|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Oliver McShade wrote:
Are you... Implying that being a caster is difficult? That concentration checks and SR are actual problems???
Heh... Heheh... Hah... HAHA...
HAHAHEIWAHEAWUIEHAWUIEAHWUIEWHEUIAWEHIAWUEHAWUIEHAWUIEHAWIUEAWHEUIAWHEUIAWE HAWUIEHAWUIEAWHUIEAWHEUIAWHEIUAWEHAWUIEHAWUIEAWHEUIAWEHUIAWEHUIWEHAWuIEAWHU EIAWHEUIAWEHUIAWEHAWUEHA!!!!!!!!!!
Secret Wizard wrote:
No one here played the class.
It's good to know that this Wizard is fully using those divination spells... He obviously knows what classes everyone is playing!
Secret Wizard wrote:
Whoever said he was "shocked" the unchained monk had low will saves could be a talking head in a 24 hour news network.
How surprising a change is has literally zero effect on whether or not it was a good change.
I give an additional skill point to be spent on craft, performance or profession. The only restriction I add is that it must not be added to a skill with direct mechanical benefits for the character (like a Performance skill affected by Versatile Performance), but I don't mind if the extra skill point is used to qualify for feats or PrCs (like Dervish Dance).
Well... I wouldn't call the old Monk "decent", but yeah... Not that being better than the core Monk means much... And it did lose a bunch stuff for no reason.
Those kinds of tricks, traps, and actions have been done since day one. Since Gary Gygax HIMSELF for crying out loud.
Wow... The "Gary Gygax did it!" fallacy.... Hadn't seen one of those in a long time... Careful, everyone! It's an antique!
(BTW, GG would be considered a horrible GM by modern standards)
I love the foundation of Pathfinder. It wasn't perfect but it was a vast improvement over 3.5. And product quality was amazing.
- - -
I despise the route Paizo has followed in the more recent years... Where anything slightly outside the norm is hammered down. If it doesn't fit the designer's idea of fantasy, it's not allowed. If it's slightly better than a "classic" option, it's not allowed. It falls outside a very specifc, arbitrary and rigid parameter of what a certain class should do, it's not allowed.
And worst of all... If an option in the new book they are trying to sell is not as good as the option in the old book they already sold... The old option is nerfed.
There are only a handful of concepts that are allowed and supported by the rules (specially on the non-caste side), and the design team hasn't shown any interest in changing that.
Product quality has also been falling... Culminating in the awful mess that was the ACG, but not being limited to it. Their errata "quality" has always been particularly shameful, and it got even worse lately.
- - -
So... I like Pathfinder, but I hate Paizo's current business policy and design philosophy. And those have been slowly but steadily decreasing my enjoyment of the game.
I feel your pain, brother... I have a pages-long googledoc of house rules and rules fixes... And those are just the ones I bothered to write down. ><'
It's really, really difficult not to be disheartened.
While I disagree with your hyperbolic, almost paranoid, position, I will agree that the current state of things isn't a very good look.
You know what? I agree. My rant was hyperbolic. But it wasn't always so... It's just years and years of frustration taking their toll... Because I love the game, but I see the designers making the same awful design decisions over and over again when it comes to game balance.
It's pretty clear that Paizo prefers to nerf balanced options than actually improve the new ones that are not very good. It's pretty clear that they don't really care about game balance at all, and at best, care about the illusion of balance. It doesn't matter it the game is well-designed... It only matters that the new players who don't know Pathfinder and want to buy the book think it is.
I know speaking calmly and politely is more constructive... But it's really difficult to remain so when they ignore all concerns for years and show no sign of ever changing that attitude. My criticism isn't unique or new. Many of the problems with Pathfinder's lack of balance and the game design philosophy that sustains it have been known for over 15 years now. The devs simply don't care. They aren't stupid. If they did care, they would have already addressed those problems.
When you speak to deaf years, eventually your start shouting. And after that, you stop caring at all... And I fear the day is coming when I simply won't bother anymore, and a game I loved will just be a bitter memory. And I fear I won't be the only one...
Who knows... Maybe that's what they want. Maybe they decided they already got enough of my money.
Name calling would be if I called them "jackasses" or something. If you look up the definition of "dishonest" and "incompetent", you'll see they mean exactly what I meant to say. It's not an offense, it's a description. If they take offense to that, then they should either do a better job with the errata and be more truthful about it. Or they can just stop caring and just listen to the compliments.
Paizo is really good at creating cool and flavorful options... But they are really freaking bad at game balance. Being really bad at something is the definition of "incompetence".
"martial/caster disparity is a rumor pushed by people with an agenda"
...or something like that...
Not that their justifications mean much... Paizo is usually either dishonest or just incompetent when it comes to errata.
The Crane Wing stuff into oblivion because it's easier than actually trying to do proper game design. They nerf balanced tools that were causing no problem to make new classes seem better, not because the nerf made sense. Remember how they nerfed animal companions' armor proficiency to make the Cavalier look better? Or when they nerfed the Paragon Surge exploit because it stole the thunder of Arcanists (that one actually needed nerfing, but I really freaking doubt that's why they did it, considering how long that loophole went untouched). Now, I don't doubt they nerfed SWD to make Kineticists look better. That's paizo "errata" policy 101.
I'm tired of it... I no longer trust the design team. I had hopes things would get better with the addition of Mark to the team, but I was obviously wrong.
This is how Paizo "balances" the game:
1- Write a bunch of class features with no care if it's balanced. Be sure to ignore all feedback that goes against your initial impressions.
There's some comical exaggeration there, of course... But only a little.
Yes, I'm bitter. Why do you ask?
Exactly why the "you can just houserule it" argument is a fallacy.
Pfff... Non-sense! These paying customers are too entitled! It's like they think it's a game designer's job to design a good game. :P
It's like when you go to the theater and see a bad movie. You have no right or reason to complain just because you paid for it... After all, you can simply write your own fanfic and make it a better story than the movie itself!
Secret Wizard wrote:
Fighters have perfectly good numbers too...
Secret Wizard wrote:
Honestly, to me, the people who complain about the UC Monk are the same people who whine about Precise Strike being removed for Magi or claim that Divine Protection is perfectly fine. They are the people who tack Fate's Favored onto every build. They miss the fact that there's some supposed balance.
You obviously haven't been paying attention, then.
Anyway, this is not the thread for this discussion. I'm leaving. Enjoy the thread. ;)
Secret Wizard wrote:
Everyone who says the Fighter is a great class says exactly the same about that class... So forgive me if I remain unconvinced.
I admit UC Monk is a decent beatstick... Not much more than that, though.
Yeah. that's what I was trying to get at. There is no reason for crossbows not to add Str modifier to damage. In fact, since the lever allows you to add more strength than you'd normally be capable of if you were just pulling it (because, you know... that's what levers do! Maximize strength!). There is an argument to be said that they should allow even greater strength. They could be the 2-handed weapons of ranged combat (the ones that require at least a move action to load, anyway, that way they would require 2 feats to full attack, but would then deal more damage than other options. The feat investment balances the damage boost).
Yeah, but say... But you need the strength to get there. If you have a trigger that requires you to pull the string further, wouldn't that in turn transfer add more force to the projectile?
Yeah, editing mistake. ^^
Bolt Ace got proficiency with all crossbows. Shaman got SNA and Remove Diseases. Oddly enough, those changes were already listed in my houserules document.
Well... On a more positive note, not all of the errata was bad... Given proficiency with all crossbows and SNA and Remove Diseases to the Shaman were good calls (which happen to match my own houserules ^^).
It's just that Paizo really, really realy doesn't know how to handle nerfs. They can't just subtly/slightly change options that are considered too good. They simply Crane Wing-nuke it into nothingness and consider that to be good game design and a job well done.
As for Divine Protection... They could simply give us a feat that allow characters to use Cha instead of Wis for Will saves. There! It's balanced and makes viable many character options that weren't really feasible before.
Instead they gave us the pointlessly restrictive Steadfast Personality and the horribly-overpowered-then-horribly-underpowered Divine Protection.
All in all, one step forward, three steps back...
Honestly... I wouldn't care if it's a joint project, if it's 3pp or even who is making it...
All that matters to me is this:
1- Is this something I'd enjoy?
If the answer to all those questions is "Yes", then yes, I'll contribute. If any of them is a "No", then no, I won't.
Oracles should have a good means of boosting their saves (No, Iron Will and Great Fortitude don't count)... But the old DivProt was too good, specially since it stomped the toes of Paladins.
That said, Crane Winging the feat into uselessness is a horrible solution. Paizo should really stop trying to nerf stuff... Not because everything is balanced, but because they are g~$#*$n awful at nerfing. Far more often than not they go overboard and make an overpowered (or even slightly above mediocre) option a waste of space, which is arguably even worse, considering the fact that most feats in the game are already horrible.
Secret Wizard wrote:
Play a regular Unchained Monk then. Fixed and balanced.
Arguably. It's better than the Core Monk, of course, but it's not exactly a great class...
And I'd consider Alertness a rather boring feat tax. Iron Will too.
- - -
That said... I think Wis to attack and damage is a bit much, but Wis to damage should be fine. Grab Weapon Finesse and use Dex to attack, then a second feat for Wis to damage.
That should work fine.
Yeah... Eldritch Scions is one of those sad cases where a great idea almost works, but is ruined by a couple details...
Just take the normal Magus and give it spells known/per days as a Bard. No need for the whole Bloodrager b@$$%@#+ tackled on it. If your really want it to be based on Cha, at least give the poor guy +2 skill points per level.
You can keep the Druid and give it Oracle spell progression. Shouldn't be too far off.
I think it's more of a question of if he can do it fast enough.
You can chop off your hand and do the same to it. Should we assume characters have no hands?
Nope. If a fighter doesn't get his weapons or armor, then the wizard doesn't get his familiar.I actually agree on this point, anything that you can remove without killing him should be removed for this theoretical bout.
Doesn't make much sense, though. The familiar is a class feature. Weapons aren't. A better match would be the Wizard not having access to a spell component pouch.
Rules citation needed.
And who said anything about reading combat actions? You can ready a non-violent action just as easily.
Is there any rule actually preventing characters from readying actions out of combat, though?
Is it impossible for a group of friends to shout "SURPRISE!" when the lights turn on unless everyone wins Initiative against the birthday guy?
The way I see it, out-of-combat time is also divided in rounds... We just don't bother keeping track of them because there is no point. But it should still be possible for my character to, say, ready an action to drop a water balloon on whoever goes through the door bellow me.
However, the weapons themselves aren't class features. It's the difference between knowing how to drive and owning a car.
Gunslingers, OTOH, do start with a simple firearm... Not great, but at leas the isn't empty-handed. Bladebound Magus has his black blade...
Off the top of my head, I don't remember any other class that has an in-built "You have this weapon. Period." class feature.
PIXIE DUST wrote:
Well, to be fair, a Wizard without his spell component pouch isn't going to do much better... Though he can solve that problem with a single feat.
Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10
I'm currently looking for cool/useful powers for my character.
We already have 2 damage dealers, so I think I'll focus more on debuff/support. An idea was using a whip to perform maneuvers such as Dirty Trick, Trip and Disarm, but by gods, that is feat-intensive! Specially for a finesse build! Just trying to use an whip costs 2~4 feats (one of which is the extremely boring Weapon Focus).
So my search continues...