Pathfinder: the Lowdown

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Lago PARANOIA wrote: Bruce Cordell fucked up the FR setting so hard that we're probably never going to get another Forgotten Realms sourcebook for this edition. Ever.
That may well be a good thing. I always hated FR.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

I don't like Forgotten Realms either, but if I wasn't so intent on watching 4th Edition go down in flames I would be very upset at how Bruce Cordell handled it.

Forgotten Realms fanboys are one of the things that kept 3rd Edition afloat. There was a reason why we had so many goddamn Forgotten Realms sourcebooks and adventures. Yes, the FRCG gave us ridiculousness like Persistent Spell and Archmage but it also gave 3rd Edition momentum and expanded its lifespan.

I mean, c'mon! Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter fuckin' Nights. Eh? Ehh?
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.
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
Roy wrote: Your post is not too different from the many people that claim 4th edition is a lot of fun if you do not actually play it, and instead make up a bunch of random stuff.
Well any edition. 3.5, PF, or 4E all seem to use that philosophy.

It's one reason I kinda look at anyone funny when they use the "But you're making up houserules" anti-PF or anti-4E argument, when 3E games are loaded with just as many house rules if not more. I mean I have never houseruled any system as heavily as I've houseruled 3.5
If you can't understand the difference between 'replace 10-20%' and 'replace 95%+' then we have nothing to discuss. The former is house rules, the latter is a full system redesign.

Also, Plus Fucking One about FR.
Last edited by Roy on Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:
I mean, c'mon! Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter fuckin' Nights. Eh? Ehh?
BG was actually 2nd edition rules.

I never really got into NWN much. It was a kind of boring hack and slash game.
Zurai
NPC
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:56 pm

Re: Pathfinder: the Lowdown

Post by Zurai »

Wow, there's a lot of useless, vitriolic dreck in the OP, much of which is out-and-out false.
FrankTrollman wrote:No. In this case, the "playtest" was a lie. Destructive playtesting was not only not encouraged, it was actively and specifically rejected. The Paizo leadership only wanted to hear about whether people had fun or not. Which means that the most pried playtest reports were seriously ones in which the players spent all night in immersive roleplaying or where the fun centered around "awesome" artifacts that broke the rules. In short - things that didn't use the rules at all and didn't demonstrate anything. People who actually ran apples to apples comparisons, same game tests, or repeated experiments to get controlled results or regressed bugs were not only ignored, they were banned from their forums.
False, and a quick trip through the still-open Playtest Forum proves it so. I personally made quite a few posts that brought up mechanical issues and I've not even received a warning, let alone a ban.
Pathfinder does the opposite, and mysteriously makes spellcasters more powerful and fighters less powerful. Thus, it's more unbalanced.
False. Spellcasters are less powerful; spells are weakened, spells per day are decreased, and non-spellcasting class abilities that were considered overly powerful before (ie, wild shape) are nerfed. At the same time, fighters are more powerful: they get the same number and list of bonus feats, but now they also get actual class features.
Specialist wizards essentially don't even have spell selection limits anymore, but they still have bonuses/
Again, demonstrably false. Read the Wizard preview. While it's true that there are no TRUE banned schools, it takes two spell slots to memorize a "banned" spell. That's a spell selection limit.
Anything you'd want to do with combat feats costs more feats now. The +4 bonus from Improved Disarm has been divided into two feats, for example. Spell Focus is unchanged of course.
At the VERY least, this is misleading. We have absolutely no indication of how the feats section has changed from Beta to Release. We do know that they significantly boosted the strength of Power Attack over the Beta version, though.
Power Attack, they nerfed it.
They streamlined it. Instead of having to keep a spreadsheet at the table to figure out the optimal reduction to provide the biggest damage increase, Power Attack is now -1 to hit/+1-3 damage per 4 levels. It IS less powerful, but it's also much easier to use, and it's still a good investment for a 2h fighter.
Not only are the rules specifically in a state of flux, with Jason going in and rewriting stuff with and without blog messages to that effect all the time
And this is the point that most clearly indicates that the Trollman has a serious bias in play, here. At the time of the Trollman's post, he was telling an out-and-out lie, because the rules had been frozen for several months at that point (because the rulebook was already out to the printer and couldn't be changed even if they had wanted to).
Those options don't seem to exist in Pathfinder, so every Bard is doomed to gradually lose ground to mediocrity and finally obscurity in all fields and never justify their existence or regain the spotlight in anything.
False. You can use Sublime Chord, Seeker of the Song, Lyric Thaumaturge, etc, completely or almost completely unaltered. As for Snowflake Wardance, it's an easy conversion, depending on how literal you want to be -- either you make it use 1 round of music per round of dance, up to a maximum of the duration described by the feat, or you use 1 round of music to activate it and it lasts the duration described by the feat.
Is Polymorph Fixed Yet?

No.
That depends greatly on how you define "fixed". It's no longer an instant-win-melee-combat button, which was the major game balance problem. There's still the "finding the perfect critter" problem (which is a meta-game, non-balance problem), but since the stat gains are static and the granted special abilities fairly low-key, that's really only something you have to do if you're OCD about maximizing every possible facet of your character.
These have a tendency to be shit like demon claws that are frankly really lame.
... at first level. On the other hand, they also have the tendency to be things like "cast metamagic spells without increasing casting time" at the higher levels. But that'd be telling the WHOLE story, eh Trollman?
So while the Necromancer wizard gets a free doubled control pool on his skeleton horde, the Sorcerer gets his choice of a wide variety of flavors of bullshit melee combat schticks that he will literally never us because he's still a fucking arcane spellcaster.
Ah, yes, the 5 first-level "at will" abilities out of 9 or 10 bloodlines that have a melee touch component. None of the bloodlines have any melee combat schticks past first level except for Aberrant, which gets extra reach with touch range spells.
No. Like pretty much anything else that you'd really want someone to do a giant overhaul on because the original system didn't work and no one uses it or integrates it into other subsystems, Jason pretty much ignores it.
The stated goal of PFRPG is to maintain backwards compatibility. Blasting them for not doing a giant overhaul of an original system while at the same time blasting them for not being backwards compatible enough is just more blatant bias.
If you're a Dread Necromancer you can cast remove disease spontaneously if you happen to worship that goddess whose name starts with U - so all of them presumably do.
Demonstrably false, since the Dread Necromancer isn't open content and thus Paizo is unable to touch it to provide a bonus like you claim they have.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Lago wrote:Also, David Noonan. He made Stronghold Builder's Guide. That's all.
Right. Quite a feather in the cap of David Noonan. That book, while flawed of course, is actually a pretty cool accessory. For how short it is, there is actually a lot of useful material. The basic setup is even pretty useful to player characters in the hypothetical world where they want to take months and months of downtime and build a house.

It has a big list of rooms to have and some minor bonuses for having them around, and it has a big list of people to hire and some actually pretty comprehensible prices for hiring staff to do stuff. Neither list is as long as you'd want, but it's there. There is a fairly decent (if again short) list of fantastic materials to make castles out of.

And to top it all off, the entire castles as investments section, while silly, is at the least quite easy and quick to adjudicate and much more balanced than the running a business rules in DMG 2. And that's what it's going to be compared to, right? You're living in a wealth = power bullshit existence and you have this thing that sits there making money at some rate and it costs a huge pile of money to begin with. So you'd like it to pay itself off eventually and never give out piles of money that are too astronomically crazy. And the rules in SBG do that, making it the (unfortunately) best investment rules that 3rd edition D&D ever had.

Admittedly, it's fighting against the rules in Powergaming of Feyrun and DMG2 - but still. Totally the best investment rules. I'd put SBG in my top 10 of books that got published for that edition. Yes, I concede easily that none of the sample fortresses were actually worth building - but seriously you wouldn't play any of the sample characters they put next to the prestige classes in any books either.
Zurai wrote:Demonstrably false, since the Dread Necromancer isn't open content and thus Paizo is unable to touch it to provide a bonus like you claim they have.
Uhhh... is that seriously the best you can do? You're a fucking a Paizo fanboy and that's the best you can fucking do? Get the fuck out of here, adults are talking.

The book Gods and Magic gives every necromancer who worships their lame Kali clone Remove Disease and Contagion as bonus spells known. They don't have to mention the Dread Necromancer class at all because they are just "a spellcaster" and therefore get the bonus. They just happen to be the only ones who really care that much because having spells known of any kind is so good for them.

-Username17

-Username17
Zurai
NPC
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:56 pm

Post by Zurai »

FrankTrollman wrote:The book Gods and Magic ...
Is a 3.5 supplement, not a Pathfinder RPG one. There are no Pathfinder RPG supplements, currently. Thus, your complaint has literally nothing to do with the Pathfinder rules.
Last edited by Zurai on Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Frank, we derailed this thread enough. I think that we should take SBG stuff to the other thread.
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.
wrathgon
NPC
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:11 pm

Post by wrathgon »

I am going to have to give my input on this thread, even though i just joined this site.

PF has failed FOR ME, and it seems for alot of people. I was happy to see that someone was trying to keep 3e alive and i hoped they would fixed SOME of the problems in 3,5. They have, the OP does not talk about the good stuff of the rules, only the bad. Maybe he does not believe there is any good stuff, but i do.

PF failed at fixing the classes, they patched the fighter class, but didnt do enough, they gave the caster classes MORE stuff, which they didnt need.

Now they did some nice work with some of the other classesbut powered them up too much IMO.

Reading over the previews just shows how much a power up ALL the classes got, when only a few needed it.
I am sorry but there is no way to use a 3.5 mission with PF without major rewriting of NPCS and monsters, so IMO they have failed at backwards compatibly.

The skill system does make things easier by removing cross class skills, but the +3 to class skills leads to taking a class with lots of class skills like rogue, putting 1 point in a bunch of skills, then moving to another class, and still getting the +3. a better way to do it would use Iron heroes Skill groups.

Spells
They did fix some of the broken spells, but did not do enough, there are still too many over powerful spells that they left so now instead of taking this overpowering spell, they take another one. But they did a good job on the ones they did fix(other than polymorph, that was a joke) The death spells do HP dmg was a waste of time, They should have nerf all the spells to make none save or win, but there are stilll many like that(Ta laugher anyone?)

Craft
They took away the only thing that was limiting casters in making items, burning XP. I would have liked them maybe add rare materials like dragon blood or something else other than GP to make items. i been toying with using monster parts for XP in making items, which would bring back reason to go adventuring and slay a giant or Roc or whatever.

I really like the rewrites for the combat moves, much better than 3.5, and easier to use and understand, they did get the base DC wrong but the final changes it up and after doing some math i think it works well.

Overall i think PF failed what it said it would do, and i dont think this is what 3.5 should become. I dont think they addressed many of the problems 3.5 has and in some cases have made it worst.

I been playing in a PF beta game for 6 months now, and ran one for 6 months so i did give it a try.

anyways i hope that PF works for those that like it, and those that dont, well dont play it and leave it at that. In responds to PF failure for me, i started to design my own d20 system that uses parts of PF, Iron heroes and Acane Evolved(two very good d20 system i think).
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

But Bruce Cordell still sucks more.
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.
Nihlin
Journeyman
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Nihlin »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Also, David Noonan. He made Stronghold Builder's Guide. That's all.
Funny story: back in... 2002, I think, maybe 2003, I spilled a drink on my friend's copy of the Stronghold Builder's Guide. So I bought him a new one and kept the damaged one. I actually like it. I'm not saying you couldn't make up something better in a few hours, but I like the thought, as it were. And it's gotten some play. So, hey.

Actually, that wasn't very funny...
Last edited by Nihlin on Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
Nihlin
Journeyman
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Pathfinder: the Lowdown

Post by Nihlin »

Zurai wrote:Wow, there's a lot of useless, vitriolic dreck in the OP, much of which is out-and-out false
Wow, there's a lot of useless, math-impaired nonsense in the fanboi's post, much of which is out-and-out false.

That said, I actually picked up the Pathfinder monster book at Free PRG day, so I've looked at monsters that they have actually been printed in actual hardcopy. There were enough changes all over the statblock that it's pretty clear what their notion of backwards-compatible means: just enough to be recognizable, but different enough to sell you a new book.
User avatar
Ganbare Gincun
Duke
Posts: 1022
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:42 am

Post by Ganbare Gincun »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Yeah, Dave Arneson died before his time, didn't he?

ZING!!
And he'll never get his due.
User avatar
Ganbare Gincun
Duke
Posts: 1022
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:42 am

Post by Ganbare Gincun »

TOZ wrote:I apologize for drawing the attention of the Paizo forums, but they did pose the question "Why all the hate for Pathfinder?"
Oh. And here I thought the Paizils followed Roy home after he assaulted PF on forum too many. :lol:
Last edited by Ganbare Gincun on Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Is Roy stirring up shit on other forums again?
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
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

If this is supposed to be the official "Pathfinder sucks" thread, someone (who cares) might want to respond to Zurai with actual facts instead of empty flaming.

It's not going to be me - I don't give a toss. But dismissing him with a handwave is lazy.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Is Roy stirring up shit on other forums again?
TOZ wrote:I apologize for drawing the attention of the Paizo forums, but they did pose the question "Why all the hate for Pathfinder?"
Not Roy this time. Though it wasn't actually starting shit. But they are still coming over here to whine about how because they have never personally been told to shut up for saying that Bards don't "seem cool enough" therefore, Jason totally listens to actual playtesting comparing actual abilities.
User avatar
erik
King
Posts: 5861
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by erik »

mean_liar wrote:If this is supposed to be the official "Pathfinder sucks" thread, someone (who cares) might want to respond to Zurai with actual facts instead of empty flaming.

It's not going to be me - I don't give a toss. But dismissing him with a handwave is lazy.
Actually it appears a handwave dismissal is all he needs. He claims fighters are stronger yet admits their major damage engine has been nerfed... just not as badly as they originally screwed em over. Nor did he address Frank's claim that since old feats have been split into more feats enough to outcost the greater spending pool of feats available.

Really he barely addressed anything directly. Zurai just made counter claims while providing less substance than the claims he disputed. I am totally ignoring dickwads who do that. There's nothing to argue with someone who just says "nuh-uh!".
Zurai
NPC
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:56 pm

Post by Zurai »

clikml wrote:Actually it appears a handwave dismissal is all he needs. He claims fighters are stronger yet admits their major damage engine has been nerfed... just not as badly as they originally screwed em over.
Power Attack hasn't been the primary Fighter damage engine since Dungeonscape was released.
Nor did he address Frank's claim that since old feats have been split into more feats enough to outcost the greater spending pool of feats available.
Yes, I did. We have no idea what the final feats will end up being. The reduction in feat power level was a major complaint ... during Beta. We already know that they've fixed MANY of the major feat complaints from Beta, among them the total uselessness of Power Attack and the swift action activation for combat feats (such as Dodge).
Really he barely addressed anything directly. Zurai just made counter claims while providing less substance than the claims he disputed. I am totally ignoring dickwads who do that. There's nothing to argue with someone who just says "nuh-uh!".
Less substance than Frank's outright lies? At least I'm telling the truth or an opinion rather than trying to lie to people to further an agenda. You'll also note that Frank didn't even bother to deny that he was lying to you all -- probably because he knows it's pointless because half of you are currently sucking his dick. I'll also point out that I did provide actual data points (example: sorcerer bloodlines), while Frank provided literally zero data points.


I'm certainly not 100% in favor of the pathfinder changes. I bitched long and hard in the Bard preview thread about the moronic change to uses/day. I also did a lot of complaining about the changes to polymorph and the nerfs to some of the other spells. I'm not saying PF is all roses and piles of gold waiting to be claimed. I'm saying that Frank has an obvious axe to grind and doesn't give two shits about actually helping people choose the best edition for them -- his only goal with this thread was to vent his bladder in Paizo's direction. That's fine, except that he acts like he's trying to help people while doing it.
Last edited by Zurai on Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
cthulhu
Duke
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by cthulhu »

Zurai wrote:
clikml wrote:Actually it appears a handwave dismissal is all he needs. He claims fighters are stronger yet admits their major damage engine has been nerfed... just not as badly as they originally screwed em over.
Power Attack hasn't been the primary Fighter damage engine since Dungeonscape was released.
But didn't you say that 3.5 sourcebooks don't count previously? So if dungeonscape is out of play, doesn't that make the primary damage engine power attack?

I am confused.
Zurai
NPC
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:56 pm

Post by Zurai »

cthulhu wrote:But didn't you say that 3.5 sourcebooks don't count previously? So if dungeonscape is out of play, doesn't that make the primary damage engine power attack?

I am confused.
No. I said that the Golarion Gods and Magic book is not a Pathfinder RPG sourcebook and has no Pathfinder RPG rules in it, so saying the Pathfinder RPG sucks because of Gods and Magic is like saying the USA sucks because Sarkozy is the president of France.
IGTN
Knight-Baron
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:13 am

Post by IGTN »

Lying?

Seriously, it looks like this:
Frank: Pathfinder does X. X is self-evidently bad, so Pathfinder is therefore bad.
Zurai: Nuh-uh! That's the beta, (ed. note: which they've already sold). The designers promised that the release version (not the one they already fucking sold) would be good, so that can't be true. Nobody's ever seen the release version 'cept the designers, so you can't say anything about the system. You're a liar.

Also, if the Pathfinder core fighter is worse than the 3.5 core fighter, Pathfinder is a nerf. It doesn't matter if there's something in a 3.5 expansion book that lets fighters keep up that wasn't nerfed (because the Pathfinder team couldn't get their grubby mitts on it), since Pathfinder is only backwards compatible in that the designers say it is enough that people believe it.
"No, you can't burn the inn down. It's made of solid fire."
Zurai
NPC
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:56 pm

Post by Zurai »

IGTN wrote:Lying?

Seriously, it looks like this:
Frank: Pathfinder does X. X is self-evidently bad, so Pathfinder is therefore bad.
Zurai: Nuh-uh! That's the beta, (ed. note: which they've already sold). The designers promised that the release version (not the one they already fucking sold) would be good, so that can't be true. Nobody's ever seen the release version 'cept the designers, so you can't say anything about the system. You're a liar.
Yes, lying.

Frank: The Pathfinder developers post every day that the rules are changing.
Actual reality: The rules had been frozen for over two months before Frank's original post.

Frank: Anyone who attempted to actually beta test was banned from Paizo's forums.
Actual reality: Plenty of playtesters posted very negative, very critical mechanical complaints during the playtest and never got banned.

Frank: Bards can't use inspire competence for take 20 attempts.
Actual reality: Inspire competence used during a take 20 attempt costs 1 round of music.

Frank: The options to use bard prestige classes and bard feats don't exist in Pathfinder.
Actual reality: ... do I even really have to respond to this?

Etc.
User avatar
erik
King
Posts: 5861
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by erik »

WTF, dungeonscape? I don't know anyone who even owns that book, hell, I barely heard about its existence. It came out Feb 2007. That had to be one of the last 3.5e products kicked out the door. And that is the new bar by what fighters are to be measured? Sweet Jesus.

I played 3rd edition games for a long while, and by and large, power attack was the major means by which fighters could hope to struggle to be relevant in combats. At the very least, if it was taken away or diminished, then you needed something pretty good to replace it.

If pathfinder has lessened the damage that fighters can produce via power attack then hopefully they have given them something in return. The best way to get myself along with others to agree on this point would be to provide some example where the damage per round can be compared to 3.5 or 3e examples, or better yet, performing actual testing and comparisons against identical challenges to equivalent characters from previous editions.

I also don't get how you can say you have no idea what the feats will end up being, and then take to task someone for using the discussing the feats we know about, the beta versions, as examples. Either pathfinder is a mystery box or it isn't. If it is a mystery box, then that puts a lie to any claims of it being some sort of open playtest edition, and the only things we can honestly discuss are the things that we know were introduced, even if tis only a beta version.
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Post by Josh_Kablack »

Those options don't seem to exist in Pathfinder, so every Bard is doomed to gradually lose ground to mediocrity and finally obscurity in all fields and never justify their existence or regain the spotlight in anything.

False. You can use Sublime Chord, Seeker of the Song,
Seeker of the Song?! You're seriously suggesting that there is anything useful in the class about underwater singing!?

SO what was that theorized cheese in Combine Songs that makes level 2 worth actually taking compared to just straight bard?
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Locked