Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[FatR]

GenCon announcements are painting Paizo's 2016-17 fiscal year as Year of Cthulu. Strange Aeons AP and Horror Adventures, based on the Old Ones, madness, turning into monsters, and generally being Call of Cthulu PF-style.

I already don't see any non-superficial setting differences between Pathfinder and Call of Cthulhu.

The big difference is that in PF you can kick more ass, and your accomplishments are more immediately impressive, even if ultimately they amount to jackshit.

I wonder if that is what people at Paizo want to fix.

[Username17]

Call of Cthulhu is a popular setting whose traditionally used system is a dog with fleas from the late 70s. The setting is also almost completely public domain. Writing expansion material for popular RPG subjects without paying any royalties because you don't have to is pretty much part of the business plan.

As FatR noted, Paizo has already been fapping to Mythos material for a long time. Making overtly Call of Cthulhu materials ported into a hack of 3rd edition D&D rules is an obvious and natural evolution of the company.

-Username17

[RadiantPhoenix]

Would you say that, even if Paizo does about as poor a job as they normally do, their Cthulhu stuff will be better than Call of Cthulhu?

[Whipstitch]

Hellboy is an odd duck that has only become odder as more cooks enter the kitchen but I don't really think it should be dismissed entirely from the horror genre so blithely. Yes, it has a lot of super hero DNA in it, but it also has many callbacks to weird fiction and old EC horror.* So while it's true that Hellboy spends a lot of time punching out nazi war apes it's also true that there's many issues that are structured more or less like an episode of the X-Files--you know damn well the lead isn't terribly likely to die but oftentimes his role is only to bear witness to crazy shit that will never be adequately explained. Hellboy is a bad ass, certainly, but he can also confirm that there are unexplained monsters out there just by looking in the mirror. Dude's got a tough gig.


*Yes, some of that stuff may seem corny now, but those assholes have some serious squatters' rights on the genre.

[Username17]

Would you say that, even if Paizo does about as poor a job as they normally do, their Cthulhu stuff will be better than Call of Cthulhu?

Absolutely. That's the thing Paizo has had going for them from the beginning. They have a top notch RPG art department and they happen to be using one of the best core rules engines in the industry (they didn't make that engine, but they are using it). This means that even though their design methodology is frankly little better than White Wolf's was before they got shit canned, they still consistently produce material that is head and shoulders above what their competition is offering.

It's basically just like when they picked a fight with WotC in the first place (or WotC picked a fight with them, depending on how you look at it). Yes, the fuck-ups at Paizo were drawn from the same talent pool as the fuck-ups writing 4th edition D&D and weren't measurably better as writers or designers. But they produced a product that was much much better, because they had better art and a better core system. Going up against Chaosium would be a blowout. The writers at Paizo are still a bunch of fuck-ups, but they are competing against this:



-Username17

[OgreBattle]

My guess is that arcane casters get a new slew of tentacle themed spells to cast, divine casters get ways to alleviate insanity, and fighters get to go insane fighting cosmic horrors in melee combat.

[Miniature Colossus]

So I need some character advice. Still pretty new to Pathfinder and 3:ed overall.

I had to make a character on short notice and decided to whip up an archer cleric since I had heard good things about them, but now I'm starting to rethink my choice. Part of it is that as I read more about them it seemed like most of their goodwill is 3.5 legacy, where they were totally sweet, but in PF they appear to be no more than regular cleric sweet. The other problem is that we're playing The Emerald Spire which is Paizos answer to all those who wanted an old school dungeon crawl AP. Tight hallways with the big meatbags elbowing each other for space in the front are not exactly ideal conditions for an archer. At least not when we are starting at level 1 and Improved Precise Shot is so so far away for a cleric.

So what should I remake my character into? So far the rest of the party is a Fighter, an Inquisitor and a Gnome Summoner riding a bear eidolon (big meatbags elbowing each other for space etc etc). So preferably nothing that requires anything more than visual contact with the enemies. A buffer could work but doesn't sound terribly exciting, though probably good to have as a secondary role. Ranged debuffers or battlefield controllers seem more fun and I've been tempted to try a Witch or an Oracle. We are rolling stats (yes really) and I got 16 16 15 13 12 10 so something kind of MAD could actually be a good thing. Pretty much anything in Core+APG+ARG+UM is fine. Like I'm 99% sure I could use Paragon Surge shenanigans if tried, but the AP is listed as level 1-13 i think so it might not be worth it. Though we are using the fast XP track so who knows.

Any thoughts?

[Shady314]

Archer Cleric is still plenty strong if that appeals to you. Just because you won't get any persistent spell DMM cheese the DM would probably not allow anyways... just how optimized do you need to be for this? A human cleric of Erastil (Point Blank and Precise Shot level 1) with animal domain for the companion can make a mockery of that fighter I am sure while still being a cleric.

Witches or Oracles are strong too. If you want ranged debuffer then go witch. They're fun.

[Orca]

MCol., a witch does sound like it'd fit your requirements best. Make sure you get the trickery or deception patron so that you can cast mirror image/invisibility when something does get past the front line. You can't go far wrong making a witch.

An oracle is more of a buffer/secondary fighter in most cases. You've got the stats for it if you do want to go that way. They can do BFC/debuffing but won't be as good at it in your situation, a heavens oracle needs a clear gap in the front line to operate for example. On the other hand when things screw up an oracle is noticeably less squishy.

How much detail do you need?

[OgreBattle]

Tight hallways with the big meatbags elbowing each other for space in the front are not exactly ideal conditions for an archer.

That sounds like an ideal situation for an archer who has an animal companion he can shoot over

[AcidBlades]

So I need some character advice. Still pretty new to Pathfinder and 3:ed overall.

I had to make a character on short notice and decided to whip up an archer cleric since I had heard good things about them, but now I'm starting to rethink my choice. Part of it is that as I read more about them it seemed like most of their goodwill is 3.5 legacy, where they were totally sweet, but in PF they appear to be no more than regular cleric sweet. The other problem is that we're playing The Emerald Spire which is Paizos answer to all those who wanted an old school dungeon crawl AP. Tight hallways with the big meatbags elbowing each other for space in the front are not exactly ideal conditions for an archer. At least not when we are starting at level 1 and Improved Precise Shot is so so far away for a cleric.

So what should I remake my character into? So far the rest of the party is a Fighter, an Inquisitor and a Gnome Summoner riding a bear eidolon (big meatbags elbowing each other for space etc etc). So preferably nothing that requires anything more than visual contact with the enemies. A buffer could work but doesn't sound terribly exciting, though probably good to have as a secondary role. Ranged debuffers or battlefield controllers seem more fun and I've been tempted to try a Witch or an Oracle. We are rolling stats (yes really) and I got 16 16 15 13 12 10 so something kind of MAD could actually be a good thing. Pretty much anything in Core+APG+ARG+UM is fine. Like I'm 99% sure I could use Paragon Surge shenanigans if tried, but the AP is listed as level 1-13 i think so it might not be worth it. Though we are using the fast XP track so who knows.

Any thoughts?

What level are you? If you are below level 5 or so, then I'd just recommend picking the Heirloom Weapon trait and then rocking out the Archery Druid. Using the Nature Fang archetype. Domain or Animal Companion. Your choose really, though AC is probably going to serve you decently if you aren't up to 11th level, and they are probably more interesting fluff wise anyways.

LVL 1: Point Blank Shot/Precise Shot
LVL 3: Mounted Combat
Nature Fang Slayer Talent: Ranger Feat: Rapid Shot
LVL 5: Mounted Archery

But that's just me. If you don't wanna ride your animal. Then get Spell Focus (Conjuration) and Augment Summon. But you're probably better off going with the Saurian Shaman archetype instead. Those dinosaurs can be found everywhere on the summon animal list. Enjoy having those dinos out on a moment's notice.

[Prak]

No clue what Paizo has going on at GenCon, but found this image-

Ezren finds your lack of optimization disturbing

[TOZ]

I have a feeling that is part of the Adventure Card Game online version demo. One should not compare the ACG to PF balance wise. The monk may not be worthless in that.

[Prak]

I'm just amused by the disapproving glare of their Iconic looking down on the guy.

[Miniature Colossus]

Archer Cleric is still plenty strong if that appeals to you. Just because you won't get any persistent spell DMM cheese the DM would probably not allow anyways... just how optimized do you need to be for this?

Not at all really, it's mostly just for fun. Actually in the other campaign we're running (same GM, mostly the same players) I'm playing a straight up conjurer wizard and biggest problem I've had is that the encounters are often a bit to easy to the point that I've been feeling a bit useless.

"Anybody want me to cast Enlarge Person?"

"No thanks we're good."

"Oh, well how about I lay down a Web spell?"

"Naw, that will just get in the way. Don't you have a crossbow or something you can use?"

If we do get into real trouble sometime in the future I don't think my personal optimization level will matter as much as the general lack of tactics and strategy the plague our group.

Also, after being in one fight as an archer I realized that I'm not particularly fond of the combat minigame and should probably stick to some form of casting.

[Miniature Colossus]

Witches or Oracles are strong too. If you want ranged debuffer then go witch. They're fun.

MCol., a witch does sound like it'd fit your requirements best. Make sure you get the trickery or deception patron so that you can cast mirror image/invisibility when something does get past the front line. You can't go far wrong making a witch.

An oracle is more of a buffer/secondary fighter in most cases. You've got the stats for it if you do want to go that way. They can do BFC/debuffing but won't be as good at it in your situation, a heavens oracle needs a clear gap in the front line to operate for example. On the other hand when things screw up an oracle is noticeably less squishy.

How much detail do you need?

The Witch does sound like fun so I'll look i to it some more.

That sounds like an ideal situation for an archer who has an animal companion he can shoot over

I haven't actually been able to force myself to read through the combat chapter so I'm not entirely sure how cover works, but I was under the impression that most allies would count as partial cover. And in our only fight so far the path was so tight only on person was able to stand in the front and fight, making it quite troublesome for even the melee people.

AcidBlades: Interesting, but I think I'll go with the Witch. Thanks anyway.

[Miniature Colossus]

I'm just amused by the disapproving glare of their Iconic looking down on the guy.

By the way he is looking to the side, it almost looks like he is rolling his eyes at the poor guy.

[TOZ]

It IS a pretty spot on aside glance.

[momothefiddler]

So, on the off chance that I actually make it to 5 for once (let me dream), are any of the skill unlocks worth the Signature Skill feat? I've been looking through them and so far haven't seen any I'd give a shit about if they were free but maybe I missed something?

[Orca]

So, on the off chance that I actually make it to 5 for once (let me dream), are any of the skill unlocks worth the Signature Skill feat? I've been looking through them and so far haven't seen any I'd give a shit about if they were free but maybe I missed something?

Maybe Intimidate, if you're really into that? If your game is seriously into flying, that would be a possibility too, but I've never seen a GM want to count the 5' move penalties and limits on turning that closely.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

... I've never seen a GM want to count the 5' move penalties and limits on turning that closely.

I used to until I realized that spellcasters arbitrarily get huge bonuses to fly checks for reasons.

[virgil]

Two years out of date, but I feel this review of Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Feats is relevant to our interests. I'm hurt that Libertad didn't seem to see fit to show us this on the Den

[Orca]

Two years out of date, but I feel this review of Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Feats is relevant to our interests. I'm hurt that Libertad didn't seem to see fit to show us this on the Den

The writer, Owen Stephens, had a shaky grasp on the rules the one time I saw him on the Paizo boards. He was boasting about his warpriest who could use fervor and the Surmount Affliction spell to beat conditions like blinded, dazed or paralyzed. The combo works for the first, but without the ability to take a swift action when dazed or to speak verbal components when paralyzed it failed at the other two. I'm not surprised his intentional mistakes were a bit scattershot too.

Edit: his boast.

[Lago PARANOIA]

The Gaming Den... I need your help.

Someone's asking me for a level 14 gish build for a game and they insist on having something like the Magus's Spell Combat feature. Of course, Magi suck horse anus and I've been wracking my brain trying to come up with a way to reduce the suck.

Right now, my plan is to present an Arcanist (Blade Adept) 6 / Magus 1 / Eldritch Knight 7. The plan right now is to take Extra Arcana: Broad Study using the Eldritch Knight's Diverse Training feature.

An eldritch knight adds his level to any levels of fighter he might have for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats (if he has no fighter levels, treat his eldritch knight levels as levels of fighter). He also adds his level to any levels in an arcane spellcasting class for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats.

The thing is, I'm not quite sure if that's legal. The Broad Study Arcana has Magus 6 as a prerequisite, but that's internal to the Arcana class features.

Is there any rule lawyer stuff I can use to make such a thing legal?

[Juton]

The Gaming Den... I need your help.

Someone's asking me for a level 14 gish build for a game and they insist on having something like the Magus's Spell Combat feature. Of course, Magi suck horse anus and I've been wracking my brain trying to come up with a way to reduce the suck.

Right now, my plan is to present an Arcanist (Blade Adept) 6 / Magus 1 / Eldritch Knight 7. The plan right now is to take Extra Arcana: Broad Study using the Eldritch Knight's Diverse Training feature.

An eldritch knight adds his level to any levels of fighter he might have for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats (if he has no fighter levels, treat his eldritch knight levels as levels of fighter). He also adds his level to any levels in an arcane spellcasting class for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats.

The thing is, I'm not quite sure if that's legal. The Broad Study Arcana has Magus 6 as a prerequisite, but that's internal to the Arcana class features.

Is there any rule lawyer stuff I can use to make such a thing legal?

That's a good catch with the Arcanist, it's a better Magus then the Magus. By RAW it's legal. You qualify for the feat via EK, you get Spell Combat from the Magus and Spell Strike from the Arcanist, so it should work as intended. The only potential problem is that you are being clever in ways Pathfinder-GMs might not like, so it still may get blocked regardless.