Forums of the Megaverse®

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 2:37 pm**

Man are man at arms Boring. Psionic characters and Magic users of all types get spell / power after spell / power as they level up, but Knights? mercs? Longbowmen? Jack and ****. They don't even get powers or moves as creation.

Yeah, they can have magic items and such, but guess what? SO can magic users.

"But wait," you say, "they are more durable than magic users and get armor." I think it's a wash. Quite soon level wise, mages can get Armor of Ithian, and the Psi folks have a couple shields they can get access to.

And don't get me started about Scholars and squires and vagabonds... NOTHING really could draw someone to play one of those. They don't even have defining skills. Like a skill called "Entitled Influence" for the Nobles where they can use their standing as an aristocrat to make people of a lower station do what they want, or " Connections" for the merchant where they can find a person who knows a person who can sell them things at a discount or have obscure things for sale. Or "Research" for the scholar where they have the ability to pour over texts at a rapid rate and make connections quickly researching a topic.

Sorry, I got started.

I mean, I guess they are interesting OCCs. PFRPG is definately a more classic "Role" Playing game than Rifts where most folks seem to be afflicted with Munchkinitis (I am afflicted, so stow the Plasma Minimissles, I have an impervious to fire Magical Tattoo).

I'm just getting into it and will be GMing a game for some friends this weekend, and was really looking at characters for the first time, despite having the game main book for a while now.

I guess coming from Rifts where every OCC can DO something, these OCCs seem... Underwhelming.

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 3:09 pm**

Men at arms are not magic users, so they don't get any of the magic feats like in D&D and Pathfinder.

How a character's 'patent of nobility' influences the game play is up to the GM and players.
(Court Etiquette R79)

If you want a M@A char class that starts with magic weapons then there is the Impreial Janessary (western Emp.) starts with a few.

(Cards of Fate R13)
If your GM okay with importing stuff from other games or using for all the PB games)
(Magic proffecencies and Limitations NB: TtGD & R 27)
(Look At Rifter 30 for char modifications. M@A & magic. )
(human special abilities table R:LS)

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:48 pm**

heyleatwe82 wrote:Man are man at arms Boring. Psionic characters and Magic users of all types get spell / power after spell / power as they level up, but Knights? mercs? Longbowmen? Jack and ****. They don't even get powers or moves as creation.

That is why I still run the 1st edition version of this game. Magic users don't get the same combat skills as men at arms, they have fewer uses of their magical abilities in general than in 2E, and most of them have fewer regular skills than the mundane OCCs, so the mundane characters are more relevant. Compared to Rifts, the 1E characters definitely won't have all the bells and whistles, but they seem (to me anyway) to mix well with each other in relative power scale and utility.

Posted: **Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:24 am**

There are a few things to consider when you're deciding on skill-based characters vs magic-based characters.

Magic users and psychics (well, Mind Mages and Mystics anyway) have obvious advantages that become quite potent as they gain levels, knowledge, and higher P.P.E. pools. They also get to select many of the same skills as skill-based characters.

Despite this, I've always preferred playing skill-based characters for several reasons:
1. In terms of straight-up offensive power, weapons generally beat magic and psionics; spells and powers that can out-damage most weapons tend to cost a lot of P.P.E. or I.S.P., and such spells tend to take longer to cast.
2. Magic and psionics are intrinsically flashier than skills and tend to draw a lot more attention/ire/suspicion. They are also easy to detect, whereas skill-based abilities are not.
3. I enjoy using non-magic approaches to solving problems, and there are some potent non-magic-based tactics that I love to use. Some examples:

+W.P. Net has perhaps the most potent disabling attack in the game. Nearly impossible to parry (can only dodge, for the most part), it renders a foe helpless for several melee rounds of essentially free hits.
W.P. Paired Weapons nearly doubles one's offensive power, especially when striking an opponent who momentarily can't hit back.
+Characters with high strength can pick up and hurl heavy objects. If you have a strong character and a foe who can't effectively defend (see above), this can be a quick way to inflict massive damage in a short time.
+Breed Dogs is a great way to train up a few four-footed allies. Dogs are one of the greatest supernatural detectors in the game, they're great trackers, and they can add some damage and disabling attacks as well.
+Horsemanship provides great mobility, solid combat bonuses, and extra attacks in the form of horse-attacks (if you can stay on your horse as it kicks). Regular horses are also excellent detectors of supernatural forces and magic. Exotic horsemanship dials this up further, allowing you to ride supernatural animals and take advantage of their attacks as well.
+Use Poison is a fantastic skill. Even if you respect the "good guys don't use poison" rule, you can use natural toxins to disable and/or debuff a foe.
+The ability to make and deploy traps can allow you to prepare an area for combat much like a diabolist. There are several skills that are handy for this (field armorer, Track & Trap Animals, Rope Works, )
+Spying by mundane means is often far more effective than spying using supernatural means. Having non-combat skills to serve/entertain others can give you opportunities to get an "in" and meet with people.

While the utility of these skills is situational, the reality is that adventures consist of a series of situations, and if you can understand and implement your character's skills effectively, you'll tend to see many situations in which mundane skills present superior solutions to magic or psionics. The array of possibilities within these mundane skills is impressive, and while they may seem underwhelming at first glance, I think they're worth a look. That said, the fact that many magic users and psychics can take these same skills is worth considering, too.

I have been developing a set of house rules that tend to make men-at-arms far more effective in combat. You might want to check it out.

Posted: **Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:36 pm**

Well, I think the second edition did a real disservice to the men-at-arms characters. As Kraynic mentioned, the men-at-arms had distinct advantages over non-men-at-arms in combat. The main one was paired weapons. It used to be that only Men-at-arms PCs could select it. So, a non-man-at-arms in melee combat with a man-at-arms character was probably going to die in a round. Also, SDC doesn't help with all of the physical skills adding so much to the damage a PC can take.

There are still advantages that Men-at-arms have over spell casters. For one, their attacks are a lot faster. Unless you're using a 1st or 2nd level spell (Cloud of Slumber or Blinding Flash, basically) you need a full half a round for your spell to take affect. The average man-at-arms has 5 attacks per melee with boxing so that's three attacks before the spell gets off, or just 2 depending on how you split that 3rd attack. As Hotrod said, they do more damage also. A battle axe at 2nd level does 4d6, which is more than most mages can manage until 4th level, unless you take firebolt at the start. You also don't run out of energy. Of course, the spell caster can do all of this as well, but then you're just pitting hand to hand vs hand to hand.

The monkey wrench is the Mind Mage. That is the cheesiest PC available, unless you let someone roll up an Undead Hunter as written. The mind mage gets a bunch of powers at 1st level, can use them with just 1 attack action, and pyrokinesis can do 6d6 damage to someone and that person doesn't even get a change to dodge. The only limitations they have is the ISP cost of their powers.

So, unless you revert to the 1st edition hand to hand advantages, then yes, the men-at-arms characters are lame.

-Vek
"Never trust a mind mage."

Posted: **Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:29 am**

heyleatwe82 wrote:Man are man at arms Boring. Psionic characters and Magic users of all types get spell / power after spell / power as they level up,

Greetings and Salutations. In general, I agree with this sentiment. Palladium could do a lot to help spice up their Men at Arms classes.

heyleatwe82 wrote:but Knights? mercs? Longbowmen? Jack and ****. They don't even get powers or moves as creation.

Hold up ... you don't think the Long Bowman has any abilities at creation?! So you're just completely discounting their range which surpasses almost all classes, psionics, and spells until at least level 10? You're not counting the fact they can dodge projectiles better than any other class? You're discounting their increased ROF and Range bonuses as they level? You're discounting their ability to move and shoot, allowing them to mitigate opponent's trying to close the distance? If you pretend the abilities they have don't exist, then you're correct, but that one is on you. The statement about Men at Arms being boring is mostly true, but the Long Bowman is one of the few classes that actually get something to help them stand out. Note: Rangers can also be skilled in the Long Bow, but would only have it at 640 ft and the range increase of W.P. Archery. This would still out range most spells and psionics until level 8 or so. However, this advantage is still surpassed by the Long Bowman, so I didn't waste much time on it.

For the record, Palladins also get the Way of the Lance (which has a higher crit chance and crit damage), Demon Death Blow, and starts with a horse (which can also aid in combat) with the best Horsemanship skill in the setting (that no one else can take). Note: Knights have some of these features too (abilities which Practitioners of Magic and Psychics cannot take), but they're really just weaker Palladins so I won't waste my time on them.

heyleatwe82 wrote:And don't get me started about Scholars and squires and vagabonds... NOTHING really could draw someone to play one of those.

Well, there's role-playing. I've played a few for that very reason. Though there's no real mechanical draw to play those classes, nor do I believe there was ever any intent for them to be mechanically superior to anything ... which is why they're listed as the "Optional" classes, really just extra classes to help flesh the world out a bit more and something some may enjoy the challenge of role-playing (and I know I have).

Still, for a game where your actions are based on mechanics, it's nice for the classes to have something to help them stand out. I agree with the sentiment, and I think this can be done better by Palladium. You didn't state no game mechanics though, you stated "NOTHING" and I felt I needed to include an addendum to that statement.

heyleatwe82 wrote:Or "Research" for the scholar where they have the ability to pour over texts at a rapid rate and make connections quickly researching a topic.

Research is a skill introduced into the Palladium Fantasy setting in Mysteries of Magic. This is listed as being automatic to Scholars ... and some other classes. Really it's still not class defining, so your point here remains. I just wanted to add those for accuracy more than anything.

heyleatwe82 wrote:I guess coming from Rifts where every OCC can DO something, these OCCs seem... Underwhelming.

Hmm ... I take it you're going more post-Rifts Ultimate Edition (RUE) release? Because if you look at the original Rifts main book, some of the classes didn't have much special about them either (PF2 was released 6 years after this version). It was in RUE when they tried to give each of the main book classes something unique (a rules update released 9 years after PF2).

So I don't think this is something Rifts does better or unique to Rifts, just that Rifts was updated more recently. If a PF Ultimate Edition is ever released (though I doubt it), I imagine they'd give some of the Men at Arms updates to help them stand out better as well (similar to RUE). Since you wanted to compare the two, I mostly wanted to put the comparison in perspective.

Okay, I think that covers my rant for now. That really started because the claim the Long Bowman (specifically listed in the opening rant) didn't have anything special about it. Farewell and safe journeys.

Posted: **Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:21 am**

I play first ed so the warriors have a bit of distinction there but generally the lesser classes like merchant and squire are a blank slate ready to be molded in lots of directions during the game, i have a character in my current game who is playing a merchant, he thought he was human but it turns out he is fae blooded and his fairy magic has turned to mercantile effects and has made me make a magical merchant, with magic that help mend wagon wheels and axles, go faster, get better prices and things stay fresher longer.

So I just find the lesser classes to be putty in my hands as the players have less expectations about where they go normally.

Posted: **Thu Feb 18, 2021 2:38 am**

Well, I also forgot to mention that men-at-arms can go all out all of the time. They don't have to conserve ISP or PPE and wonder if a greater threat might arise. That could work against them for you, since that means there is less to consider. However, most of the people I've gamed with in the Palladium system prefer to play men-at-arms precisely because they don't want to have to worry about knowing the ins and outs of spells and powers, and they don't want to worry about rationing power supplies.

-Vek
"Individual tastes, I guess."

Posted: **Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:53 pm**

Veknironth wrote:Well, I also forgot to mention that men-at-arms can go all out all of the time. They don't have to conserve ISP or PPE and wonder if a greater threat might arise. That could work against them for you, since that means there is less to consider. However, most of the people I've gamed with in the Palladium system prefer to play men-at-arms precisely because they don't want to have to worry about knowing the ins and outs of spells and powers, and they don't want to worry about rationing power supplies.

-Vek
"Individual tastes, I guess."

I've never had a player who wanted magic or psionics because of the math involved. My players will pick the warrior classes simply because of the simplicity of play.

Posted: **Mon May 17, 2021 8:24 am**

There are still advantages that Men-at-arms have over spell casters. For one, their attacks are a lot faster.

Posted: **Mon May 17, 2021 11:06 pm**

Well, Men-at-arms have faster attacks than spells of levels three and up. But spells level 1 and 2 are just one attack action, and the RAW allow for non-men-at-arms to have most of the same abilities in hand to hand as men-at-arms and those attacks are also equal.

-Vek
"Only men-at-arms should be allowed to have paired weapons, just like 1st edition."

Forums of the Megaverse®

Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.

Re: Getting into Palladium Fantasy for the first time.