile and put up a clean playtesting doc soon, as the current one is literally covered with editing markup.

Oh no! That stinks T_T

If you need any help, of any sort, even if it's just to, like, yell at me to feel better, feel free to seek me out.

As far as playing, everything seems alright so far. I haven't actually gotten Tahuaca Four-Jaugar-Two-Macaw into a game yet, but she looks pretty fun on paper.

[Taveena]

Sorry to hear about that. :( Are you at least okay now financially?

[Fax Celestis]

Sorry to hear about that. :( Are you at least okay now financially?

Enh. Single-income family, two kids. So you know, money's always a thing, but we've got food and shelter and power, so we're not that bad off.

[angellis_ater]

Hi!

James - I'd love for you to get in touch with us at Dreamscarred Press ASAP.

[NomGarret]

So I hope that this project still has life, as I just recently got a good look at it. I like what I see. My biggest thought at the moment is about base effects succeeding even if you fail to meet the DC. I may run some numbers to see what can be accomplished even if you fail all checks.

[ElderLucian]

Did not realized this was a thing... hope it is continuing because I'm starting a campaign soon and when I told one of my players about this he immediately rerolled to try it out.

[NomGarret]

I suggest smoothing out the edict progression for Advocates. They get a total of 23 edicts plus litanies and right now you learn anywhere from 0-3 at any given level. Level 3 just grants a bonus feat while level 4 grants 2 edicts known and the first litany.

[Ssalarn]

Hey all! So, here's the deal-

James has unfortunately had to drop out of this project to deal with some real life issues, so I'll be taking his place to run this thing through the finish line. I have a few goals-

1) Maintain the integrity of James' work so far.

2) Tighten up both base classes and get them ready to wrap. This may include beating the Knight-Scholar into something that looks a fair degree different than it does now.

3) Add in some new archetypes that I feel this project would benefit from, particularly the Bard, Ranger, and Witch.

4) Finish, and possibly make a few tweaks to, the existing Litanies and Edicts.

5) Finish the product in a timely manner with the highest possible quality.


I'd love it if you all could help me meet these goals with playtest and feedback data. Some of the things that I'm considering doing to meet these goals include-

1) Reevaluating the role of litanies and edicts. I've seen a few comments on how the progressions of the Advocate and Knight-Scholar are a bit wonky, and I think making Litanies just another type of Edict with the [Litany] keyword is a step towards resolving those problems. I don't believe we need two separate progressions for Edicts and Edicts-that-are-really-just-sustainable-buffs.

2) Switching the Knight-Scholar to a full BAB chassis. This is actually going to involve a lot more work than that simple mission statement would indicate, but I think it's important to establish the Advocate as the "master" of Tzocatl/Truenaming, and that involves strengthening his facility with the new subsystem a bit and shifting the focus of the second class.

I'm also looking at some other options, such as a class or archetype that actually inscribes names into totems or tattoos, using them in a slightly different way, but I'll talk a bit more about that when it's ready.

For now, I'd love to hear what everyone has to say, whether it be about my projected goals and ideas, issues or compliments for the existing materials, or what have you. Anyone worried that this will derail one of my other projects, like Psitech - don't worry. Those are proceeding apace, though I do anticipate that Psitech and Tzocatl will probably have some time where both are in playtest simulaneously.

Thank you everyone!

[Ilorin Lorati]

Anyone worried that this will derail one of my other projects, like Psitech - don't worry. Those are proceeding apace, though I do anticipate that Psitech and Tzocatl will probably have some time where both are playtest simulaneously.

Thank you everyone!

All I needed to hear. Looking forward to seeing this project continuing. Shame about James, though.

[Novawurmson]

Sorry to see Fax Celestis go, but happy to see Ssalarn in. Excited to see the next update.

[stack]

The scribing onto items/tattoos sounds interesting. Since you have shadowcasting in the works, you'll have 2/3 of the tome of magic updates under your belt. If there wasn't already a good PF binder out there...

[Vhaidara]

Grab nab it Ssalarn, I want Shadewalker!

I'll actually have to find time go back through this. I remember building a character for a short lived playtest attempt. IIRC, my biggest complaint was lack of synergy. A Litany that increased fire damage, but then almost no internal access to fire damage, things like that

[Ssalarn]

Grab nab it Ssalarn, I want Shadewalker!

I'll actually have to find time go back through this. I remember building a character for a short lived playtest attempt. IIRC, my biggest complaint was lack of synergy. A Litany that increased fire damage, but then almost no internal access to fire damage, things like that

You never know, DSP may do a big Tome of Magic style release with Akasha, Tzocatl, and Shadow magic, given that I've designed or worked on all three. The future is an exciting place with endless possibilities!

As to the whole synergy thing - I've noticed that there are a lot of edicts that do a particular type of energy damage, lie electricity. I'm looking into bumping the number of edicts known and allowing you to take the same edict multiple times, selecting a different energy type each time. Still running the math on that fix to make sure it works out appropriately, but I think it's a good way to go.


The scribing onto items/tattoos sounds interesting. Since you have shadowcasting in the works, you'll have 2/3 of the tome of magic updates under your belt. If there wasn't already a good PF binder out there...

I'm actually of Native Alaskan descent (Tlingit), so the temptation to do a class or archetype that uses totems has been nagging at me for a bit, especially since it didn't happen with Akashic Mysteries. I think that this could be a really good place to explore that idea.

[Kaidinah]

I am sad to see James go. He was a pretty cool designer and I totally digged his naming sense for a lot of the stuff in Tzocatl. I wish him and his family the best.

Thank you Ssalarn for bringing Tsocatl back. Its been a while, so I am not fresh on my litanies and edicts, though I think combining the two sounds like a good idea. As for the Knight Scholar, Full-Babbing it sounds like a good start to developing an identity for it. It was weird having both classes be medium BaB.

[Ssalarn]

I am sad to see James go. He was a pretty cool designer and I totally digged his naming sense for a lot of the stuff in Tzocatl. I wish him and his family the best.

Absolutely agreed.



Thank you Ssalarn for bringing Tsocatl back.


I'm more than happy to get to be a part of this project, and I'm definitely looking forward to working with everyone who's been playtesting this or who will be playtesting.



Its been a while, so I am not fresh on my litanies and edicts, though I think combining the two sounds like a good idea.

For me, they're really just names, and names with a specific subset of rules attached, so I think that combining them into one grouping is going to allow more versatility and variety of characters, and actually give a bit more design space to work with.



As for the Knight Scholar, Full-Babbing it sounds like a good start to developing an identity for it. It was weird having both classes be medium BaB.

I think I've got some good ideas where to go here. You may not know this, but I was seriously considering making the Daevic 3/4 BAB for a while, just because you tend to get more leeway from a certain subset of the player base who value that full BAB very highly and feel that it should also come with stricter limitations and narrower options elsewhere in the chassis. I think the Daevic turned out pretty good though, and he's got almost as much veilweaving power as the Vizier, though with certain limitations that throttle his total veilweaving power and versatility. I want the Knight-Scholar chassis to fit in similarly, where it feels like someone who has just as much breadth of ability within Tzocatl, but less depth and more focus.

Also, the name Knight-Scholar just strikes me wrong. Any thoughts on if I were to tweak the name to Warspeaker to accompany some of the other planned developments?

[Milo v3]

Disappointing to hear about Fax, but it's good to know that Tzocatl is still in safe hands.

[Kaidinah]

Also, the name Knight-Scholar just strikes me wrong. Any thoughts on if I were to tweak the name to Warspeaker to accompany some of the other planned developments?Warspeaker is a very brutal sounding name, evoking a pretty cool image. I definitely think Warspeaker fits this system a bit more than the Knight Scholar's current name.

[Sayt]

Warspeaker is a good name, but I think Knight-scholar does tie in with the classes Int focus to a certain extent.

[Milo v3]

Part of me is thinking just Commander, but it's not really..... mystical enough of a military title.

[Ssalarn]

Warspeaker is a good name, but I think Knight-scholar does tie in with the classes Int focus to a certain extent.

I'm exploring the idea of making the Knight-Scholar / Warspeaker Charisma based instead. It seems like there is some demand for that, and it opens up the number of races that can excel at the system. Thoughts?

Also, which would people prefer- the option to change the type of element an Edict or Litany used by increasing the DC, or the ability to learn an Edict multiple times, with a different element associated with each version?

[georgie_leech]

It's a shame Lore Warden is already a Fighter Archetype.

[Vhaidara]

Oh, I like that idea. Maybe when you learn it, you choose an element. That's your base, and you can increase the DC from that to change it.

Also, I saw something about merging Litanies and Edicts earlier: I don't like that idea, at least from my memory of what is what. IIRC, Litanies are basically stances, vs edicts being the spells/maneuvers. That's a really big difference, honestly.

[Sayt]

I'm exploring the idea of making the Knight-Scholar / Warspeaker Charisma based instead. It seems like there is some demand for that, and it opens up the number of races that can excel at the system. Thoughts?


I have...complicated thoughts on making it Cha based. Intelligence makes a certain amount of intuitive sense for a supernatural system in which magic is based off of a grammar and diction, rather than convincingness. Furthermore, there are several fairly recent 'Charismartials' (I am never using that term again): the Swashbuckler, Daevic and Warlord, and while there weren't many (or any, really apart from a few Bard archetypes/builds and of course the Paladin, which I somehow almost forgot) before, it feels like the market is flooded a bit at the moment.

On the other hand, it does help to differentiate it from the Advocate, which is very... wizardly, in as much as it's the main truespeaker specialist, much as the wizard is the main arcane caster, and charisma is generally a relatively undervalued stat, but commonly receives racial bonuses

[stack]

Charisma does seem overused for martials (daevic, paladin, warlord, etc), but I suppose it depends on the fluff and focus as the class develops.

[Vhaidara]

I think Int martials are about as common Cha-martials. Warder, Harbinger, Inspired Blade Swashbuckler, Aegis. And Int is generally the best stat for a mental-independent martial, since it gets you Combat Expertise, the key to tax on being useful.

Also, Swashbuckler and Warlord are almost a year old. They'll be well over that by the time this gets released

[Milo v3]

How would the flavour work for non-int truenaming?

[Kaidinah]

How would the flavour work for non-int truenaming?A logical speaker versus demagoguery? Thats the way I think of it.

[Vhaidara]

How would the flavour work for non-int truenaming?

Whispering gently into the universe's ear.

More seriously, I feel it would be more like battlecries. They know the words, they might even know what they mean, but what they care about is that the words give them strength. They don't question it, or study it, they just use it.

It's an odd parallel, but if you've read the Dresden Files, think of Michael's Latin battlecries.

[Milo v3]

A logical speaker versus demagoguery? Thats the way I think of it.

Demagoguery (https://youtu.be/hHQ2756cyD8?t=36)?

[NomGarret]

First off: sorry to hear about James, but if this project had to fall into someone else's hands, I'm glad it fell where it did.

I'm going to have to go back and look some more, but the one bit that I remember being concerned about is the effectiveness of spamming edicts when you don't meet the DC. Namely, is it better to fail a higher level edict since the base effect will still go off than hope to make a lower level edict with emphases?

[Ssalarn]

First off: sorry to hear about James, but if this project had to fall into someone else's hands, I'm glad it fell where it did.

I'm going to have to go back and look some more, but the one bit that I remember being concerned about is the effectiveness of spamming edicts when you don't meet the DC. Namely, is it better to fail a higher level edict since the base effect will still go off than hope to make a lower level edict with emphases?

I saw you bring that up, and it's actually one of the things I'm looking into right now. Thanks for the support and the feedback!

[NomGarret]

My initial thought is -1 attack/save DC if you fail to meet the txocatl check, but that doesn't address all the other edicts that have neither an attack roll nor a save.

[Mithril Leaf]

Damn it Ssalarn, I was almost done with your subsystems. Hopefully I shall get another distinct mechanic to graft onto my Aegis.

[Ssalarn]

Damn it Ssalarn, I was almost done with your subsystems. Hopefully I shall get another distinct mechanic to graft onto my Aegis.

You'll never be done! I've still got Psitech and Shadow Magic waiting in the wings, and those are just the things I've already run by Andreas and Jeremy! Muahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahhaha!


Wait, I actually came here to say something.... One second... I know it was important....

Ah, got it.

So, planned changes that I'm working on-

1) Removing Tzocatl Training as a class feature and rolling it up with Edicts and Litanies so there's one solid base that all the little pieces of the subsystem can refer directly to. This is largely to streamline things and make the system easier to grasp. Will have a version of what this looks like available shortly.

2) Knight-Scholar is being converted to a Cha-based full-BAB chassis, as I've kind of talked a bit about earlier. As part of this, some of his class features, like Scholarly Knowledge, are being shifted to the Advocate to emphasize that class as "the Intelligence guy" and some new class features, like Warcries, are being written in to take its place. Think of it kind of like the difference between a lecturing professor and a motivational speaker- they both have to know what they're talking about enough to make a point, but one guy uses a huge depth of knowledge and an expansive vocabulary of precise terms, while the other guy uses a narrower lexicon of attention-grabbing keywords. I'm pondering whether or not to have a general rule that you must have a minimum Intelligence score of 10 to make Tzocatl checks at all- I don't want to make classes and archetypes that rely on different mental ability scores too MAD, but I'm also very much against the idea of bumbling idiots who can still pronounce the words that define existence.

3) Minor changes and additions to the core rules and feats to accomodate points 1 and 2.

4) I'm going to be trying out something called Elemental Affinity, similar to the psionic mechanic of active element types. Whenever you learn an edict or litany that interacts with a particular element, the default of that element is always the one selected for your Elemental Affinity, the aspect of creation you are most attuned to based on your character and personality. You can select a different element by increasing the DC of your Tzocatl check by 3, or 5 if the selected element opposes your affinity (so, for example, if your natural affinity is water (cold), you could speak an Edict to instead deal earth (acid) damage with the edict by increasing the check by 3, or you could deal fire damage by increasing the DC by 5. The goal here isn't to turn the Tzocatl characters into yet another type of bender, so I'm not looking at adding many more elemental themed powers, it's to give the Tzocatl system itself some much needed versatility and increased synergy within its own chassis.

5) And of course, archetypes. Bard and Ranger are coming up as soon as I finish my projects on the Advocate and Warspeaker.

I'm working on getting these changes ready for playtest and review now, aiming to get them out to you all ASAP. When I do, I may need to start a new thread so I can take over the OP and post any updated links or similar necessities. If that happens I'll post a link to that new thread here to try and head off any confusion.

[Sayt]

All good to hear! I do love me some rangers...


Y'know, I the Warcries thing made me think of it having a an archetype, or the Warlord having an imitation archetype (Like the Pathwarlker PsyWar and initiating) that gets Warcries. Make it Golden Lion focused: Speaker for the Pride.

Also, might it be worth seeing if anything of value can be included from the Words of Power system that was Ultimate Magic? It never erally got any support from Paizo, but I think you could make an interesting Wordcaster/Edit Theurge, and perhaps expand the words of power system a little?

[Taveena]

It's gonna be tricky. While the hierarchy of elements has changed from 3.5e to PF - Cold now being the most commonly resisted - it's still THERE, and it seems like it's just going to be a stronger option to pick Acid, Electricity, or Sonic over Fire or Cold in almost all situations.

I dunno. It's probably possible, but when they're all on an apparently equal footing, in practice they've got other problems just because of the targets.

[NomGarret]

Sonic is more thematically appropriate than fire or cold, anyway. Heck physical damage (calling up the earth, commanding armor to stab inward, etc) seems more fitting somehow.

[Mithril Leaf]

It's gonna be tricky. While the hierarchy of elements has changed from 3.5e to PF - Cold now being the most commonly resisted - it's still THERE, and it seems like it's just going to be a stronger option to pick Acid, Electricity, or Sonic over Fire or Cold in almost all situations.

I dunno. It's probably possible, but when they're all on an apparently equal footing, in practice they've got other problems just because of the targets.

I can't quite recall the forum thread where they analyzed it, but I think there are no monsters immune to both acid and fire. I do recall that acid and electricity are about on even footing with sonic as by far the least resisted type. I think it was around 100 for each of acid and electricity.

[Abithrios]

It has been quite a while since I last looked at this. I have forgotten most of the details, but I recall having a couple of misgivings about some of the mechanics, and I don't remember if they were ever resolved. The first is that it was possible to take a twenty on many of the Tzocatl checks. It's not a formal rule, merely an emergent property of having long duration buffs castable at will with variable effects. If you don't get the maximum effect the first time, just try again until you do. The other (which I may be misremembering) was that Tzocatl results in more difficult table math (what is my attack modifier today?).

[meemaas]

It has been quite a while since I last looked at this. I have forgotten most of the details, but I recall having a couple of misgivings about some of the mechanics, and I don't remember if they were ever resolved. The first is that it was possible to take a twenty on many of the Tzocatl checks. It's not a formal rule, merely an emergent property of having long duration buffs castable at will with variable effects. If you don't get the maximum effect the first time, just try again until you do. The other (which I may be misremembering) was that Tzocatl results in more difficult table math (what is my attack modifier today?).

I think I had the same misgivings about your first point here. Probably the best solution is to make it so you can't overwrite an existing edict until it's duration expires naturally. I'm sure Ssalarn can get the right wording to solve that easily.

Also, excited to see that you've taken this project over Ssalarn, I love your work on Akashic Mysteries and I know you will be able to do this project justice.

[Ssalarn]

Anyone familiar with the new Occultist class from Paizo? I was thinking of hijacking it for my totemist archetype, but I'm worried that Occult Adventures may not be widely used enough for me to be taking a big concept and hanging it on something from that book. Just trying to get a feel for where people are at on it.

(My personal opinion- Occult Adventures is a great book, probably one of the better pieces of work Paizo has done in quite a while, though the Occultist is probably one of the bottom two classes of the bunch. That being said, "implements" becomes "totems" so easily, and I'll be gutting most of the subpar options and mechanics for the archetype anyways.)

[Milo v3]

Anyone familiar with the new Occultist class from Paizo? I was thinking of hijacking it for my totemist archetype, but I'm worried that Occult Adventures may not be widely used enough for me to be taking a big concept and hanging it on something from that book. Just trying to get a feel for where people are at on it.

(My personal opinion- Occult Adventures is a great book, probably one of the better pieces of work Paizo has done in quite a while, though the Occultist is probably one of the bottom two classes of the bunch. That being said, "implements" becomes "totems" so easily, and I'll be gutting most of the subpar options and mechanics for the archetype anyways.)

Ooh, do it. I've been wondering when DSP will decide that they're willing to put in Occult stuff, and the Occultist is a great opportunity when it comes to potential archetypes with how they handled the implemeents.

[Vhaidara]

Yeah, Occult stuff is awesome. I haven't had much chance to play around with base Occultist (been using my own Sphere Occultist), but Spiritualist and Mesmerist are both crazy kinds of fun.

[Nihilarian]

Occult Adventures seems pretty uninspired to me.

[Vhaidara]

Occult Adventures seems pretty uninspired to me.

Care to elaborate? I find all of the classes quite well done
Kineticist was the victim of over conservation, but the idea is sound and easily salvaged.
Medium is a nice take on the Binder, and the archetypes are amazing
Mesmerist is a great debuffer with a great variety of builds for it
Occultist is a great idea with execution that I haven't had a chance to try yet
Spiritualist is a very cool take on the Summoner that fixes a lot of the balance issues while keeping the core of the eidolon focused class
Psychic i don't care about.

[Ssalarn]

Care to elaborate? I find all of the classes quite well done
Kineticist was the victim of over conservation, but the idea is sound and easily salvaged.
Medium is a nice take on the Binder, and the archetypes are amazing
Mesmerist is a great debuffer with a great variety of builds for it
Occultist is a great idea with execution that I haven't had a chance to try yet
Spiritualist is a very cool take on the Summoner that fixes a lot of the balance issues while keeping the core of the eidolon focused class
Psychic i don't care about.

Posted my thoughts on Occult Adventures here (http://www.somnambulant-gamer.com/2015/09/occult-adventures.html).

[Nihilarian]

Care to elaborate? I find all of the classes quite well done
Kineticist was the victim of over conservation, but the idea is sound and easily salvaged.
Medium is a nice take on the Binder, and the archetypes are amazing
Mesmerist is a great debuffer with a great variety of builds for it
Occultist is a great idea with execution that I haven't had a chance to try yet
Spiritualist is a very cool take on the Summoner that fixes a lot of the balance issues while keeping the core of the eidolon focused class
Psychic i don't care about.to start with, 5/6 of them are fairly typical casters. Psychic Magic isn't appreciably different from Magic Magic. At least Psionics had a different method of resource management.

Kineticist: Warlock, but with the Hellfire baked in, a fairly generic elemental theme, and somewhat awkward seeming besides. Managing burn seems like it would be a pain, especially since the Warlock was fairly simple.

Medium: they turned a class with unique mechanics and fantastic flavor into a spellcaster who uses generic spirts. Also, hope your DM puts one of the listed spots somewhere near you every morning or else you'll go through the day as a 3/4th BAB 4/9th caster. Maybe he'll even give you the one you want.

Mesmerist: The Mesmerist isn't bad, and I especially appreciate it's ability to get past immunity to it's gimmick. Considering it's based on a regular spellcaster I don't have any complaints about where they took it.

Occultist: all right, I suppose. The resonant powers do bring to mind Soulmelds, but nothing else about the class does.

Psychic: No one seems to have anything to say about this class other than "it's a full caster, what did you expect?"

Spiritualist: this one doesn't even go back to 3.5 for "inspiration". At least it's at a more reasonable power level than the summoner?

[Vhaidara]

Ignore psychic magic completely. Psychic magic is stupid and pointless. Look at the actual classes.

Kineticist: Managing burn is actually quite nice. People overcomplicate it. It's just a resource that you expend over the course of the day, and you get a bonus when you do.
Medium: there's an archetype to get around that. And the Reanimated Medium. Also, you're objecting to it on the grounds of ******* GM. ******* GM can ruin anyone's day. Also, there is going to eventually be the Harrow Medium, which will come with 54 spirits (the original was this, but they realized it was taking its own book)
Mesmerist: How is this based on a regular spellcaster?
Occultist and Spiritualist: You're acting like not going back to 3.5 for inspiration is a bad thing, but you said you found the book uninspired. What part of doing different things is uninspired?

[Taveena]

For what very little my opinion's worth, Occult Adventures is... I dunno. Kinda disappointing. The entire reason I LIKE Warlock is because of their lack of resource management. Burn is even worse than spell slots or power points because not only do you have the tossup of 'now vs later', you've also got to try to work out exactly how much HP you can get by with. Plus, the elemental damage blasts are basically a trap option.

Medium, meanwhile, is down to a minuscule 6 spirits, has a daily resource (two, really, given you can only reduce once per day). and has so many less options than the Binder.

To be entirely honest, though, Pact Magic Unbound felt like a significant drop in power from the Binder, too, without a clear role in combat, but it at least had the things that I like about the Binding system involved, which Medium didn't.

The flat-up casters I just dislike, like pretty much every caster that isn't fixed-list or using a weird subsystem. (Psychic magic doesn't get to be a subsystem. Divine and Arcane aren't different subsystems.)

This is all entirely subjective, but none of these are playstyles I enjoy, and I have no interest in practice in playing any of those.

[Nihilarian]

@Keledrath

Except for the Kineticist, all of the classes are Psychic Mages. If you find Psychic Magic pointless, it's a wonder you're trying to defend them at all.

Kineticist: I'll take your word for it. It's still a Warlock.

Medium: the fact that 3/5 of the class' archetypes make it so you can pick and choose your spirit makes it all the more baffling why the base class has to rely on the DM giving you what you want. No amount of archetypes can save it from the fact that Vestiges were just way more flavorful.

"The DM can mess up any class" is a lousy excuse because other classes don't encourage your DM to make fundamental choices for you.

Mesmerist: it's Pathfinder's answer to the beguiler, and I think I actually like it better than the beguiler, so I'm not sure why you're defending it? Having actual class features helps.

Occultist: Ssalarn was asking about using this class as the basis for a Totemist archetype, which is why I brought up soulmelds. I don't actually have much to say about it; it's gimmick seems a logical extension of Arcane Bond? That's about it.

Spiritualist: I was suggesting that it took inspiration from a Pathfinder class, not that it was wholly original.

[Kaidinah]

Anyone familiar with the new Occultist class from Paizo? I was thinking of hijacking it for my totemist archetype, but I'm worried that Occult Adventures may not be widely used enough for me to be taking a big concept and hanging it on something from that book. Just trying to get a feel for where people are at on it.

(My personal opinion- Occult Adventures is a great book, probably one of the better pieces of work Paizo has done in quite a while, though the Occultist is probably one of the bottom two classes of the bunch. That being said, "implements" becomes "totems" so easily, and I'll be gutting most of the subpar options and mechanics for the archetype anyways.)I think that would be pretty cool. I wouldn't mind seeing the Occultist mixed in. Besides, the Occultist is on the SRD, so at least its accessible. I'd imagine most 3rd party users will be willing to use the SRD anyway, since 3rd party already has so much non-print content to begin with.

[Vhaidara]

@Keledrath

Except for the Kineticist, all of the classes are Psychic Mages. If you find Psychic Magic pointless, it's a wonder you're trying to defend them at all.

Because I judge a class by its features, not some idiotic tag paizo put on it? Magus isn't good because it casts arcane spells, its good because of its class features. It could cast divine spells and it would still be good. Ditto Bloodrager, inquisitor, and bard, off the top of my head. Likewise, spiritualist, mesmerist, and medium are about their class features more than their spell list. Hell, my spiritualist only casts out of combat, and that's because he's a backup healer (for when the cleric goes down)

Also, on vestiges being more flavorful: I disagree completely. Vestiges had more prewritten flavor. Spirits have a lot more player driven flavor. Hell, one of my go to is actually similar to reanimated medium: you channel your own futures. But it leaves it up to player creativity.

More on topic, I would love to see a truenaming mesmerist. I love people who can sweet talk the universe into doing their bidding.

[Ssalarn]

More on topic, I would love to see a truenaming mesmerist. I love people who can sweet talk the universe into doing their bidding.

Hmmm.... What if it includes things like being able to decrease the DC of a Tzocatl check against a target affected by your beguiling gaze, essentially reprogamming them into a simpler universal template of themselves?
I swear, that sounded like a perfectly straightforward idea in my head.

Point being, I really like the idea and it's inspiring some interesting thoughts about how to blend the mechanics together.

[NomGarret]

Since margin of success matters for txocatl checks, would it scan easier to grant a txocatl roll bonus rather than apply a DC penalty?

[Fax Celestis]

Hey guys, thought I would check in. Glad to see Ssalarn has picked this up.

For full disclosure purposes, my dad has been in and out of the hospital for cancer for basically the length of this project's lifespan. While that gave me an opportunity to write, it also very harshly impacted my inspiration, as I was worried and stressed and couldn't put my energy into the project. I also have had some financial difficulties (tangentially related to the previous note with my dad), and as such have had to get rid of cable at home, which left me with no internet access (and therefore no way to work on this, among other things). Also have had a lot of upheaval at work: a round of heavy layoffs coupled with implementation of new company-wide software solutions and a department change made my life very very busy. All in all, a lot of crap building up all at the same time. I didn't handle any of this well at all, nor was I on top of my game with letting DSP know up-front, otherwise this would've likely been handed off sooner, but the important thing is that it's been taken care of and will be going somewhere from here. Things are beginning to normalize for me, but I honestly have no idea when--if ever--I'll be able to get back to designing, even part time. That's a huge disappointment for me: I love to design and to make games, and to have to put down my biggest hobby and passion for my responsibilities as a son, as an employee, and as a father is difficult, but it's a decision I've had to make.

Ssalarn, if you have questions for me about anything, particularly about what I had envisioned for the rest of the project or the intention of something that may be too vague, feel free to drop me a line and I'll get to it when I get an opportunity.

Again, my apologies to everyone for how I handled (or rather, didn't handle) this. I have complete faith in Ssalarn's abilities as a designer to complete this project to a wonderful result.


Since margin of success matters for txocatl checks, would it scan easier to grant a txocatl roll bonus rather than apply a DC penalty?

DC reduction works better, I think. Bonuses to tzocatl checks are supposed to be hard to come by, and while the net result is about the same, at least with a DC reduction you don't have to deal with stacking bonuses.

[Mithril Leaf]

I think that it would be very thematically appropriate to have some ability to bind/summon an outsider or maybe some number of CR/HD of them at max based off your check. Perhaps as a Litany so you are limited to not having anything else active if you want your pet out.

EDIT: Also is there any way to actually meet the 56+ check result required to get the max tier dragon breath from Dragonfire Litany?

[Deadkitten]

Hey all! So, here's the deal-

James has unfortunately had to drop out of this project to deal with some real life issues, so I'll be taking his place to run this thing through the finish line. I have a few goals-

1) Maintain the integrity of James' work so far.

2) Tighten up both base classes and get them ready to wrap. This may include beating the Knight-Scholar into something that looks a fair degree different than it does now.

3) Add in some new archetypes that I feel this project would benefit from, particularly the Bard, Ranger, and Witch.

4) Finish, and possibly make a few tweaks to, the existing Litanies and Edicts.

5) Finish the product in a timely manner with the highest possible quality.


I'd love it if you all could help me meet these goals with playtest and feedback data. Some of the things that I'm considering doing to meet these goals include-

1) Reevaluating the role of litanies and edicts. I've seen a few comments on how the progressions of the Advocate and Knight-Scholar are a bit wonky, and I think making Litanies just another type of Edict with the [Litany] keyword is a step towards resolving those problems. I don't believe we need two separate progressions for Edicts and Edicts-that-are-really-just-sustainable-buffs.

2) Switching the Knight-Scholar to a full BAB chassis. This is actually going to involve a lot more work than that simple mission statement would indicate, but I think it's important to establish the Advocate as the "master" of Tzocatl/Truenaming, and that involves strengthening his facility with the new subsystem a bit and shifting the focus of the second class.

I'm also looking at some other options, such as a class or archetype that actually inscribes names into totems or tattoos, using them in a slightly different way, but I'll talk a bit more about that when it's ready.

For now, I'd love to hear what everyone has to say, whether it be about my projected goals and ideas, issues or compliments for the existing materials, or what have you. Anyone worried that this will derail one of my other projects, like Psitech - don't worry. Those are proceeding apace, though I do anticipate that Psitech and Tzocatl will probably have some time where both are in playtest simulaneously.

Thank you everyone!

Good to see another project your working on.

So since I don't have a lot on my plate and I am genuinely interested in this project I will dive right in.
I apologize if I miss something in a previous post I just recently saw this project.

So about the "Knight-Scholar"...
I know you are working in a class feature called Warcries, is it just going to be a rename of the Words of Power class feature?
From what I can a "Knight-Scholar" is a VERY powerful dip for any CHA based class if the class feature remains the same. Both Yaotlalia and Itlacoa are REALLY good trade for a 1 level dip, especially considering they operate on a replenishing pool and have you CHA added to their duration, which means most of combat if you have a focus in them.

Teini: If you keep something like this in the rework, you could possibly word it similar to the Mesmerists Psychic Inception Bold stare, that way it might be balanced at being available at a lower level than 19th

Intelligent Defenses might also be a bit strong as written due to how good a 2 level dip would be.

[Ssalarn]

I think that it would be very thematically appropriate to have some ability to bind/summon an outsider or maybe some number of CR/HD of them at max based off your check. Perhaps as a Litany so you are limited to not having anything else active if you want your pet out.

EDIT: Also is there any way to actually meet the 56+ check result required to get the max tier dragon breath from Dragonfire Litany?

One of the reasons my update is taking so long is that I am painstakingly sifting my way through all the existing Edicts and formulae to make sure that everything scales how it should. I'm also trying to minimize the impact/requirement of high system mastery to use the system; I'd prefer that system mastery lie more in the realm of "which combinations of Edicts and Litanies get me the best results" rather than "how high can I jack my Tzocatl check".

I'm working on making 50 a "hard cap", and adjusting things so that a low system mastery player at 20th level can hit that ceiling about 60% of the time and a high system mastery player can squeeze that closer to 80 or 90%.

[Mithril Leaf]

I'm also trying to minimize the impact/requirement of high system mastery to use the system; I'd prefer that system mastery lie more in the realm of "which combinations of Edicts and Litanies get me the best results" rather than "how high can I jack my Tzocatl check".

I'm working on making 50 a "hard cap", and adjusting things so that a low system mastery player at 20th level can hit that ceiling about 60% of the time and a high system mastery player can squeeze that closer to 80 or 90%.

While that is an admirable goal, I personally am a big fan of letting a wide system mastery apply many small improvements.
I think that a nice mechanic to satisfy the desire for allowing less optimized builds do well that would still reward system mastery would be some way to take some amount of damage to increase your checks. It would let anyone be really badass a limited number of times, while people who build to be able to heal well get to use it more frequently and earlier. Or something along those lines.

[Vhaidara]

Kind of a metaphysical backlash? A price you pay to make up for the lack of skill you have with the words?

I'm only a little biased (I personally adore backlash mechanics as a supercharger), but I love this idea.

[NomGarret]

I'm not wild about adding a self damage element into the base mechanic. A particular class or archetype, sure, but let's not cut into the flavor space.

Also it makes a big difference if it looks more like the over-channel feat or the kineticist's burn.

[Mithril Leaf]

I'm not wild about adding a self damage element into the base mechanic. A particular class or archetype, sure, but let's not cut into the flavor space.

Also it makes a big difference if it looks more like the over-channel feat or the kineticist's burn.

I was personally feeling that it could be a feat or two, where maybe you take damage at say, a 4 to 1 ratio in exchange for a boost to your checks, probably limited by your level. So at level 8 you could invoke Eldritch Profanity to get a +2 bonus but you would take 8 damage.
It would let less optimized characters sometimes pull out the big guns and more optimized ones to have a reliable source of check bonus if they invest in HP.

I would personally also have a second feat to allow you double the cap on level and damage. Maybe even don't have a cap, assuming the ratio isn't too extreme.

[NomGarret]

Well you'd probably want to cap it at the speaker's current hp, otherwise you wind up doing 1000000 damage to yourself and getting a 250k bonus to your check. Sure, you're dead, but death isn't always permanent and what you just did was really impressive.

[Vhaidara]

I'd actually go with making death by backlash more...permanent. You're literally smack talking the universe at this stage. And it's hitting back.

I'd say, since you control how much you use it, if it kills you, Unname from 3.5 occurs.

[Ssalarn]

I'd actually go with making death by backlash more...permanent. You're literally smack talking the universe at this stage. And it's hitting back.

I'd say, since you control how much you use it, if it kills you, Unname from 3.5 occurs.

I may have to work that in somewhere, just because it's awesome. I kind of like the idea of flubbing your universe speak so bad the universe just disconnects you from reality, but that's more niche PrC type territory, not something that should be able to just happen to a base character.

[Vhaidara]

I may have to work that in somewhere, just because it's awesome. I kind of like the idea of flubbing your universe speak so bad the universe just disconnects you from reality, but that's more niche PrC type territory, not something that should be able to just happen to a base character.

I personally feel it as a kind of body fuel. Like in the Inheritance series, where the magic draws directly upon their strength. Feed too much, and you're gone. Or a functional Death Curse from the Dresden universe.

[Taveena]

In spite of all of Truenaming's problems, Unname was wonderful (and terrifying), so something like that showing up again...

[NomGarret]

Food for thought: why create a new mechanic for swapping damage types when we already have the suffix feats?

[SorenKnight]

I just noticed that Litany of Resilience's esoterica grants DR 1/adamantine. I seem to remember that there was another esoterica (I don't remember which one) that granted DR 2/adamantine.

[Sayt]

In spite of all of Truenaming's problems, Unname was wonderful (and terrifying), so something like that showing up again...

There is already a grandmaster edict that does this


I just noticed that Litany of Resilience's esoterica grants DR 1/adamantine. I seem to remember that there was another esoterica (I don't remember which one) that granted DR 2/adamantine. That would be exploit defect.

[AGrinningCat]

Since it was noted that this is 'Phase 1', will Phase 2 show up with more Edicts?