Input wanted for game concept for PF 3.75 (Porophyra RPG)

[Marcarius5555]

I'm genuinely interested in sticking w/ PF1e - 2e doesn't ring my bell. I'd be interested in input on the conversion between this http://porphyrarpg.wikidot.com/faq and the favorite 3rd party material like DSP PoW, Psionics, Akasha, Spheres, Elephant in the Playground Feat Tax rules, etc.

I'm intrigued by the idea of combining all the spell lists and reworking iterative attacks. Any other comments anyone else would like to make on this attempt to update the CORE rules and how it might interact with other stuff?

[exelsisxax]

{Scrubbed}

[Psyren]

I'm intrigued by the idea of combining all the spell lists and reworking iterative attacks. Any other comments anyone else would like to make on this attempt to update the CORE rules and how it might interact with other stuff?

Can you clarify what you mean in the first sentence?

I do think there'd be a market out there for continuing a cleaned-up 3.P1, but the devil is in the details.

Personally I think one good innovation from P2 (though it started in P1) is the three-action+reaction system.

[TotallyNotEvil]

Can you clarify what you mean in the first sentence?

I do think there'd be a market out there for continuing a cleaned-up 3.P1, but the devil is in the details.

Personally I think one good innovation from P2 (though it started in P1) is the three-action+reaction system.

I'm kind of tempted to hot-swap the 3-action system into my game, tbh.

It feels a lot more modern.

Wasn't there anothe project doing the same thing? Corefinder I think. Haven't heard from it in a while.

[exelsisxax]

I'm kind of tempted to hot-swap the 3-action system into my game, tbh.

It feels a lot more modern.

Wasn't there anothe project doing the same thing? Corefinder I think. Haven't heard from it in a while.

No, CF is not reworking all action types (only full attacks, swifts, moves, and invented a new action).

[pabelfly]

No, CF is not reworking all action types (only full attacks, swifts, moves, and invented a new action).

Any news on when Corefinder might be released? Was interested to see how it will turn out.

[StSword]

Can you clarify what you mean in the first sentence?

I do think there'd be a market out there for continuing a cleaned-up 3.P1, but the devil is in the details.

Personally I think one good innovation from P2 (though it started in P1) is the three-action+reaction system.

In Porphyria the highest penalty for an iterative attack is a -5.


And it uses a magic system like Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved in which there is a single spell list that individual classes have differing access to based on theme or complexity.

A gish class based on being a warrior of the light would probably only know the simplest spells because of the split focus from their martial training, and no spells of necromancy or darkness, as an example.

Porphyria is basically pathfinder revised, with such rule tweaks.

And like Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved it's a setting book as well as a core book, so really the biggest difference is the alternate class and race list.

For example, several prestige classes such as arcane archer and stalwart defender are base classes.

So to integrate third party systems to Porphyria, you're going to need to put in the work. Some are going to be easy, making a SoP Arcane Archer isn't going to be a challenge. A path of war Assassin or an akashic Stalwart Defender will require more work.

Of course some people like doing that themselves, others not so much.

[exelsisxax]

Any news on when Corefinder might be released? Was interested to see how it will turn out.

not at all. and the discord seems to be the only place with news.