|
Gerund posted:But the flip side is that having an iPhone do all the squiggly math inherent in the "2000 spell buff" 3.5 base system is going to further invest the developers into doing nothing to make the game easier for people who don't have a spiffy gadget to do all the work for them. Alternatively you can play with people who aren't autistic and don't sit around calculating the ideal combination of Wizard buffs all day, or just play 4E and not worry about it. Who gives a poo poo if they're making Pathfinder "easier"; the people who are playing it are deliberately playing it because it resembles an old system they like. They brag about it being more complex than 4E. Gerund posted:But hey, if you're okay playing solely to the Model Train crowd and never having a group of teenagers play your game, then more power to you. Why are people talking about iPhone owners as if they're some kind of megarich uberdorks from an alien universe itt? Do you really not know a single person who owns a nice phone without having a trust fund, a doctorate, or a stamp collection? EDIT: mikan
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 19:14 |
|
|
Yeah; if you get angry at the Paizo guys for anything it should be that they've made a mint taking the OGL material from D&D and shifting a few numbers around to make a show about it being "fixed" and then boxing it up and selling it. The only thing I'm pissed about is that they beat me to the punch.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 06:11
|
|
|
Gerund posted:Mikam, 75% of iPhone users are over 25, so are we debating what young means? And I'm pretty sure that the 16-year-old iPhone demographic has more competing for their attention such as Snowboarding. This is actually relatively meaningless, because the 25% of iPhone owners under 25 are like 12-24 rather than 0-24, and 25+ is a far broader age range than 12-24? why am I even talking about this here
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 06:56
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:I like playing 3.5, and I'll admit that the fighter and rogue are two classes that are not built for higher level play. Eventually a caster will be able to do (or can summon something that does) everything either of those classes can do. I've hosed with the "calling" spells (summon planar ally, bind outsider, etc.) a bit so that they are no longer standard spells on a spell list but are rituals that take a lot of time and sacrifice to cast...but that's neither here nor there. I'll respectfully disagree regarding the Rogue. If your DM is cool he'll houserule uncrittable out entirely or at least make it not apply to Sneak Attack, and even if he's uncool he'd have to be a huge rear end in a top hat to send a party with a Rogue through the Closet of One Thousand Skeletons more than once in his career. When SA applies, a Rogue making a full attack action deals a goddamn huge amount of damage and is probably on par with those crazy Barbarian Frenzied Berserker builds or goofy charge multiplier gimmicks for greatest damage output in the game. Rogues are also the only base class that receive 8 skillpoints per level, they have the best class skill list in the game, and they get a host of useful defensive abilities (Improved Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Slippery Mind). And they get UMD as a class skill and have good cause to raise Charisma to take full advantage of it (their skillpoints and skill list make them great party faces/leaders). Make no mistake, they don't compare with any full casting progression class core or PRC, but I think they hold up way better than most of the other magically-challenged base classes do including the "half-casters" like Paladins. Skills (particularly UMD) are like a really poor man's substitute for the versatility of magic, and Rogues are the best at using them. And most of their aforementioned combat special features (Uncanny Dodge, Sneak Attack, etc) are better than any feat a Fighter can take with his bonuses.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
Ulta posted:Lets put it this way. The multiclassed wizard/cleric in my 9th level Pathfinder game is pulling his own weight, and at time outdamaging me, a 9th level Paladin. Did I mention that the DM isn't letting anyone cast 3rd level spells or higher? He's still doing good. Honestly casters are overpowered as hell but this is still worthless out of context of your individual builds and stats (do you guys roll or do pointbuy/arrays?) because classes like the Paladin and Monk that are MAD are really easy to gently caress up and make terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 01:23
|
|
|
As somebody who usually ends up buying a rope, a couple extra sets of clothes, a hand mirror, etc whenever I play a Rogue or Bard type guy (which is frequently), I don't even mind GMs fudging what odds and ends people are carrying even though I paid for mine. The fact that I wrote the words on my sheet just means I'm more likely to come up with a creative use for these things at some point.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
all this talk about how much rear end the shifter sucks really makes me want to read it
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
I just looked the Folca thing up bc I had no clue what you were talking about and like, a demon that explicitly torments the young/innocent, and is about eroding peoples' sense of safety in places that are supposed to be abjectly safe, is one that makes sense if you handle it well holy poo poo it has a rape spell
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
It's completely loving bewildering to me that a spell called "Unnatural Lust" that is expressly about making someone fall madly in love with you against their will even exists Like it's completely conceptually redundant with classic core spells like Charm and Command and Dominate, except that normal people read those spells and come up with ten or twenty uses for them that aren't sexual assault It's fantastic because it's the bad fantasy game writer phenomenon of churning out endless splatbooks by iterating on the spell list in redundant or highly-specific ways, turned to the absolute worst possible end
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
There's no such thing as a weak gymnast/dancer or clumsy swordsman in real life - at least one who sticks with it very long - but the thing is that nothing else about ability scores is even simulationist. They aren't mostly-fixed at birth in real life, and forget the complexity of real intelligence; people can't even agree on what Charisma means in the game, much less reality, and how much it has to do with personable leadership qualities VS personal magnetism and beauty VS some ambiguous "strength of spirit" in the game. Dex Rogues are good at doing damage with finesse weapons because that's the archetype, and it's a game of fantasy archetypes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
It's also balanced by not being a full-progression caster in Pathfinder
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
Blockhouse posted:- Fighters being able to do things other than auto-attack with sword So what you're telling me is that Pathfinder 2E, in defiance of all odds, is good
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
TBF I just looked at the ancestry in the 2E book and it straight up says most goblin adventurers are CG or CN, they're not encouraging anyone to play an evil goblin Obviously CN is the favored alignment of fishmalk dummies but there's other ways to represent it, and I think the people who wanna play a goblin that way can make a halfling or gnome PC just as irritating Baku fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Aug 1, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Evil characters having more deity choices than CG, the most popular alignment for player characters, is pretty weird. I think the old 3E? PF? rule of "you can be one alignment removed on one axis" is fine. Some of those were weird in practice - the aforementioned LN priests of Zon Kuthon, for example - but the exceptions in the new rules mostly seem to limit rather than expand player choices without making any particular flavor or lore sense.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
I mean arguing about Zon Kuthon is w/e; he has exactly two holidays listed on the Pathfinder wiki which are- 1. The Joymaking, in which a volunteer has all their limbs and sensory organs removed so that they can live an eternity of torment. and 2. The Eternal Kiss, a human sacrifice in which the victim (who may be anybody, from an unwitting enemy to a priest of Zon Kuthon) is pampered for ten days and then killed in the longest and most agonizing way possible. I don't think any healthy person in the BDSM community would consider either of those sane, or - in the case where a voluntary sacrifice is misled or the sacrifice is involuntarily - consensual, both strong tenets of that world (in other words, things a lawful person would try to abide by). If you're designing a setting where good and evil are objective forces in the universe, I find it hard to believe either of those holidays would increase the net anything in the world besides evil. All that being said, I'm for liberal interpretations of alignments and deities, which makes for interesting characters, gives players more options, and is accurate to lived reality (where religions are insanely factional with weird local variants that significantly change the terms and conditions). I'm for allowing LN Clerics of ZK or whatever, I just don't think it makes any more or less sense than LN Clerics of Asmodeus, and I think the new restrictions are a layer of unnecessary complexity within a subsystem (alignment and religion) where your choices already aren't terribly important unless you're a priest.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Azhais posted:His holidays are based on Rimworld? creativity isn't why people fell in love with pathfinder, Arivia posted:Ah, but what if his worshipers practice PRICK, not SSC? a zon kuthon cult that just spends all their time arguing about the best way to ethically protect consenting adults who want to have their arms and legs chopped off In all seriousness I think the other big problem here besides anything to do with alignment itself is the equally-old, very D&D problem of "if objective good and evil exists and objective good is an option, why worship a malicious god?", which these games are pretty bad at ever explaining. I still think Warhammer is one of the mainstream fantasy settings that did this the best despite the arbitrary cruelty of Chaos, by having the "good guys" basically all be terrible in their own ways and having the good gods be more mysterious and distant than the evil ones.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
01011001 posted:Narratively speaking a lot of D&Dlikes assume you can spare 5-10 minutes due to most of them assuming discrete time (encounters/rounds) vs. narrative time (exploration) mode. Otherwise you’re running into issues like justifying why consecutive encounters aren’t just one large encounter (and also just burnout from lack of dynamics). Yeah, the whole thing with dungeons and why they're such a huge part of the game still is that their structure is perfect for this. Kick open a door, fight whatever's in that room, catch your breath and poke around for secrets/loot/interesting hooks, kick open the next door. I totally buy that D&Dlikes don't even bother to make this explicit most of the time because it just feels natural and is how 90% of the groups playing these games have been doing it for years.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Incidentally that's exactly how 5E D&D handles the same situation, with the added complication of wounds in PF to fix the perceived problem (ymmv) of the most efficient healing/support strategy being "let everybody get knocked out then pop them up with healing word between their turns"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:Yeah, that's what I mean by popcorn healing. It definitely can be a problem, especially if you have multiple people with Healing Word. A bonus (roughly equivalent to a PF 1e swift) action to heal for any amount of health means that you can just keep bouncing people up and down as long as they don't go from up to dead before you get a turn. If you have multiple characters with Healing Word it gets outright silly. Totally. I played a Cleric in our last 5E game and used every single 1st level slot forever on Healing Word and Bless. If other 1st-level spells exist, I'm unaware of them. The "ymmv" is just because I have mixed feelings on how big of a problem it is; I agree that it's narratively silly for people to be constantly getting knocked out and revived, but I don't know that there's anything mechanically wrong with it. PF 2E's system fixes that narrative problem at the expense of making the rules for it more complex, which is more of a tradeoff (depending on what you value in a game) than an upgrade.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Having no Con bonus is also obviously kind of an edge case. The default ability score generation is pretty generous and mostly lets you decide where the points go. Having less than 12 Con seems like a questionable decision for anyone who isn't extremely MAD, and Wizards aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 01:14
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:lmbo, the top review is griping about how "PC" it is they're really, really mad about the *single sentence* in the core rules that mentions gender pronouns, which is part of the larger statement about "you can be a male or female character and it doesn't affect your stats" that every RPG since the 90s has included
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
LemonAIDS posted:For rogues I assumed their spells through the feat count as innate spells so they'd use charisma and the rules say if you can cast spells, you're trained in them. On the subject of the Rogue Minor Magic feat: if I'm understanding archetypes correctly, it seems like there's no actual reason to ever take that feat unless you're planning on taking a non-caster archetype at some future point? All it does is grant you two cantrips, while the level 2 archetype feats for true casters all give you two cantrips, let you pick which mental stat you use for casting (based on which you take), and provide additional bonuses like skill training. I guess that's actually not imbalanced because the archetype feats do prohibit you from taking a different archetype at low levels, but it's something people looking for an Arcane Trickster type Rogue/Mage build should keep in mind.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Kylra posted:If it works off of class DC, you would get proficiency increases from your class as you level automatically, instead of having to take extra feats to keep DCs up like archetype feats. I completely forgot that class DC was a thing when I noticed/posted that I hope they come out with an amazing 4E-style character generation program
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Leraika posted:probably the free multiclass one? Yeah, the comparison is really stark if you compare what those multiclass feats actually do to the Human ancestry feat benefits. Shall I take a skill, or get a skill, the ability to cast a few cantrips, and the option to take further multiclass feats from this class (all a level before any other character could choose to multiclass)?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Multiclassing in D&D and its derivatives has pretty much always been hot garbage thrown in as an afterthought for meticulous power gamers looking for break points in the system or inexperienced players who trick themselves into it because they see it as a way (and it is promoted as) to be unique or to fill a role that probably already exists in a more functional class framework. I like it in AD&D, where it somehow winds up being oddly balanced (apart from the noted issue that there's little reason to play a single-class Thief ever), and 4E which basically does the same thing as PF2E archetypes - that is, it's hard to break much with it because it's more like dabbling than true multiclassing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2019 06:05
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:I haven't gotten to play any 2e yet, since my friends almost all agree that they don't even wanna touch it for some reason. Mine are also gunshy, the weird part being that half of them are 3E/5E D&D diehards. They're the exact people who shouldn't be afraid of Pathfinder 2E.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
The only characters that can kind of, sort of get away with being six levels behind the party are support casters, and it'd still be a lousy experience. If the DM is unwilling to renegotiate that and has no plan to rapidly catch you up to the party, you're going to be annoyed any time the dice come out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2020 08:36
|
|
|
One of the most interesting concepts you could possibly explore with a cop RPG is the relationship of lethal force, nonlethal force, and diplomacy/deescalation, the consequences of utilizing them, etc. If you want to eradicate that concept from the get by saying fireball just "incapacitates" bad guys without any consideration for what you're actually doing when you hurl an explosive ball of fire at someone for stealing jewels or whatever the gently caress, maybe you just pick one of a thousand other possible themes for an adventure. That concept isn't just part of an obvious real-world social problem, it's also a constant theme in crime, police, and detective stories. At some point, you're just wearing "cop adventure" as a lovely aesthetic cloak if you're unwilling to engage with it, and perhaps that forces a look at the larger problem that Pathfinder and D&D are fundamentally games about killing people (or at least beating them up) and most of the rules/options serve that.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2020 08:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 19:14 |
|
|
Admiral Funk posted:It's weird to me that so many people struggle with the idea that maybe they didn't want to make a police brutality themed adventure. Then maybe they shouldn't have made an adventure where you play as the police Which is my point: fantastically refusing to engage with the concept of stopping crime by running around shooting to wound - and just allowing everyone to do it - is both irresponsible and makes for bad genre fiction. That nobody there considered this before they published it/the summer 2020 BLM protests is asinine. Baku fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jul 12, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2020 18:09
|
|