Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Kobold

Jiggy's page

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32. RPG Superstar 2013 Marathon Voter, 2014 Dedicated Voter, 2015 Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 18,155 posts (19,955 including aliases). 17 reviews. 4 lists. 1 wishlist. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 15 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 18,155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Arturus Caeldhon wrote:

For me, two things:

1) The Forge of Combat

1) As if the game wasn't poisoned enough by munchkins and minmaxers, the Forge of Combat further reduces game concepts to board game/MMO status. I appreciate build threads - I really do - but I have found that munchkin types often infect non-maximization threads with rules lawyering and other powergamer nonsense. This is a roleplaying game, not a rollplaying game, after all. The Forge of Combat makes this even more obscene.

Agreed. Reductionist thinking obviously has its place, but fantasy gaming is just about the worst place there is for it. It's anathema to the nature of the beast, which is to be expansive, baroque, and whimsical (of course I mean in reasoning, not necessarily tone).

People who think that anyone who discusses combat in mechanical terms must necessarily only think of the game in terms of combat or otherwise "reduces" the game from what it is to something else. As though an unfamiliarity with combat were somehow required in order to grasp the rest of the game.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mattastrophic wrote:

Speaking of, the Rules Questions forum really grinds my gears. That board is where good questions go to die. Searching it is a waste of time.

-Matt

People who don't know how to navigate and/or properly apply or interpret something (such as the Rules Questions forum, or the rules themselves, or GM fiat, or DPR calculations, or...) and conclude that the thing in question must be worthless.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Hmm...

Have you tried looking at a sampling of common items that such a fighter would want to craft, what the DC to craft them is (after taking into account the +5 for each spell or other requirement not available), and what level the fighter would therefore have to be in order to craft it with a take-10?

I'm speculating that the DCs will be prohibitively high, but I haven't done the research yet.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

:(

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Morgen wrote:
There was this game I was in where I got missed by 2 while using combat expertise. It was against as a magus who was alpha striking me and I would have lost the character. I respect that feat.

There was this game I was in where I got crit-confirmed by 2 while raging. It was against a magus who was alpha striking me and I lost the character. I have no respect for rage.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

thejeff wrote:
Honestly, if it's just in the inventory, it probably means the inventory list is generated from a character generator program and the person didn't bother to go through and manually correct everything.

I wasn't even counting those instances as part of the peeve.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Also, hands-free light source because ioun torch isn't Core. ;)

EDIT: Ninja'd. It also occurs to me that even without resonant powers, you can still slot a stone just so that it's not orbiting your head (and implantation isn't Core either).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Orfamay Quest wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

But if it's the only crossbow in your inventory, then nothing is gained by flipping the order of the words,

Actually, it is gained. It tells you how it's listed in the index, which means you can go directly to it instead of going to "heavy crossbow" under h-for-hotel, saying "d---!", and finally finding it under c-for-charlie.

If I'm looking up a spell like mass cure light wounds, that could be under m, under c, under l, or under w. A note to myself as to which is .... helpful.

That stops being an issue when the reader is sufficiently familiar with parts of speech and the nature of indexes.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Oh, another one: people using words that have actual meanings but it's clear from context they actually just mean it as an intensifier.

Things I've seen used to mean "very" or to assert their conviction that the affected statement is true:
Literally
Objectively
Provably
Verifiably

Do you see the trend among the types of words getting used like this?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Avatar-1 wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Naming objects in the backwards, index-friendly format they saw in a chart. Things like "crossbow, heavy".

The only reason to ever name something backwards like that is so that similar entries in an alphabetized list will be next to each other. It is not the actual name of the thing.

Ah, wait a second. Do you mean some people will actually say "My paladin Joe uses his longsword for melee attacking and his crossbow, heavy, for ranged attacking." ????

Not as much in the middle of a sentence, but naming it somewhere that doing it index-style doesn't actually accomplish anything. Like, "crossbow, heavy" makes sense in the Equipment chapter where you want it to be right next to "crossbow, light" and "crossbow, repeating" and "crossbow, hand" or whatever.

But if it's the only crossbow in your inventory, then nothing is gained by flipping the order of the words, which makes me think you're just copy-pasting without understanding. Similarly when someone writes a new homebrew item or RPG Superstar entry and titles their item in that fashion.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Oh, here's one:

Naming objects in the backwards, index-friendly format they saw in a chart. Things like "crossbow, heavy".

The only reason to ever name something backwards like that is so that similar entries in an alphabetized list will be next to each other. It is not the actual name of the thing.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

If there was a trick that would let you gain a free one-time 50XP bonus for the first encounter of your career, would you really care? Because I wouldn't, and that's basically what we have here.

The Design Team has bigger fish to fry.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Can someone answer the phone already? Cause I called that $#!+

I feel like there's a joke here somewhere about holding a ringing turd up to your face and saying hello, but I'm not sure how to execute it.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lamontius wrote:
Acedio wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
Genius
We've never met, but I am a fan of your work.

Stop it

I am blushing right down to my bones

Bone-blush is not a sight for the faint of heart.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

thejeff wrote:

There's no better way to find the most favorited post?

That's irritating.

Agreed. And not only that, but (at least in Chrome) every few minutes the page would time out or something, such that when I tried to go to the next page of favorites, it would reset to page 1 and I'd have to remember which page I was on and go back to it manually. :/

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

97
Sadly, not a funny one. Most of the favorites are probably just markers. But I'm not sorting through my entire posting history to find the second-highest. :/

EDIT: Went ahead and looked through about half of my "Favorited" list. For a second I thought my winner was going to be my 50-favorite post about what martial characters need, but it turns out it gets beaten out by two lines of slapstick with 65 favorites.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

kinevon wrote:
I looked, couldn't find the reference, but I thought there was something in the FAQ that said treat anything with a "--" weight as weighing half a pound for determining Mithril cost.

It's in the Ultimate Combat FAQ.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Norgorber's nostrils...

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Your post is framed as though it were a rebuttal to my post, but fails to contradict anything I said in any way that I can see.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zhangar wrote:
@ Jiggy - Huh. That's a really good comparison.

As a guy who has a psychology degree and keeps seeing TV/film reference Freud and the field of psychology as though they were synonymous, I'm surprised it took me as long as it did to make the connection. :/

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

In my mind, Gygax is kind of like Freud.

He pioneered something that people weren't really doing before, and thereby opened the door to wonderful things. Yet at the same time, the way he actually did it was unrefined, underdeveloped, and full of downright terrible ideas. His greatest gift was not the thing he originally came up with, but the starting point he created that other people could work from. He's more or less responsible for pioneering the field, and some of his ideas were pretty solid and worth keeping, but a lot of it was awful and served no greater purpose than to get the ball rolling and later be replaced by better models developed by the people he inspired to start thinking about the subject. Meanwhile, those who don't know the field very well still erroneously assume that the nature of the field is closely associated with his original ideas.

Gygax is basically the Freud of fantasy roleplaying.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mattastrophic wrote:

Six Degrees of Bash the Rogue.

-Matt

Could you define "bash"? The ideas I have in my head of what it means to "bash" are things that really only apply to words directed at a person, so I'd like to get a clearer understanding of what you're actually meaning here.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I could do with less "ninja'd!" when someone posts the same answer ahead of you.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's one I see from time to time:
Jumping into a thread to point out that DPR isn't everything and can't tell you how useful your character is... in response to someone using DPR to help someone decide between Weapon Focus and Furious Focus.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
If your die consistently rolls low, replace it. Many game-store dice are not properly weighted, simply due to poor manufacturing standards. While rolling low and missing an attack you would have hit without power attack is frustrating, a genuinely fair die will result in power attack producing significantly higher average damage output over time. Keep in mind that a run of bad luck, or a bad roll at a crucial time, doesn't invalidate the overall statistical benefit of power attack.

If you're rolling the die enough to actually have a good idea of whether it truly rolls low, consider diversifying your hobbies. ;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:

"Murderhobo". No other term on this forum gets my hackles up like this one.

I already feel that gamers in general tend to verbally punch themselves in the face way too often. But this is one of those concepts which, if you'd explain it to anyone who is not a gamer, would just confirm every stereotype "normal" people have about gamers.

Aside from that, the concept of a "murderhobo" is disgusting and offensive. It's very probably just me, but when someone refers unironically to their character or group as "murderhobo(s)", I cringe in disgust.

I was following up until the point where you mentioned people referring to their own characters/parties as murderhobos. I thought the term was generally used by people pointing out a method of playing that they don't like.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Right along with the macrocosm it's a part of: "Hey, can anyone help me X" "Sure, here's a bunch of stuff that isn't X! Why are you even wanting X? Don't X." and all its myriad forms.
I feel the need to defend this, since it's my usual response to someone who wants to shove a square peg in a round hole due to "concept" (when that "concept: is usually "I want to do this mechanical thing" rather than any RP related thing).

This one's complicated; there's more than one type of situation that can sometimes be lumped into this category:

1) Poster asks for help making (for example) a magical swordsman who can fight and cast, and someone says that if you're going to be a caster anyway just focus on spamming summons, or maybe play a summoner to have the eidolon fight and the PC cast. Completely fails to help advance the poster's goal.

2) Poster asks for help making (for example) something kinda vague like "a rogue". First few replies ask for more specifics of what they actually want, and the reply is to be a lightly-armored melee combatant who can disable traps. Posters then suggest ways to build an effective lightly-armored melee combatant who can disable traps, but doesn't involve the word "rogue".

Personally, I've seen #2 a lot more than I've seen #1, and in a LOT of threads containing #2, I see people come in and accuse the helpers of having committed #1.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Michael Brock wrote:
So, I guess we've gone from "Pathfinder Society should do a 180 and allow all contents from all the books" to "Pathfinder Society should do a 90 and allow most contents from most of the books"?

No, see, the stuff he doesn't want simply doesn't count as "content", so the collection of stuff he would allow can still be called "all of the content". ;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

BretI wrote:
My last character death was because I couldn't roll more than a 5, so your example is probably working against you.

But as soon as you get to where you still hit on a 5, you'll just roll 5s on your saves instead of your attacks and die that way. ;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.

And I just got reminded of another: really extreme views of "munchkin" or "powergaming". Just saw an example where it included taking a feat to increase your damage or number of attacks. They listed iteratives as a type of munchkinism.

I mean, it's bad enough to belittle people. But when the complaint is literally that the player is doing exactly what the system offers them? Cripes.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, just got reminded of another one:
When posters call people idiots or otherwise assault those who disagree with them, then their posts get deleted, and the poster attributes it to Paizo not wanting them to express inconvenient opinions or some such thing, or otherwise acts like the mods are out to get them.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Uh, maybe I missed something, but it looks to me like on any given round you have to choose between either Arcane Strike or Elemental Strikes, since they're both a "swift action for 1 round of benefit" type of deal.

Anyway, for a full-BAB class that also has additional bonuses to hit (rage, in your case), the attack penalty on Power Attack is very nearly negligible past the very early levels, making it very close to free damage, in quantities vastly beyond Arcane Strike.

For instance, at 8th level, you're looking to hit a typical Armor Class of 21. You have 8 BAB, +7 from STR (assuming rage and a +2 belt), and at least a +1 from your weapon (possibly more).

That means you're hitting on a 5, and dealing 2d6+11 damage.
Add Arcane Strike, and you're hitting on a 5 for 2d6+13 damage.
Swap for Power Attack, and you're hitting on an 8 for 2d6+20 damage.

I don't think you'll "feel" the difference between +11 and +13 damage at 8th level.
I think you'll only "feel" the difference between hitting on a 5 and hitting on an 8 a little bit.
I think you'll "feel" the difference between +13 damage and +20 damage a lot.

Even so, you have the info, so you can make your own decision with that. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
People who spout "Stormwind Fallacy" at the first hint of any conflict between characterization and optimization.

People who claim that's what's happening even when the provoking comment is a "role/roll" line or other textbook example of the idea.

;)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Crillitor wrote:
Where does it say that you can't make masterwork improvised weapons?
Core Rulebook, Equipment chapter, Improvised Weapons wrote:
Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat. Because such objects are not designed for this use...

Making it a masterwork weapon (or a +1 weapon, etc) causes it to stop fitting the definition of an improvised weapon. An object cannot simultaneously be crafted to be an exceptionally effective weapon AND be "not crafted to be a weapon".

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lune wrote:

Ok, I know that Gauss is going to say that this is just another exception but I found something else. Someone mentioned in the thread that Jiggy linked the Adhesive armor enhancement. I will quote the relevant part here:

Adhesive wrote:


The stickines grants the wearer a +2 enhancement bonus on combat maneuver checks made to disarm, grapple, reposition, steal or trip when the wearer is using a natural weapon or unarmed strike to attempt the maneuver.

This is not from a splat book. It is from Ultimate Equipment.

Now does that not clearly state that you can use an unarmed strike to attempt a grapple combat maneuver? No splitting hairs here. It doesn't just imply it, it outright says it.

Am I wrong?

Yes, you're wrong.

It does not say that you can use unarmed strikes (or natural weapons, for that matter) to perform a grapple. It says that you get a bonus when performing any one of a list of maneuvers IF using unarmed strikes or natural weapons to do so. That doesn't mean that both unarmed strikes and natural weapons always apply to all of those maneuvers by default. On the contrary, the very fact that it's written conditionally (i.e., you only get the bonus IF the listed maneuver is performed with an unarmed strike/natural weapon) shows that it's NOT a given that any of those maneuvers would necessarily use unarmed strikes/natural weapons.

For instance, if you make a disarm check, you might be using your sword (no bonus from the armor), or you might be using an unarmed strike (getting the armor's bonus).

For grapple, you normally don't use a weapon, but if your animal companion has Grab, letting them initiate a grapple via the associated natural weapon, then putting this ability on their barding would give them a bonus. If I'm not mistaken, there's also a monk ability somewhere that lets you add Grab to your unarmed strikes, which would also qualify.

None of this suggests that all those maneuvers default to using unarmed strikes or natural weapons.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Arturus Caeldhon wrote:
1) As if the game wasn't poisoned enough by munchkins and minmaxers, the Forge of Combat further reduces game concepts to board game/MMO status. I appreciate build threads - I really do - but I have found that munchkin types often infect non-maximization threads with rules lawyering and other powergamer nonsense. This is a roleplaying game, not a rollplaying game, after all. The Forge of Combat makes this even more obscene.

1) It grinds my gears when someone describes other people's fun with terms/expressions like "poisonous", something to be "reduced" to, something that "infects", "nonsense", or "obscene".

2) It grinds my gears when someone says "roleplay/rollplay", as it implies that being interested in rolling dice is the wrong way to play a game in which every endeavor is resolved by rolling dice. Seriously, damn near 90% of the actual content of the Core Rulebook is either opportunities to roll dice or ways to modify the dice you're rolling. Maybe we need to start a new phrase, like "this is a roleplaying GAME, not a roleplaying SCRIPT" or something.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Unfortunately, the Pathfinder system doesn't accommodate nontraditional fighting styles very well, at least past the very early levels. Wealth/gear in Pathfinder is functionally a second XP track, so relying on a build element that can't advance money-wise is basically like every so often voluntarily declining to gain your next level/feat/class feature.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Congrats!

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
Mythic 1/2-Dragon Gestalt Jiggy wrote:
Lamontius wrote:
my level 32 chaotic evil psionic shadowcaster laser-guided machine gundragon antipaladin with mythic levels is ready
THERE IS ROOM IN MY PARTY FOR YOU

cool we will be placed at any table that complains about limitations or does not understand that core is core is core

srsly though
he has a really awesome backstory you will love it

"Limitations by Lamontius"

Is that a disclaimer for the next version of the Guide, or the title of the first volume of his shadowcaster's backstory?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe encourage the existing players to spend some of that gold on gear for their new comrades? Makes sense in-character as your team is more powerful if a couple of new people have +1 weapons/armor/cloaks versus spending even more money on taking your own weapon from +1 to +2. And out of character, it's a good way to let the existing players' reward feel "real" (i.e., not cheapen it by handing the same to others for free) and simultaneously make the newbies feel welcomed and empowered/excited. Seems like an all-around win to me.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

The question of whether grappling uses the "unarmed strike" weapon (and therefore its dependent bonuses, such as an AoMF) has come up before, and the Pathfinder Design Team ruled that it does not use the unarmed strike weapon and does not gain such bonuses, just as the aforementioned FAQ Blog suggests.

Weapons which explicitly have the ability to affect a grapple are special exceptions.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Roguelikes can be fun. I'm particularly fond of Brogue, and have gotten the amulet out the door more than once. :D

But let's be clear: roguelikes are not roleplaying games, even if you use dice and pencils/paper to play them.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:
I just dont like TWF on Bloodrager myself.

Why, if you don't mind my asking?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Gonna go against the grain here and actually suggest a bloodrager, with the arcane bloodline and the spelleater archetype. Here's why.

• Bloodrage: Seriously, the guy is screaming his head off in fury when attacking. Besides, it's a STR boost, and that was his highest stat (revealed later, in SAO2). This will also help offset that TWF penalty.

• Fast Healing: You know that "Battle Skill" that let him auto-heal, from the episode where he arrests [REDACTED]? Boom.

• Swift-action self-heals: See above; lets you use your spell slots to emulate that regen ability instead of actually casting spells, so you don't break concept.

• Free blur while raging: His evasive abilities were off the charts (more explicitly in SAO2, but still).

• Later, free haste while raging: "Faster! FASTER! RRAAAAAHHH!!!"

That's how I'd do it, anyway.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

For me, I have a rough minimum for both power and style/flavor. Anything that can boost either axis without bringing the other axis below the minimum will be happily added to the character.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:

Sorry Jiggy, but you are missing all kinds of little details like the EK starting with a 1 BAB, and weapon focus, so unbuffed, he is +2 ahead of the other two (who could bet weapon focus at level 3. They can each spend a round buffing to be -1/+1 from where the EK walks around unbuffed. He also has many more options of race, weapons, deity, etc.

Most of the levels the EK is down in BAB, he has options like mirror image, that put him in much better shape then the cleric, and access to the entire wizard spell list, which give him versatility that blows the bard out of the water.

But really this is all boiling down to +1 or +2 at mid levels. Not a big deal, especially since the EK is probably a transmuter, and can walk around with +2 to strength due to school ability. And since he made his own belts and headbands and other wondrous item crap (from his wiz bonus feat and rocken spellcraft), this stuff means very little. Seriously, who cares about +2 when the EK can get 5 attacks per round +4 to str and NA, pounce, 40' move, scent and grab? with ONE SPELL. And he can cast that spell 4 times a day!

Again, the EK is probably a little worse then battle bard or battle cleric, at least at a few levels, (As most agree it should be) but I just don't see why a point or two here or there really matters in unoptimized play. Most of this stuff boils down to the difference of a single feat, item, or 1st level spell, so it is REALLY INSIGNIFICANT!

I played an EK from 1 to almost 14, then the very next character I played was a melee cleric.

They were in different leagues. It is not "just a point or two here or there". The cleric is noticeably, tangibly, experientially superior.

Maybe it's different with the polymorph guy you keep bringing out (but given your record so far on accurate theorycrafting, I doubt it), but if the only way that an EK works is as a shapeshifter, then the design of the EK has failed.

When you play an EK as the thing that the class description sets him up to be, you have a gameplay experience in which you can really feel the shortcomings.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Fergie wrote:
I would say that if your goal is to create a "magical swordsman" EK would not be your best option.

Which is part of the problem. When someone's looking through the CRB, trying to find a way to play their magical swordsman concept, the EK is there screaming "Pick me! Pick me!"

And then delivers the worst magical swordsman in the game.
This is bad.

Quote:
I would also say, that if you like being a wizard, but would like to be a lot better at attacking things, a EK is pretty decent.

Wrong, and here's why:

more...
And just to be clear, by "bad at attacking", I don't mean "not on par with full-BAB classes", I mean not even on par with 3/4 BAB classes. You know, the classes that are designed to be worse at attacking things than fighters? That's who the EK spends most of his career trailing behind.
I don't know. I came up with some numbers years ago, and they seem to put bards, clerics and EK's fairly equal.

Your numbers are exclusively at 9th level. That's more than halfway through most PCs' careers, and therefore can't be taken as a representation of how the character plays out. Single-level snapshots are often misleading.

On their way up to 9th level, the bard and cleric in your examples would have maintained 3/4 BAB the entire time, while the EK build dips as far down as 1/2 BAB. Outside of levels 1, 2, and 5, the EK has lower BAB than bard or cleric until... you guessed it, 9th level, where you made your comparison.

Also, the bard and cleric have had access to their buffs (Inspire Courage and divine favor) from level 1. So even at the levels where EK has the equivalent of 3/4 BAB, the cleric and bard have the ability to buff while the EK doesn't get to buff until 6th level.

But of course, you only looked at 9th level, after the EK finally got to join the buffing club, five levels later than everyone else.

And then even at 9th level, you just assume everyone has equal access to the buffs that your comparison depends on. You assume that the 9th-level EK has heroism running, but he's only got three spell slots of that level (and that's after accounting for INT). You really think that's the same level of reliability as Inspire Courage, or the cleric's 1st-level divine favor, or even the bard's 5/day on-demand version of heroism?

And then even with all those flaws in your comparison, you still misrepresented the (already skewed) data that you gathered: you said the three builds' buffs all "averaged" to +3/+3, but didn't post the individual totals, which show that the cleric is +3/+3, while the bard is +4/+4 and the EK is +2/+2.

That's right, even in a scenario that was skewed heavily in favor of the EK, you still found data showing that the EK is the weakest, then declared that they were all about the same.

I don't think "waiting 9 levels to finally get UP to the point of being at -2/-2 behind the bard" is a reasonable definition of "about the same".

Quote:
I feel that battle clerics and bards are fully capable of pulling their own weight, and then some.

They sure are! That's why I've been comparing to them. The next character I played after my EK was my battle cleric, and I could feel the difference very strongly.

Quote:
I really don't care what classes are 'best' at something,

Nobody is asking for "best". We're talking about "in the same ballpark". And the EK isn't in the same ballpark as other "fight/cast options" until you get to 9th-level or higher, and even then he has to spend more daily resources to do so.

Quote:
especially when people start using optimized wizards as their base.

Has anyone actually been doing this? Granted I haven't read every post, but the general path of conversation that I've been seeing is this:

People like me: The EK is worse than other fight/cast options.
People like you: Well sure, anything looks bad when you compare it to a straight wizard!

Quote:
Many people have made claims that the EK is garbage, or worthless, or whatever, but nothing has shown the class unable to function at its APL.

Plenty has shown that. Math has shown it. My experience has shown it. Heck, your own numbers hinted at it, and that was looking at it just as it was starting to finally hit its stride. If you actually looked at the bigger picture instead of a best-case-scenario endgame snapshot, you'd see it. Just because you're not looking doesn't mean it hasn't been shown.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:
I would say that if your goal is to create a "magical swordsman" EK would not be your best option.

Which is part of the problem. When someone's looking through the CRB, trying to find a way to play their magical swordsman concept, the EK is there screaming "Pick me! Pick me!"

And then delivers the worst magical swordsman in the game.
This is bad.

Quote:
I would also say, that if you like being a wizard, but would like to be a lot better at attacking things, a EK is pretty decent.

Wrong, and here's why:

"A lot better at attacking things" is not really a thing until it's at least on par with classes that attack things.
Or to put it another way, if the thing you're better than is so bad that you can be better than them while still sucking, then it's not a true benefit.
Being "better at attacking than a wizard" is like being less fat than Jabba the Hut or being smarter than Simple Simon or having a bigger nose than Voldemort. Technically an improvement, but doesn't mean you're not still a fat, flat-faced idiot.

So yeah, an EK is (for most, but not all, of his career) "better at attacking than a wizard", but he's still bad at attacking!

And just to be clear, by "bad at attacking", I don't mean "not on par with full-BAB classes", I mean not even on par with 3/4 BAB classes. You know, the classes that are designed to be worse at attacking things than fighters? That's who the EK spends most of his career trailing behind.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Yay, no more lopsided cleric channels! ;)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fomsie wrote:
now every race or appropriate feeder class option is valid. That is diversity.

That would be diversity, if it were true. But it's not. Just because you got rid of a better option doesn't make the worse options become valid.

Traditional-entry EK spends the vast majority of the PC's career being worse at hitting things than other martial/caster hybrids (bard, inquisitor, etc). It was true before early entry was a thing, it continued to be true when early entry became a thing, and taking away early entry has not made it stop being true.

And I don't think it's reasonable to say that "worse than every other way to fill the role" is "valid".

1 to 50 of 18,155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.