Pathfinder Is Still Bad

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Longes
Prince
Posts: 2867
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:02 pm

Post by Longes »

Orion wrote:Is there an executive summary of this 200-page thread? I last looked at this game during beta, and it looks like many of the egregious problems from back then got cleaned up. Is it now appreciably worse than 3.5,what are the talking points on its badness, and would you take an opportunity to run it?
* Playing a fighter is still stupid, and now there are no prestige classes for fighters to break into the spellcasting
* Casters still rule
* Stealth rules still don't exist, but now there's only one Stealth skill
* Skill system is slightly better. There's no insanity with 1/2 points and shit
* It's better than 3.5 in terms of not having mountains and mountains of material to dumpster dive into.
* The class system became better, because there are now class features all the way up to the end (unless you are a fighter). This, combined with lack of prestige classes reduces the dumpster diving for ultimate power.
* Rogues might as well not exist. There's no situation in which a rogue can't be replaced by the Archeologist Bard, an Alchemist with the Tomb Raider trait or any other high int/high skills class with the Tomb Raider trait.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Orion wrote:Is there an executive summary of this 200-page thread? I last looked at this game during beta, and it looks like many of the egregious problems from back then got cleaned up. Is it now appreciably worse than 3.5,what are the talking points on its badness, and would you take an opportunity to run it?
[*] Pathfinder is more-or-less 3.5E D&D but with a bunch of pissant changes that only serve to make the edition more confusing. You can still hop into it easily enough because the major concepts are unchanged from 3.5E D&D but you'll get tripped up on the tiny details sooner or later. Fortunately, all of the game mechanics changes are frontloaded, so if you were familiar with Pathfinder's stupid changes in 2010 you're familiar with them in 2014. Since then, there's just been more expansion material rather than changes to the underlying core. Discounting stupid FAQ interpretations.

[*] Pathfinder's biggest claim to legitimacy, that of fixing linear warriors/quadratic wizards, is a total sham. They 'fixed' this by taking the nerfhammer to the more egregious spells and removing all of the 'direct' save-or-dies from the game. However, Pathfinder doesn't really grasp why wizards are > fighters so the power level has steadily creeped up such that the caster/non-caster gap is larger than in 3.5E D&D barring a few expansion options.

[*] Pathfinder's team of devs makes Skip Williams' haphazard and arbitrary look good. A frequent topic of complaining is how the FAQ will totally stealth-nerf or stealth-buff certain concepts with little grounding in RAW.

[*] Not all of Pathfinder's changes are bad. They did do some genuine good work like removing XP point costs for spells and item crafting (which makes these options more powerful, but I'd rather make the party uniformly much more powerful than lopsidedly more power) and the archetypes were a genuinely good idea. Playing LA+1/+2 monsters is much more doable in Pathfinder than in 3.5E D&D, mostly because LA+1/+2 monsters are actually modestly overpowered compared to core races -- but it actually kind of works out, since humans/half-elves/half-orcs/plain elves get advantages with the favored class bonuses that make up for it.

[*] Pathfinder's biggest positive contribution to D&D is the introduction of and standardization of archetypes, which takes the sort of inchoate idea from late-3.5E D&D of swapping in and out class features and taking them a bit further. This is awesome because A.) the open multiclassing system of base 3.5E D&D sniffs black mold and the less it gets used the better and B.) people get to play the concepts they want right out of the gate.

[*] The biggest reason why people talk about Pathfinder is its wiki on www.d20pfsrd.com. Pathfinder not only condones but encourages people to cannibalize their books and put everything up on the wiki. To WotC's surprise this is a hugely winning market strategy because people are still willing to shell out money for early access to books and/or the Pathfinder AP subscription. I myself have spent about 200 USD on Pathfinder product over the past three years.

[*] The bottom line is this: Pathfinder both deserves and doesn't deserve to be industry leader. The corporate culture of Pathfinder is one the best of TTRPGs, even accounting for its market position, and embracing the OGL even harder than 3E D&D is no small part of its success. Still, the actual game mechanics portion of Pathfinder is rather lacking. The d20 engine is in dire need of an update and from what we've seen Pathfinder isn't really up to the task. Nonetheless, it's eminently playable if you liked 3.5E D&D at all. Think of it as getting a 5% pay cut at your current job with no added benefits. That's Pathfinder compared to 3E D&D.
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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.
User avatar
Orion
Prince
Posts: 3756
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Orion »

Actually, you make sound like it's probably slightly better than 3.5.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

If someone said that they liked Pathfinder better than 3.5E D&D after being cognizant of the merits and flaws of each edition... I would disagree, but I would understand. If certain strengths or innovations of Pathfinder really appeal to you such as the racial selection or campaign setting or archetypes or the new classes or even the art direction I could see it outweighing the negatives.
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Mon Nov 24, 2014 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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.
User avatar
TOZ
Duke
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:19 pm

Post by TOZ »

Honestly, the biggest positive outweighs the negatives, and that is just how easy it is to get a Pathfinder game together in my area.
Ghremdal
Master
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 1:48 am

Post by Ghremdal »

As a player I like it a bit more then 3.5, though I miss some items from MIC and miss Tome of Battle.

From the GM side I will see in a week or so, as our high level plane crawl game will begin. Light on RP, heavy on combat a GM vs players type game, no holds barred (other then certain shenanigans).

Party starts at lvl 14, but due to high point buy, and having a T2 class they are treated as lvl 16. My stipulation is that I don't use custom monsters, just those out of the bestiary (no advancement, templates are ok).

Party will consist of:
Barbarian with the spellcasting archetype
Healbot Paladin (no spells variant)
Gunslinger, Crossbow ace archetype
Some sort of celestial themed Sorcerer

Any suggestions for that level, good/nasty monsters?
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Templates are more powerful pound-for-pound than advancement. Just so you know.

Also, you should strongly consider running groups of classed NPC opponents than a small group of super-monsters. And go easy on the opposition that has spellcasting. That group is pretty weak; it doesn't have a cleric or wizard. What the hell is your party going to do if they need a break enchantment or a resurrection spell or a scrying? Is the sorcerer just going to be a support caster?
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.
Ghremdal
Master
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 1:48 am

Post by Ghremdal »

I expect deaths, so I feel the party composition will change sooner rather then later. Though taking T2 or higher classes increases their effective party level, so I don't expect to see too many wizards or clerics.

As for the current setup, Sorcerer will support, as for the rest there will be items/spellcasting services for hire.*

I don't want to go too hard on them at the start, just am looking for some monster suggestions so I don't have to dive through all the bestiaries to find what I like.

*The entire "campaign" will be set on a custom plane. Monsters, instead of gold, will drop Astral Diamonds, with 1gp = 1 AD. AD's can be converted into effects after a player concentrates for 8 hours, at the standard price for the effect. So a player can create a ring of protection +1 in 8 hours expending 2000 AD. Same with spells, with standard spellcasting price for services (material components also cost AD), though not all spells will be available at the start.
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

Longes wrote:[
* It's better than 3.5 in terms of not having mountains and mountains of material to dumpster dive into.
I disagree on the dumpster diving problems. The Archetype situation means that everyone's base classes are basically prestige classes. The fact that all the material is available for free means that DUMPSTER DIVING galore for all the best stuff is the standard. Most martial classes simply don't work without monstrous amounts of dumpster diving.

I concur that Pathfinder's claim to fame that it balanced the magical/non-magical disparity is a crock. It has widened considerably and the two least magical classes in the core book, Fighter and Rogue, are obviously the shittiest trap options.

The idea that Fighters and Rogues were "fixed" is a crock. The Rogue is EASILY the worst 1-20 class in the core book. EASILY. Because they lost flask sneak attacking, sneak attacking via blinking and other things, it is even harder to sneak attack. Everything got bloated HP and increased AC and you're still a 3/4 class doing Xd6 damage. You have no magic access and your main schtick, sneak attacking, has been whored out repeatedly, to Alchemist and Investigators, Druid archetypes and Slayers. You know, classes with the same Sneak Attack progression and better saves and 3/4 spell casting, full-casting classes with better saves and 1d10, full BAB classes with attack bonus boosting class options.

Trap-finding has been so trivialized that it may be purchased by anyone for the low cost of half of a feat or taken at character creation as a trait. Things like Archaeologist Bard and Seeker Sorcerer make the whole trap-finding thing a farce.

Power Attack and other bread and butter feats were changed and it nerfed fighters down to the ground. Things that used to be one feat like Improved Trip are chunked into two so even the promise of more feats than a 3.5 fighter is illusory. Melee combat with the beefed up monsters in the bestiaries is not something that is recommended. The game is heavily shifted towards MAGIC as 1st option and then Ranged Attacking with Magical Buffing as the second best option, with melee sitting over here as the option for morons. Melee doesn't even do more damage than ranged now.

Rogues can't even Tumble into a flank to sneak attack for Xd6 whatever at 3/4 BAB with no ways of boosting their attacks. The Acrobatics DC is fucking crazy high. Even the "right way" to play a rogue in Pathfinder is impossible.
Last edited by Insomniac on Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:44 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

Archmage Joda wrote:Speaking of casters in pathfinder, how does the Witch measure up? Is it just a waste of space in a world where there's already the wizard and sorcerer classes, or is it also a worthy caster class in its own right?
Well, you're a full caster so just off that, you're in pretty good shape.
Their spell list isn't great but is has some gems and Pathfinder has a few easy ways to list-dip. You've got some great class abilities with your Hexes, like Slumber.

Half-Orcs can cast off their Constitution. Only way I think you can full-cast off your Con score in Pathfinder. Half-Orcs can also get a racial +1 luck bonus through tattoos and take a trait to boost that to a +2 luck bonus to all saves.

+2 to all saves and casting off Constitution with Slumber is a quick and easy way to be pretty potent without breaking your brain making a really strong character in another way.
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

Post by OgreBattle »

If the Fighter, Rogue, and Monk were gestalted into a single class with all of their abilities, would this new Fightyperson still be worse than a Paladin, Barbarian, or Ranger?
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

Orion wrote:Actually, you make sound like it's probably slightly better than 3.5.
The sum of all of the differences (positive and negative) amounts to random noise.
MisterDee
Knight-Baron
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:40 pm

Post by MisterDee »

OgreBattle wrote:If the Fighter, Rogue, and Monk were gestalted into a single class with all of their abilities, would this new Fightyperson still be worse than a Paladin, Barbarian, or Ranger?
At low levels, it's probably comparable if you're sticking to the base classes mashed together - you're essentially a fighter with more skill points, all good saves, and finally enough feats to get the staples and some customization of your character.

If you allow archetyped versions of classes, however, it'd probably be a bit too good at low levels. Replacing all the abilities of the monk that are irrelevant to the gestalt (i.e. everything but the saves) with relevant stuff probably makes the gestalt's numbers too good.

At mid to high level, the base class gestalt still doesn't cut it - the three classes suffer mostly from their total lack of relevant class features. Rogue talents, bravery and Tongue of the Sun and Moon are still shitty when combined together. It'd of course still be better than regular fighter/monk/rogue, but not by enough.

The archetyped gestalt would be a lot more interesting. There are monk archetypes that are actually good, and replacing whatever shitty abilities remain via Qinggong monk would probably be sufficient to push the gestalt into real class territory (still not a full caster, but...) Rogue and fighter archetypes aren't that incredible, but at least they open the door to marginally better synergies and improvements (and if nothing else, that's a lot of extra feats and feat equivalents that can be turned into ki points for the monk if necessary.)
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

You'd be a full BAB with 8 skill points, all good saves, Weapon Training to boost attacks and Sneak Attack to help with damage.

A lot of it doesn't synergize like Armor and some fiddling abilities like Bravery and Slowfall and stuff just really don't matter.

Archetypes where you can get some sort of spellcasting, like Quinggong would push it past at least one of those classes, possibly two. I'm thinking Paladin and Ranger, maybe. Barbarian still has jacked saves, a d12, nice skills, nice saves and abilities to get things like Pounce.

In any case it is interesting to see how combining 3 of those classes together isn't nearly as big a deal as combing any 3/4 or half-casting classes together that cast off the same stat, like Hunter/Inquistor/Warpriest.
User avatar
Dean
Duke
Posts: 2059
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:14 am

Post by Dean »

For balance it could start as Fighter, gestalt with Rogue and Monk at 4th level, and gain access to archetypes of the its classes at around level 8.
DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.
User avatar
Archmage Joda
Knight
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Archmage Joda »

So, here's a question: whenever I monkey with oracle, I always have trouble picking mystery. What oracle mysteries are good, and which are trash?
Silent Wayfarer
Knight-Baron
Posts: 898
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:35 am

Post by Silent Wayfarer »

Archmage Joda wrote:So, here's a question: whenever I monkey with oracle, I always have trouble picking mystery. What oracle mysteries are good, and which are trash?
In general, it depends. Oracles can be better than a cleric at (almost) any given subtask a cleric is expected to accomplish, but not all of them at once. Their mysteries will go a long way toward this, and the best effects are usually at level 20 so don't even think about MCing.

If you want to heal, Life Mystery.

If you want to fight, Metal and Battle aren't bad.

Lore mystery gives you wish 1/day at level 20 at no cost, CHa to AC instead of Dex and free +5 inherent to Int. You can also jack spells from the sorcerer/wizard list 1/day provided you have a source (this one kind of sucks).

But no matter what mystery you pick you're still a full caster, albeit a somewhat shitty one. So you can't go too wrong. Also, the curses generally improve and stop being a drawback after a while, so you can power up with them as well.



I don't make oracles much, so take what I say with a pinch of salt.
Last edited by Silent Wayfarer on Tue Nov 25, 2014 9:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
If your religion is worth killing for, please start with yourself.
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

I've been playing a low-level oracle in an on-and-off weekly game for a few months. I'm restricted mostly to core, and 5th level is an unpleasant place to be. Not having 3rd level spells hurts. Not having access to the entire cleric list hurts.

But I expect that this is a minor bump. It'll never have the sheer versatility and power of a pure cleric, but the oracle's curse is fun to work around and casting spontaneously keeps things from bogging down.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

User avatar
Archmage Joda
Knight
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Archmage Joda »

In what I will try to leave as the last installment of "How steaming is this shit?" for a while, is the mystic theurge worth anything when using the ability to qualify using spell-like abilities for minimal casting loss (that is to say, only a single level lost from your preferred caster)?
TiaC
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:09 am

Post by TiaC »

Archmage Joda wrote:In what I will try to leave as the last installment of "How steaming is this shit?" for a while, is the mystic theurge worth anything when using the ability to qualify using spell-like abilities for minimal casting loss (that is to say, only a single level lost from your preferred caster)?
If you can get Esoteric training from your guild it's pretty good.
User avatar
rasmuswagner
Knight-Baron
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 9:37 am
Location: Danmark

Post by rasmuswagner »

Archmage Joda wrote:So, here's a question: whenever I monkey with oracle, I always have trouble picking mystery. What oracle mysteries are good, and which are trash?
Most of the Mysteries have one or two good revelations, and the rest is filler.

The Lunar Mystery, though....

*A decent Wildshape Lite ability from level 7
*An additional natural attack, if you're going for that.
*Touch attack for "you lose, no save" against pure casters from level 5 (mantle of moonlight)
*Your shitty blast power also has Fort (scaling) or blinded 1 round
*Animal companion - limited list, but one of the options is Tiger.
*Cha replaces Dex for AC and Reflex.
*And an ability to create temp HP with Healing spells that's better than the Life Oracle's.
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.
Mask_De_H
Duke
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:17 pm

Post by Mask_De_H »

If you're playing low levels or really like Color Spray, Heavens is a choice you can make. Slap Heighten Spell on that bitch and take the Revelation that dings HD based on your Cha and you have something workable. You also get flight and a Wall of Force and possibly some free metamagic/Cha to Perception, depending on if your DM gives a shit about what time of day you fight.
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

rasmuswagner wrote:The Lunar Mystery, though....

*Cha replaces Dex for AC and Reflex.
The Cha to reflex is a bit of a trap though. You probably want to take the divine protection feat on your oracle and since the FAQ you can't have cha to a save twice. Thus since it replaces dex, your save is probably lower.
Insomniac wrote:Half-Orcs can cast off their Constitution.
The Scarred Witch Doctor (Witch) is still stuck with int for determining bonus spells though.
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
User avatar
Archmage Joda
Knight
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Archmage Joda »

So, between the Druid and the Wizard, which one would you say has the "better", stronger spell list?
TiaC
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:09 am

Post by TiaC »

Wizard of course, the Druid just has a Fighter as a class feature.
virgil wrote:Lovecraft didn't later add a love triangle between Dagon, Chtulhu, & the Colour-Out-of-Space; only to have it broken up through cyber-bullying by the King in Yellow.
FrankTrollman wrote:If your enemy is fucking Gravity, are you helping or hindering it by putting things on high shelves? I don't fucking know! That's not even a thing. Your enemy can't be Gravity, because that's stupid.
Post Reply