Pathfinder Is Still Bad

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
codeGlaze
Duke
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 9:38 pm

Post by codeGlaze »

Adam Reith wrote:
Wiseman wrote:Welcome to the Den!
Thanks! I've lurked here before, but never posted until now. Something just clicked -- the stuff I read here can get aggressive, but it generally makes sense. The stuff I read there now just makes me want to drown myself.
You'll fit in just fine. :p
Prak_Anima wrote:When I looked at traits thinking about making a PFS character, I was pretty neutral on it.
When I looked at making a PF character, my head exploded (just a little bit... I got better). The sheer fucking volume of fuck they stuffed into the game by this point is... overwhelming, even with a spreadsheet character generator doing a lot of the heavy-lifting for you.
Last edited by codeGlaze on Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13895
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Post by Koumei »

Eh, I was already used to the "making a D&D 3.X character with all the assorted options" process - Flaws, Traits, Alternate Class Features, Skill Tricks, Templates, Racial Variants and such, all trickling in throughout the books.
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

deanruel87 wrote:Those chase rules ARE shit. It is impressive to the degree that those chase rules are bad. I could not make a product that artfully terrible.
Every time I've seen someone defending the Pathfinder chase rules, their argument has been "the chase rules are great because you can ignore the chase rules and make up something cool".
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2942
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

Archetypes really pissed me off with Pathfinder, dropped me out of paying attention.

Alternate Class features in 3e I could just ignore, almost all of them made a shit option slightly less bad, good for them. PF's Archetypes are very much not-optional powerups that lock all your other options down.

If they'd just been, like, a thematic collection of shitty feats and spells that gave some bonuses for collecting them all every 6 or 9 levels, while still leaving some room for variation. That'd be fine. That'd be "what did they do for me if I take toughness", or "how can my evoker not suck past level 3". Awesome. Less dumpster diving, not more.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
User avatar
Blasted
Knight-Baron
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 5:41 am

Post by Blasted »

I'm quite a fan of archtypes. I think they're a better option for expanding classes than "Just add another class/prestige class". They're light weight and easy to understand and apply. the quality is highly variable, but that can be said about everything in the system.
I'm not sure how your alternative leads to less dumpster diving.
Antariuk
Knight
Posts: 317
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:25 am

Post by Antariuk »

Blasted wrote:I'm quite a fan of archtypes. I think they're a better option for expanding classes than "Just add another class/prestige class". They're light weight and easy to understand and apply. the quality is highly variable, but that can be said about everything in the system.
I'm not sure how your alternative leads to less dumpster diving.
Because the sheer number of (shitty) archetypes at this point makes the whole game a) very unattractive and intimidating to newcomers and b) slows down chargen unless you go with a character guide. If someone says "all Paizo materials are in", you have an actual problem.

The only upside of all this is possibily the fact that nobody says "Pathfinder is more balanced than 3.5" anymore.
"No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style." - Steven Brust
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Pathfinder chargen has gotten so complicated that I don't know anyone who does it without consulting min/max tomes from the internets. The idea of actually reading all that shit before making a character is simply anathema. It's not a job for one person, and the effort has to be distributed across message board participants.

That is fucking insane.

-Username17
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

Post by OgreBattle »

Archtypes would be interesting if there was more "Sneak attack for your alchemist!" and less "As a Hill Fighter you gain +1 to charge uphill"
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Does the bard's Inspire Greatness ability work to increase the skills/BAB/feat/CL of summoned monsters with only monster HD?

I don't see any reason why it can't, but I'd like for there to be a smoking gun.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Dulon
NPC
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:59 am

Post by Dulon »

Prak_Anima wrote: On the other hand, if I were going into a PFS game, I'd take the two "+900 starting gold" traits (Chosen Child, Rich Parents) unless I were a caster, in which case I'd just select 3 "+x caster level" traits. Probably for a scalable cantrip, if possible.
Except you can't because the +gold ones (along with half the others on the SRD) are banned from PFS because...reasons. It still baffles me that they publish stuff that they immediately ban from the "official" game. Also the traits don't stack in most cases.

As for archetypes and stuff, I'm not sure the problem is so much that they give terrible situational bonuses like the +1 to charges so much as they trade your actually good options away at the same time. The few archetypes worth using tend to do the opposite. and dump features you never use for something marginally more useful.


Also, 'nother Den noob here, been lurking for a couple months and figured I should get around to making an account.
GâtFromKI
Knight-Baron
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:14 am

Post by GâtFromKI »

Since I am curious, I tried to find out if the hill fighter actually exist; and I found this : clic.

:confused:

Did someone say at some point: "you know what's missing in Pathfinder? a way to negate the acrobatic check when charging down a slope." ? Was there a general demand for such an ability among the Pathfinder community? Did James Jacob say to JD Wiker : "this AP won't work if fighters have no way to charge downhill in plate armor" ? :confused: :confused: :confused:
Last edited by GâtFromKI on Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Pseudo Stupidity
Duke
Posts: 1060
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:51 pm

Post by Pseudo Stupidity »

OgreBattle wrote:Archtypes would be interesting if there was more "Sneak attack for your alchemist!" and less "As a Hill Fighter you gain +1 to charge uphill"
I looked up hill fighter because I didn't believe there would be an archtype that was that stupid.

Turns out there isn't, but there is a trait named "Hill Fighter" that lets you charge down hills (but not up them, you fucking munchkin) without making an acrobatics check.

Edit: Ninja'd.

Edit2: Whoops it is a trait. My bad. Still, this or +2 initiative? Tough choice.
Last edited by Pseudo Stupidity on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
sandmann wrote:
Zak S wrote:I'm not a dick, I'm really nice.
Zak S wrote:(...) once you have decided that you will spend any part of your life trolling on the internet, you forfeit all rights as a human.If you should get hit by a car--no-one should help you. If you vote on anything--your vote should be thrown away.

If you wanted to participate in a conversation, you've lost that right. You are a non-human now. You are over and cancelled. No concern of yours can ever matter to any member of the human race ever again.
Cyberzombie
Knight-Baron
Posts: 742
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 4:12 am

Post by Cyberzombie »

Pseudo Stupidity wrote: Turns out there isn't, but there is a feat named "Hill Fighter" that lets you charge down hills (but not up them, you fucking munchkin) without making an acrobatics check.
I didn't even know there was an acrobatics check required for charging down a hill.
Dulon
NPC
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:59 am

Post by Dulon »

I dunno the Driver seems to come close to being that dumb. You know, give up trapfinding on your rogue to lower driving DCs by 2 for all the times you have to use the shitty chase rules.
Last edited by Dulon on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6342
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by virgil »

Antariuk wrote:The only upside of all this is possibily the fact that nobody says "Pathfinder is more balanced than 3.5" anymore.
You don't talk to the right people then, because that is still present.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Adam Reith
NPC
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:27 pm
Location: USA

Post by Adam Reith »

Yeah, most PF feats are so situational they're basically intended for NPCs/monsters who don't move from a specific location and will only have one "set piece" before they're killed. Why stuff like Hill Fighter wasn't simply rolled into skills (e.g., "at 6 ranks, you don't even have to roll anymore") in the first place is beyond me.

Some feats outright take away options, or even negate penalties that don't exist in the first place.

The disparity of traits is, if anything, even worse. You're presented with a choice of "+2 to initiative that stacks with everything" or "+2 to Acrobatics checks to avoid losing your feet on a pitching ship's deck during a storm." Uh, hmmm, let me think about that one...
Last edited by Adam Reith on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rasmuswagner
Knight-Baron
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 9:37 am
Location: Danmark

Post by rasmuswagner »

Cyberzombie wrote:
Pseudo Stupidity wrote: Turns out there isn't, but there is a feat named "Hill Fighter" that lets you charge down hills (but not up them, you fucking munchkin) without making an acrobatics check.
I didn't even know there was an acrobatics check required for charging down a hill.
Well clearly, charging down a hill is something that requires specialized training. That's why generals have historically tried to avoid staying on high ground with their spearmen.
...My head hurts.
Every time you play in a "low magic world" with D&D rules (or derivates), a unicorn steps on a kitten and an orphan drops his ice cream cone.
Dulon
NPC
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:59 am

Post by Dulon »

To be fair Paizo occasionally erratas stuff to be better; they changed the Prone Shooter feat so it actually does something now for instance rather than negating a nonexistent penalty.

...not that they do this very often but it does happen.
GâtFromKI
Knight-Baron
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:14 am

Post by GâtFromKI »

Adam Reith wrote:Yeah, most PF feats are so situational they're basically intended for NPCs/monsters who don't move from a specific location and will only have one "set piece" before they're killed.
Actually Hill fighter is a trait, not a feat. So NPC can't have it. It's PC-only-stuff.
Last edited by GâtFromKI on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Adam Reith
NPC
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:27 pm
Location: USA

Post by Adam Reith »

Edit: Adam, if you could take a look at the stuff I'm planning on publishing for Pathfinder, I'd appreciate the eye of someone who knows the system.
I know jack-all about comic books, so I can't be of much help in that regard except to caution you to be very, very careful about publishing anything that even looks like it might skirt the line near copyright infringement. There are people who seriously make a living now doing nothing but suing people who post/copy/adapt stuff that they made up years ago.

That said, PF seems to be very anti-base classes except for random "hybrids" used to cover up the fact that mutliclassing in 3.0/3.5/PF doesn't work, and never did, and still doesn't. Tightly-themed classes seem to all be made into lame archetypes now, but I suppose there will always be a market for well-made prestige classes.

I'm sure you're already aware that the trick to appeal to the fanbase is to disguise mechanics at all costs and focus on "flavor" instead -- don't say "this works like [SRD ability X]" when you could instead insert two paragraphs of fluff that kind of hints around what the effects might be, assuming the DM is willing to concede them. Showing the mechanics the way you're doing here is a good way to balance them for actual play, but make sure you hide them in the final product, because most PF players don't want to look too closely at what's under the hood.

At a quick perusal only, the power levels look good to me, but the people here can probably give better feedback on that. Be prepared for the fact that PF players will yell ZOMG OVERPOWERED! at anything that's even close to balanced with a core rules bard, much less a full caster.

Minor editorial: "it's" means "it is." The possessive is "its."
Last edited by Adam Reith on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:46 pm, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Adam Reith
NPC
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:27 pm
Location: USA

Post by Adam Reith »

GâtFromKI wrote:Actually Hill fighter is a trait, not a feat. So NPC can't have it. It's PC-only-stuff.
Then what's it for? This kind of thing is what makes me anxious to not look at PF anymore. If it were a monster ability, I could at least use it to build encounters.
Last edited by Adam Reith on Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Dulon
NPC
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:59 am

Post by Dulon »

Its basically a trap ability that you will never use; PF has loads of these and the devs don't seem to care. It really only has any use if your MC is some kind of "realism" nazi and make you roll for shit like running down a hill.
GâtFromKI
Knight-Baron
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:14 am

Post by GâtFromKI »

Adam Reith wrote:Then what's it for?
That I don't know. I just don't know. I really just don't know. I'm afraid I really just don't know. I'm afraid even I really just don't know. I have to tell you I'm afraid even I really just don't know. I'm afraid I have to tell you...
User avatar
TOZ
Duke
Posts: 1160
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:19 pm

Post by TOZ »

I just wish HeroLab would fix their software to where I could hide all those shitty situational options that will never ever be used in a million years. If I have to look at Death From Above while scrolling through feats one more fucking time
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Does HeroLab have an option for banning material by source -- or even by individual option -- like the 4E D&D Character Builder?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Post Reply