|
Arivia posted:The more I read about Paizo the happier I get that they are just making cool things to mess around with while playing elfgames with my friends. It doesn't need to be super balanced, it just has to be fun: and they're delivering that in spades (and in the most socially conscious manner of any of the big publishers for sure.) I thought that once too. Then I tried playing a monk. I guess cool things for casters to mess around with technically counts as cool things to mess around with.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I thought that once too. Then I tried playing a monk. I just buffed the monk when someone asked to play one (and the ninja too) and called it good!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
I'm just tossing out everything other than the core rulebook and like the first bestiary in the next game I'm running, so I don't have more cool things to have to manage. It also makes me wonder why I'm paying money for stuff like this that I have to manage by houseruling. I guess I'll just wait for the PRD updates from now on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Archives of Nethys includes things that the PRD leaves out and generally updates quicker. Also I'm sure as everyone else will point out, core only makes balance worse not better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Well then I just have one book to read and its classes to comprehend, as opposed to many more of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Speaking of the PRD, the actual official Paizo SRD updated with a new UI recently and also includes a poo poo ton of technology rules from who knows where for the Iron Gods AP. It's like Shadowrun in Pathfinder.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Hey guys, just letting you know that the Path of War by Dreamscarred Press did the whole "Dex for damage" thing way better:quote:Deadly Agility [Combat] Anyway, you should buy Path of War if you have any sympathy to martial characters being awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Speaking of the PRD, the actual official Paizo SRD updated with a new UI recently and also includes a poo poo ton of technology rules from who knows where for the Iron Gods AP. It's like Shadowrun in Pathfinder. Huh I didn't think those were out yet! They're from the Technology Guide which I guess is coming out this month?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Arivia posted:I just buffed the monk when someone asked to play one (and the ninja too) and called it good! You know what's a pain in the rear end? Having to buff core classes with houserules so they're not hot garbage. Also, playing in a group that's either not experienced enough or not confident enough to buff the classes that severely need buffing. (Also, although I agree that Pathfinder is best used as a casual thing to just gently caress around with with friends, you probably shouldn't have said that Paizo is making a bunch of cool feats on the same page as the feat that just gives every divine class one of the Paladin's main class features with a really low barrier to entry. That's not cool, that just devalues the Paladin.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:Anyway, you should buy Path of War if you have any sympathy to martial characters being awesome. Path of War is pretty great and does what it sets out to do, but I wouldn't recommend it to others yet. It really needs another editing pass and some tightening up - it's unclear in a lot of places and hard for the DM to get a grip on because of that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Lurks With Wolves posted:You know what's a pain in the rear end? Having to buff core classes with houserules so they're not hot garbage. Also, playing in a group that's either not experienced enough or not confident enough to buff the classes that severely need buffing. That one feat might not be cool but overall? They're doing cool poo poo in general, not even just feats. And yeah it's not fun that some classes aren't the best, but whatever. They're building a good game, they can't build it around your table's politics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
They'd have to completely rip out and replace the underlying math in the game before it comes anywhere close to being a good game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
The problems with pathfinder and 3.5 go way deeper than just combat balance, even though that is also a large factor. Martial classes like the barbarian can usually hold their own in combat (at least with the help of magical items). The real problems come when you try doing anything out of combat. Casters just have way way too much versatility compared to any martial class and can solve almost any problem with the right spell. This combined with the terrible skill system that Pathfinder has gives almost all of the narrative control to the casters since all of the real problems are probably handled with spells. This is also really hard to fix with houserules since that would require you to change the very fundamentals of the system. At that point you could just not play PF at all. Pathfinder is probably at it's best when you play with a group full of partial casters. Andrast fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
I'm currently running a PF game where everybody's students at a magic school who go out at night to fight bad guys as masked avengers. Given that a lot of the casting classes can replace the noncaster roles (Magus for Fighter, Vivisectionist Alchemist/Archeologist Bard for Rogue, etc), and most of the underpowered classes are some variety of noncaster, there's still a lot of versatility. I'm having fun with the group so far, but if it works out long-term I might try seeing to turning it into a setting/sourcebook. Libertad! fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Look, Pathfinder has problems - but those problems don't stop it from being a fun game that works well in play, is way easier to run than its immediate predecessor, and has plenty of cool toys for everyone. It might not be your cup of tea if you're looking for something super rigorous like 4e, but that doesn't mean it's bad - it's just not your game. Paizo is doing a stellar job with their game, producing fun new rules options and new stories while addressing concerns in a lot of different directions. I can't think of a single other thing I'd want them to do (besides like more bestiaries tomorrow.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
I think if your GM needs to ignore the rules and rewrite entire core classes to make the game playable then Paizo is not, in fact, doing a stellar job. I'm not even sure what doing a poor job would look like if what Paizo is currently doing qualifies as stellar.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I think if your GM needs to ignore the rules and rewrite entire core classes to make the game playable then Paizo is not, in fact, doing a stellar job. Well it's a good thing that isn't needed then! The game is playable perfectly fine without rewriting any classes at all. Monks are pretty poo poo without a rewrite, but not the game as a whole. I've also never felt the need to ignore any rule. EDIT: And the skill system is fine. I'd rather have Burning Wheel's skill system, but it's no worse than pretty much anyone else's skill system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Yeah I don't ignore most of the rules (precise shot is the only one off-hand), I just wanted to let someone have fun with what they wanted to play. And Paizo themselves have admitted the monk was an error, so I'm fine fixing it a bit. It's a great, stellar game - that doesn't mean it's perfect. But nothing is. Which is fine!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I think if your GM needs to ignore the rules and rewrite entire core classes to make the game playable then Paizo is not, in fact, doing a stellar job. If you can't have a fun game with the current Pathfinder rules then you should probably play something else. Are there balance issues? Yes. Nobody is saying the game is perfect, but to say they've released a steaming pile that can't be used for a fun time is just silly. Arivia posted:Yeah I don't ignore most of the rules (precise shot is the only one off-hand) Can you elaborate on this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
HatfulOfHollow posted:Can you elaborate on this? In two out of my 3 pathfinder games (the exception being my Wrath AP, which is being run exactly by the books), we just dropped Precise Shot. It's not that it was necessarily bad (although it really does just feel like a punitive feat tax and nothing else), but we all kept forgetting the -4 penalty for firing into melee. So we agreed to not apply the penalty at all because it was just dragging the game a bit for all of us; Precise Shot doesn't exist, and any feat or other game item that interfaces with it just loses Precise Shot as a prerequisite. So for example, Improved Precise Shot just has prerequisites of 19 Dex and +11 BAB now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
I like to harp on the Monk problems because I played a Monk in a long-running campaign and it was frustrating to deal with the ongoing nerfs that came through errata. I figure the reason the class is as bad people say is because of backward compatibility concerns, which Unchained supposedly gets to ignore. Their NPCs in existing 3.5 modules were easy enough to adapt, as long as they didn't change too many things. They never came out and said this as far as I know, though, they just staunchly defended the Monk as it was, and then thew nerfs out left and right. The only real issue I have with the PFRPG rules is that casters get everything. I don't even care about the whole "caster supremacy" idea, or how Fighters can't fly under their own power, or how manipulating the battlefield can turn the tide of a fight better than anything a dude with an axe could do, but the fact that they keep giving other class abilities to anyone who can cast a spell is really frustrating. Giving things like the Paladin's Divine Health as a feat geared entirely to casters is stupid. Clerics being able to Find Traps like a Rogue is stupid. Letting Wizards make Diplomacy and Bluff checks with Linguistics is stupid. I think letting characters add DEX to damage is stupid too, but I guess I'm in the minority there. Inverse Icarus fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
I think Orator is actually intended for Investigators so that they can talk their way through an investigation without needing to focus another stat that doesn't otherwise do them much good, since a certain amount of face-work is pretty iconic for investigator characters. The benefit to wizards is a side effect, albeit one entirely characteristic of Paizo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
HatfulOfHollow posted:If you can't have a fun game with the current Pathfinder rules then you should probably play something else. Are there balance issues? Yes. Nobody is saying the game is perfect, but to say they've released a steaming pile that can't be used for a fun time is just silly. Except that with the right group and atmosphere, you can totally have fun with a poo poo game that has bad rules. I mean, I've had fun playing RIFTS, Star Wars d6, and loving BESM. Just like I've had fun playing Pathfinder. Doesn't make them not poo poo. Plus shrugging and going "well, it can't be perfect" every time the designers gently caress up just encourages them to keep writing garbage without even improving. If you actually like the game, you should be the first to raise hell about all the trash rules they spew.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
J. Alfred Prufrock posted:Except that with the right group and atmosphere, you can totally have fun with a poo poo game that has bad rules. "Did you have fun playing it" is less a function of the rules and more a function of the people you're playing it with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
One of my players is trying to take Arcane Strike on a Gnome Fighter, claiming his Gnomish Magic qualifies him for the "Ability to cast arcane spells" prerequisite. I looked on the forums but so no official response. I'm probably going to let him to do it, but he's something of a power gamer and I'm worried I'm missing something. Is there any reason to say Spell-Like Abilities aren't spells? edit: Found this. Hrm. http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qow I also like how they say Prestige Classes are "usually a sub-optimal character choice." Inverse Icarus fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Inverse Icarus posted:I'm probably going to let him to do it, but he's something of a power gamer and I'm worried I'm missing something. Is there any reason to say Spell-Like Abilities aren't spells? I prob wouldn't let him on this alone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Inverse Icarus posted:One of my players is trying to take Arcane Strike on a Gnome Fighter, claiming his Gnomish Magic qualifies him for the "Ability to cast arcane spells" prerequisite. I looked on the forums but so no official response. Nihilarian fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
Well, someone ruled that racial SLAs qualify you for prestige classes and such, so it's hard to believe they wouldn't also qualify you for feats. That said, I think that's a goofy ruling, and it's pretty clearly against the intent and flavor of the feat. efb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Paizo seems to be aware of the situation and has deliberately confirmed it despite the obviously wonky consequences. It's hard to really tell what's actually "working as intended" but I think a "yes" is closer than a "no" for this one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Another thing to note is that arcane strike scales off of caster levels
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
I think gnome slas have a cl of 1, so it would just be that. e: Nope, character level. Neat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Yeah it's kind of sad to see these prestige classes left by the wayside. But someone in my gaming group wants to take one so hey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
I'm playing a Mystic Theurge in a Legacy of Fire game and I only half regret it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Eldritch Knight has never been anything to scoff at.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
If Paizo had put together Team Fortress 2 instead of Pathfinder, Engineer would (without unlocked weapons) be able to build autonomous hunter-killer drones as fast as the Scout/as much health as the Heavy/with the range and accuracy of the Sniper/maybe all of the above. With each new update, Engineer would keep getting better and better things to build, new items to cover its few vulnerabilities, and easy access to 60% of other classes unlocks (often being better at using them than the class it was intended for), while other classes got not-so-subtle stealth nerfs like a Scout pistol that lets you run at twice the speed of any other class (Scout now runs at normal speed). Balance complaints would be answered with "our development team feels that it is unrealistic for a regular person to be able to run twice as fast as other people" while Engineers are riding predator drones equipped with lightsaber guns and hitting right click to orbital drop unkillable twenty foot tall giants on the battlefield wherever they feel like it. Would it be playable? Sure, I guess. It would even still be kind of fun, especially if you played with your friends and nobody decided to make any drones. But if you want to affect the gamestate meaningfully, you should probably roll Engineer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
I said it once before but in my opinion Pathfinder is at it's best when played with a group of partial casters. That way everybody has a good way to contribute to the party and most of the balance concerns are addressed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
Andrast posted:I said it once before but in my opinion Pathfinder is at it's best when played with a group of partial casters. That way everybody has a good way to contribute to the party and most of the balance concerns are addressed. The problem is, forcing everyone to play a certain tier of character is going to soft lock certain concepts. If one player wants to play a master swordsman in a game full of wizards, well, wield it with magic or don't bother. And the wizard character in a tier 4 game could easily overshadow everyone else if he isn't careful. You shouldn't have to ban 2/3rds of the classes available to make sure everyone is on the same playing field, especially when these bans disallow character concepts. Luckily, Dreamscarred Press is doing Psionics and Path of War, so as long as you allow 3rd party stuff you're fine. Add those to the half casters made by Paizo and you're in much better shape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
EscortMission posted:If Paizo had put together Team Fortress 2... That's a pretty poo poo analogy, even compared to other internet analogies. Remember, Pathfinder wasn't a game designed from the ground up in isolation from all other games. It's a glorified set of house rules to 3.5, which means they inherited another company's balance failures. The Core Rulebook is vastly more balanced than the 3.5 PHB, and overall Pathfinder has fewer stupidly broken things than 3.5 did. In your analogy, it's a mod to TF2, not the original design. And don't get started with bitching about it being a set of houserules for 3.5, either. If Pathfinder had been an entirely new system it would have flopped hard. People wanted to continue playing their 3.5-based games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
"Quick Study (Ex): An investigator can use his studied combat ability as swift action instead of a standard action." Studied Combat is normally a move action. Is this a book error or a PFSRD error? Anyway, I like the Hunter, Investigator and Skald so far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 16:06
|
|