Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I've made peace with the fact that my taste is objectively shit and decide to like what I like. I acknowledge Pathfinder's problems but I enjoy playing it.

[hogarth]

I like it because I've started to forget what 3.5E D&D was like, so the random variations from 3.5E have ceased to bother me.

[DSMatticus]

The thing I hate most about Pathfinder is the FAQ/errata patching. I really wish the d20pfsrd just did not include FAQ/errata updates. They are actively cancerous, and I could squat over a piece of paper and shit better solutions to the problems the FAQ/errata addresses, and then I wouldn't have to deal with the paizo devs arbitrarily nerfing shit like monks.

The thing I hate second most about Pathfinder is the vast library of content, 99% of which is completely fucking useless, which is... a fair description of 3.5, except in Pathfinder the amount of content is higher, the percentage of useless content seems higher, and of course it's all new content so I actually have to relearn that shit. Pathfinder takes "quantity over quality" to an extreme 3.5 hadn't quite finished sinking to, and at this point it's been around long enough for that to snowball into an unmanageable clusterfuck.

I'll play it, because it's not like there are a lot of other options, and it can scratch the itch, but there's basically no step in the chargen process where I'm not reminded how little I think of the people who made it. It's truly an abysmal system whose design ethos is simply a celebration of 3.5's faults.

[OgreBattle]

What're their worst errata decisions?

[Covent]

What're their worst errata decisions?

Nested sources to explain stacking.

Crane wing, which after the errata did not work.

Monk flurry which got reversed.

Reversing the SLA to make prerequisites FAQ.

Metaphorical hands of unwritten effort.

Ultimate equipment Errata where pretty much everything useful in the book was nerfed to uselessness.

ACG Errata same as the Ultimate equipment Errata.

Also having the habit of errata nerfing things when something with a similar mechanic is coming out. An example of this is scarred witch doctor and kinetisict.

[Ice9]

Also that they nerf stuff that was fine in home games for the sake of PFS. I could not give less of a shit about organized play, so it's particularly annoying to me. Even for people who do, PFS already has a ban list; they could have just added it to that.

[DSMatticus]

I'm pretty sure the most enduring example of the FAQ/errata's idiocy will continue to be reach and the second diagonal, what with the answer to that dilemma being at one point "no you don't threaten the second diagonal but you can make attacks of opportunity on anyone who enters the first diagonal from the second diagonal because if you drew a to-scale circle with a 10ft radius around your character enemies would't be able to enter that square without crossing it." I think that answer has been changed since then, but honestly the damage is done; you shit yourself, we all saw it, and now we're going to laugh at you about it for all eternity.

The most iconic example of nerfs is the monk crane wing thing, where one of the weakest classes in the game was given a way to consistently negate a single melee attack and nope can't have that.

[Koumei]

Nested sources to explain stacking.

Is that the one where adding your Charisma as a Luck Bonus to Saves doesn't stack with adding your Charisma as a Resistance Bonus to Saves because fweeble weeble blarglenarb bib bib bib?

Reversing the SLA to make prerequisites FAQ.

Where does the errata sit on that now? Can you qualify for "Able to cast 3rd level spells" if you get Fireball as a SLA, or not?

Metaphorical hands of unwritten effort.

I have no idea what this one is. Explain?

[Covent]

Nested sources to explain stacking.

Is that the one where adding your Charisma as a Luck Bonus to Saves doesn't stack with adding your Charisma as a Resistance Bonus to Saves because fweeble weeble blarglenarb bib bib bib?

It is currently that you cannot gain a stat twice to anything unless that stat grants a typed bonus due to an attribute being a source rather than a feat or class ability being a source.

Reversing the SLA to make prerequisites FAQ.

Where does the errata sit on that now? Can you qualify for "Able to cast 3rd level spells" if you get Fireball as a SLA, or not?

You only qualify for spells you specifically have. For example monks get dimension door and so qualify for dimensional dervish but not as casting x level spells.

Metaphorical hands of unwritten effort.

I have no idea what this one is. Explain?

The "you cannot TWF with a two handed weapon and armor spikes due to our unwritten rule about metaphorical hands, not physical hands of effort. Even though our written rules totally allow it. Also people will totally apply this to everything to deny you via DM penis."

[Voss]

The secret of unwritten rules that are in opposition to actual published rules actually bothers me the most. Stupid individual shit you can blame on someone (often SKR) having a moment. But the nuh-uh, up is down and logic is invalid because you lack secret access is just fucking offensive to me.

It's exactly the sort of playground 'You got shot,' 'No I didn't!' bullshit argument that RPG rules are written to avoid.

[Antariuk]

Yeah, the PFS errata/nerfing is a string of shitty decisions that have brought us nothing but anger and confusion. The worst part to me is that Paizo still denies that PFS has any role in their errata policy, which is laughable because anyone who suffers through 20 minutes of browsing their messageboards can see how that is obviously not true.

Also, DSMatticus is fucking right with the amount of (shitty) content Paizo spits out. For God's sake, we are looking at the 6th Bestiary coming mid-year, the Player Companion line features gems like the "Healer's Handbook" and there is an upcoming Hardover release called the "Adventurer's Guide" that contains informations about organizations from Golarion (as in: they introduce Golation lore shit to the so-far neutral hardcover line) that the PCs might care about - with Prestige Classes. Yes, really. I also saw an announcement for Adventurers Armory 2 somewhere, because that's something we really need. All in all, it looks super depressing.

[CapnTthePirateG]

Ooh! Are they going to make in-combat healing worth do - I can't finish that sentence with a straight face.

[Shady314]

Ooh! Are they going to make in-combat healing worth do - I can't finish that sentence with a straight face.

Paladin does it. Swift action healing that scales and can cure a number of conditions a scaling number of times per day.

They could go the vampiric way. Do damage and heal based off that damage.

If channeling was selective by default and you could choose how to spread it around that could be useful. So you could send 1d6 to the barely scratched guy and then 3d6 to the melee guy that got smacked.

Immediate action 1/rd lvl1 shield other spell.

Sure Paizo probably won't manage it but they might accidentally introduce a few things. Then nerf them a couple years later.

[OgreBattle]

Every once in a while I go to the PF board and search "[non full caster class] overpowered", Paladin/Oracle came up because Oracles can take damage in place of party members and Paladins can touch themselves as a swift action.

[Lurky Lurkpants]

Sure Paizo probably won't manage it but they might accidentally introduce a few things. Then nerf them a couple years later.

The nice thing about the "Companion" line is it basically never gets errata or FAQs, only the main RPG books do. I swear there is a secret cabal of freelancers determined to undermine the RPG line this way, with sideways-errata feats that remove less relevant feat prerequisites, a bunch of ways to turn Fighters into a class with actual features, and so on, knowing it is unlikely to get officially nerfed to uselessness no matter how much PFS complains.

Probably just delusional hope, though. They publish so much stuff every month some of it is bound to accidentally fix shit. I mean, a feat to return caster levels lost to Prestige Classes was in a book of dumb "Prestige Classes" that are pretty much just archetypes (altered main ability + different fiddlybits describes at least 1/2 to 2/3 of them) and would still be dumb then. But I man can still dream.

[CapnTthePirateG]

. I mean, a feat to return caster levels lost to Prestige Classes was in a book of dumb "Prestige Classes" that are pretty much just archetypes (altered main ability + different fiddlybits describes at least 1/2 to 2/3 of them) and would still be dumb then. But I man can still dream.

Wait, what feat is this?

[Antariuk]

I think he's referring to Esoteric Training, which isn't a feat but a membership reward for being in a magic guild or something. The character is supposed to pay fees, pass exams and accumulate Fame points to unlock these advancements, which is of course totally bonkers when you talk about raising caster levels inclusing bonus spells and such.

Eclectic Training (5 Fame): Guilds often require members to master and train in different subjects. When your Fame score in a guild reaches 5, choose one spellcasting class you have at least 1 level in—you increase your effective caster level in that class (including the number of spells you know and can cast per day) by +1, to a maximum caster level equal to your total Hit Dice. Single-classed spellcasters should still pick a class to which this bonus applies, since this bonus is retroactive.

Esoteric Training (35 Fame): The bonus to caster level you gain from Eclectic Training increases to +3 (but is still limited by your total Hit Dice). You may select a second spellcasting class to gain a +1 bonus to effective caster level.

EDIT: It's from Inner Sea Magic.

[TiaC]

. I mean, a feat to return caster levels lost to Prestige Classes was in a book of dumb "Prestige Classes" that are pretty much just archetypes (altered main ability + different fiddlybits describes at least 1/2 to 2/3 of them) and would still be dumb then. But I man can still dream.

Wait, what feat is this?

Prestigious Spellcaster from Paths of the Righteous. Every time you take it, a level of a prestige class that didn't advance spellcasting advances it.

[Antariuk]

Wow, that is an awkwardly written feat...

Prestigious Spellcaster
The transition into a spellcasting prestige class is less difficult for you, and because of this, you gain 1 additional effective spellcaster level from your prestige class levels.
Prerequisite: Favored Prestige Class with selected prestige class.
Benefit: The first time you gain a level in your favored prestige class and the spells per day class feature does not grant an increase in effective level for the purpose of casting spells, you gain new spells per day as if the prestige class did grant +1 level of spellcasting for that level. This effect is retroactive if you gain this feat at a level beyond the point where your favored prestige class would normally have not advanced your spellcasting.
The Prestigious Spellcaster feat does not have any effect if your favored prestige class does not have the spells per day class feature, or if it does have the spells per day class feature but already grants a level increase for every level of the prestige class (as do the arcane trickster and loremaster prestige classes).
Special: You can select the Prestigious Spellcaster feat multiple times. Each time you select the Prestigious Spellcaster feat, your effective caster level increases by 1. However, regardless of the number of times you choose this feat, the total increase to your effective caster level cannot exceed your actual prestige class level. This feat also applies to prestige classes that grant extracts per day instead of spells per day

[Juton]

Huh, so Pathfinder has come out and said that 1 feat = 1 level of spellcasting. Or 1 feat and a prereq, whatevs. This is the logical conclusion of the Pathfinder design philosophy.

[rasmuswagner]

Huh, so Pathfinder has come out and said that 1 feat = 1 level of spellcasting. Or 1 feat and a prereq, whatevs. This is the logical conclusion of the Pathfinder design philosophy.

Or, you know, they realized that giving up casting for flavor features is bullshit but feats are a reasonable currency.

[Mechalich]

Yeah it seems more like a really kludgy way to try and get casters to actually play caster-oriented PrCs that don't provide full casting. In terms of making more extant material at least marginally viable that's actually a good thing. Of course it is quite clearly not as good as thing as simply not producing such obviously flawed material in the first place...

[rasmuswagner]

PF design tenet: Core parts of your character's concept don't have to come in early, if they're things a Commoner couldn't do.

Unchained Summoner, Elemental subtype: If you want an elemental buddy, it gets Whirlwind/Vortex at level *20* (and fuck you Earth, you *never* gain Earth Glide).
Wildsoul (Arachnid) Vigilante: You are Spiderman. You can throw Tanglefoots bags - at level 6. You get a climb speed and the ability to shoot sticky rope - at level 12. You get "skyscraper flight" like Spiderman at level 18.

[OgreBattle]

Huh, so Pathfinder has come out and said that 1 feat = 1 level of spellcasting. Or 1 feat and a prereq, whatevs. This is the logical conclusion of the Pathfinder design philosophy.

But I get +2 to damage with my longsword ALL DAY EVERY DAY, that's potentially +28800 damage if I attack for 24 hours and every round hits. Can your wizard do THAT without needing to NAP LIKE A WIDDLE BABBY? By the way I snuck into the inn at night and STOLE his components bag!!

Oh yeah

ANTI
MAGIC
FIELD

Check
MATE

[virgil]

Lame. Pathfinder got rid of the halfling racial bonus with slings and thrown weapons, and I only just now discovered this.