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

Lemmy's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 8,454 posts (12,143 including aliases). 4 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 15 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 8,454 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Qaianna wrote:
(...) I know I've only rolled a 1 on 2d10 once ... (don't ask) (...)

Wait... Isn't that mathematically impossible? How the hell did you manage to roll lower than 2? oO


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hitdice wrote:
It's not that I'm going to favorite every single post from now on, it's just that the last few have made good points.

Hitdice confirmed as Tsundere!

"I just favorited your posts because I wanted to... It's not like I like you or anything... Baka!"

XD


4 people marked this as a favorite.

¬¬'

Seriously... You think this is overpowered?

*sigh*

Martials really can't have nice things...


Firewarrior44 wrote:
I think it's hilarious that in order to swing a second blade around a 3rd time I need 19 Dex, which is the same number of points in intelligence required to cast 9th level spells. Meaning both are apparently of comparable difficulty.

Hah! That's nothing!

You need higher Int to fight defensively than to cast 2nd level spells.

PF is such a caster-friendly game that it's harder to learn how to trip´someone properly than it is to break the laws of physics. :P


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Lemmy wrote:

Eh... I think Toughness is a really crappy feat... It's mediocre (at best) at 1st level and all but completely irrelevant at any point beyond that.

It's not as bad if taken in conjuction with the bonus hp FCB, but it's still not a good feat.

Eh. I've seen lots of people take it, and none regretted it and wished they'd taken something else (something I've seen happen occasionally with bad Feats). That may not make it good, but I think it makes it 'not bad'.

Meh... +3 hp at 1st level might make a difference quite often, when a single hit from a random orc deals just as much damage as you have hp... Which is usually something between 8 and 15 hp.

By 3rd level, +3 hp will rarely, if ever, make any difference... Same goes for +10 hp at 10th level and +20 hp at 20th level... Combined with the bonus hp from FCB, it might actually matter at some point.

Still, the feat is mediocre at best when combined with FCB and nearly insignificant by itself.


Eh... I think Toughness is a really crappy feat... It's mediocre (at best) at 1st level and all but completely irrelevant at any point beyond that.

It's not as bad if taken in conjuction with the bonus hp FCB, but it's still not a good feat.

"It's worth a feat" is a terrible metric for power and balance... A feat can give you anything ranging from Sure Grasp to Leadership. Saying "it's a feat" means absolutely nothing.


Yes.


That's some s*+%ty GMing...

I'll never understand GMs who are so eager to shout "Gotcha!" and make their players lose their class features. That's just being an a~&*@@@ with no empathy for their friends.

This is the kind of thing that makes me angrily ask the GM is he's being serious... Twice. And if he confirms it, I walk away. I have zero patience for this sort of b#%+#%%#.


Was anyone honestly surprised by the final scene of the episode?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Professor Farnsworth, Scientist wrote:
The Man in the Mask is the show's science advisor. This is why none of the cast or writers seem too worried or hurried about rescuing him.

That or whoever writes the fight scenes.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A 100 underpowered options still make a less effective character than 20 effective options.

It doesn't matter if you have a 100000000 choices to pick... You can't pick them all... And you have to play with whatever limited number of options you picked, and at that point "build versatility" is worthless.


Well... Same difference, then...

If it's something as lame as "Hunter's father", this will be the most disappointing revelation I've seen in any CW series so far.

After Hunter saying "You wouldn't believe if I told you" and all the talks of "it'll blow your [the viwer's] mind"... I expect the reveal to be at least halfway decent!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh! Another opportunity presents itself!

Try...

Lemmy's Custom Weapon Generation System!

Check out the "Elemental Damage" modification! Now you can build all your elemental weapons... And more! ;)


He wasn't using Morse code, though, was he? I remember it being something else... I don't recall what they called it, though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

"Synchronicity"... XD

Someone is actually using the hammer ane nail quote to describe science... SMH...


2 years necro... Not bad, rampao.


MannyGoblin wrote:
we just need the Snakes in King's Landing to strip down, grease up and start stabbing people. Maybe have a lesbian-incest angle where they end up straddling each other.

While that would've been an... uh... entertaining scene... I'd rather they just completely vanished from the show. No explanation given.

Sure, it'd not make any sense, but nothing about the Dorne storyline makes any sense in the show, so they might as well just spare us the pain of watching it. -.-'


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Killing Joke trailer is here! GET HYPED!


Ghost Rider's origin is pretty cool...

And Batman's origin isn't a bat flying through the window... That's just how he chose his costume's theme.


The other big problem I see is that Pathfinder pretty much forces martials to stand still all the time... 5ft steps are the one rule that gives them some mobility and a little tactical decision making...

Not only this rule would exarcebate existing balance problems (like I said, this is only a minor inconvenience for casters. Concentration checks are really easy. It actually makes it easier for Wizards to escape melee... Taking a single AoO is much better than eating a full attack), it also makes the game more static, boring and dull.


Archer Bards are pretty cool too. Barbarians actually make really good archers, even without archetypes. Inquisitors are supposed to be good archers too... But other than bow proficiency, they aren't particularly well-suited for that combat style.

And let's not forget about Gunslingers... Which aren't archers, but suffer just as much with the removal of 5ft step.

Besides... Even if an archer can survive in melee, it's pretty sad to have your best trick shut down or heavily nerfed by any critter who manages to stand next to you.


This is the 2nd time I see this "Fighters should be critting every round" argument... Other than the 2-Handed Fighter archetype, how are Fighters better than anyone at getting critical hits before 20th level?

I suppose they can get Improved Critical slightly earlier... Is that it? It's a single feat... Sure, it only affects 1 type of weapon, but you very rarely need more than that.


No one reasonable would say that Fighters can't do anything but be beat-sticks... But it's a fact that they need to invest more resources than any other class yo do it and will likely still yield lesser results.


My engineer self can't help but appreciate your work. Thank you very much, sir. :)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
This would be a minor inconvenience for casters (concentration checks are EASY), a major nerf to most martial classes and a death sentence to any archer who got in melee.
Well, any archer that didn't have Point Blank Master or something similar. My wife's Fighter (Archer) doesn't provoke and wears heavy armor.

Doesn't Point-Blank Master come somewhat late, though?

And only 4 class have access to it, IIRC... Fighter, Ranger, Slayer and Zen Archer.


This would be a minor inconvenience for casters (concentration checks are EASY), a major nerf to most martial classes and a death sentence to any archer who got in melee.

I'd talk to the GM. It's the kind of rule change that would make me decide to either leave the game or exploit it 'til he sees the error of his ways.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Seriously... Walk away from this group. And don't put too much effort into trying to befriend someone who doesnt want to be your friend. It's not worth it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Walk away from the group... At least 'til the other players reach their 16th birthday. :P

Alternatively, if you really, really don't want to leave... Do the suggested advice of calling them silly/embarassing nicknames and kill anyone who has a problem with it. Not a very mature solution, but when in Rome...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There are two things that while completely meaningless from a mechanical PoV, would do wonders to encourage players and designers to see Fighters as the mighty warriors they are supposed to be instead of "random dude with a pointy stick".

1- Give them "Fighter Talents" instead of feats. Include an option that allows them to gain a bonus combat feat and can be selected multiple times.
2- Change the class name. "Fighter" is as bad as "Magic User". It's so awfully generic, its no wonder so many people (including designers) see Fighters as little more than "slightly buffed NPC class" and describe them with a description that would better fit the Warrior class. Call them "Champion", "Warlord", "Paragon"... Anything that inspires players and designers to give the class cool, effective abilities!


7 people marked this as a favorite.

The character concept for Fighters is really awesome! "The Badass Normal"! The guy who just through training, discipline and will can stand equal to supernatural powers. He's the guy who embodies the "Charles Atlas Superpower". Awesome!

The real problem is the class' design concept... i.e.: "This guy hits hards and has high AC, therefore he'll suck at everything else". The Fighter is meant to be extremely limited and narrow-minded... And so it is... Which makes it a really bad class in a game as open-ended as table top RPGs, where literally anything can happen and there's no real limits to what can be attempted or achieved.

I once compared Fighters to grapplers in fighting games... Grapplers usually have high damage output and high health, but they are very often at the bottom of the tier list. Why? Because even in a fighting game, where there's nothing but combat, options are your most valuable resource... Not numbers. It doesn't matter how high your damage is when enemies can easily outmaneuver you, keep you away or downright neutralize your best tricks.

This becomes even more explicitly true the greater the variety of different situations the game has... And what game has greater variety of challenges than tabletop RPGs?

For as long as Fighters are designed to hit hard and do nothing else, they will never be good at adventuring... And they'll only be decent in combat as well. Amazing at standing still and full attacking, but mediocre at actually fighting, since combat will often be about much more than stantionary crestures trading blows.


This is one of the worst house-rules suggestions I've ever seen around here. And this is not something I say lightly.

It removes agency from the player, makes the class completely unfun, forces characters to be extremely narrow-minded (Cleric of God of Fire can't prepare Create Water?! WTF?) and increases the workload of the GM.


Overall, it's a really good improvement to the class... But I do have some criticism to make...

A couple stamina abilities are really good... Specifically Burst of Speed and the one that gives you an extra attack. I'd dip Fighter every time just for them. The others range from okay to "I'll forget this even exists" (1d6 to an skill check? Who cares?). Other than that, I don't see any problem with them.

I don't see why give them AWT... Fighters already have that option now, so you're effectivelly giving them nothing. I suppose getting them for free is better...

However the class doesn't really gain anything interesting later on... AWT is ok, but not particularly impressive or exciting. Personally, I'd dip 2 level of this Fighter for the stamina abilities, then drop the class, since the interesting class features are few and far between (that might be just me, though).

Iterative Mastery may be too good, however. Even more so if combined with Burst of Speed. It means Fighters will basically never miss any attack other than on Nat 1s. I don't think Fighters need even more damage... Specially at high levels. It's an 18th level ability, though... So it probably won't matter in most campaigns.

Anyway... I have a couple suggestions:

1- Give it a few more narrative abilities.
2- Don't make every option a stamina power. Just give them to Fighters 24/7. There's no need for Solo Tactics and Martial Versatility to require stamina.
3- Add more class features that are interesting, unique and fun! Adding bonuses to this and that is fine and all... But it's really boring.


That's just discussing semantics, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fighters and Swashbucklers are probably the classes that most miserably fail to live up to their class descriptions. :(


Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10
Sundakan wrote:
Isn't there also a generic black dude that does capoeira though?

There is black girl who fights capoeira (Elena)... She's South African, though. And she has enough personality to not be just "generic black girl who fights capoeira".

Well... Blanka does have a couple capoeira-inspired normals, but that's about it. He was originally meant to fight capoeira, IIRC, but the developers decided that his fighting style was too different (they were right).

But let's be fair... No matter how stereotypical any character is... None of them will ever be as bland and generic as Ryu. -.-'


Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10

Unrelated... But I really like how in SF, Brazilian characters aren't just "generic black dude who does capoeira".

We have an electric beast-man... And an electric hot-chick.

And Sean... Who was originally meant to be American, but for some reason got changed to be Brazilian. I have no idea why, though...


Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10

Play competitive games... With Brazillians???

HEIWUHEWAUIEHWAEIUWAHEIUAWEHWIAUEHWAUIEWAHEUIWAHE!!!!!

Aaah...

No, no... I don't... Brazil has a lot of good things going for it, but game etiquette isn't one of them. I don't play with BR players unless...

1- I personally know them.
2- The game has no chat function or allows me to disable it.
3- Matches are really short, such as in fighting games.

Of course, I usually just mute everyone anyway, no matter where they are from. That 1% useful stuff is not worth the 99% crap. Everyone is awful everywhere...

I never liked the "huehuehue BRBRBR" nonsense... All it does is annoy other players and make Brazilians look like childish trolls. Brazil already has its awful politicians to embarrass us. No need for us to do it ourselves online as well.

/suddenrant :P


Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10

Ah, I see... I thought you had grown up in Texas.


Male Human Dungeon Master 10/ Munchkin 10

Isn't Texas considered South? I mean... It is in the southern part of the country.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JakeCWolf wrote:

I know RP means race points, and it's an at a glace way to judge a race's power in comparison to others in a setting, but I'm confused as to why Drow have two numbers instead of one.

Does it mean depending on choices they can be above average or absurdly over powered? Or is there some subtle nuance I am missing?

Mostly, it means the Race Builder is busted.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hitdice wrote:
Knott C. Rious wrote:
Eu vou digitar em Português em vez de Latim porque ninguém vai notar a diferença. Hah!
Digitar, that prolly has something to do with fingers, right?

It means "to type"... As in... "I'm about to use my keyboard to type this text". So... Yes (although the word would still apply even if I decided to type with my nose).


This thread might have gone slightly off its rails...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HyperMissingno wrote:
If there's a debate in English don't break out into Latin if you want to continue to contribute. This is beyond basic.

Cur non?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
In nearly 30 years I have never seen a wizard with more HP than a fighter.
You've been playing Pathfinder for nearly 30 years?
You have a point?

He's posting under the "Sarcasm Dragon" alias... His point is to make funny sarcastic posts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hitdice wrote:
Lemmy, not trying to being a dingus here, but was "haud" a typo or something?

I have no idea. I don't speak Latin... But I do have access to the internet, google translator and a few sentences in Latin. I don't have any intention to proofread them, though. XD

I speak fluent Portuguese, though... That's originated from Latin, so it has to count something. :P


RDM42 wrote:
"Cura te ipsum."

Yeah... Latin sounds classy and all... But your reply really doesn't apply to Jiggy's post.

Iocorum expers sum et haud peritus


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
If I can make an effective character and roleplay just as well as I'd an ineffective one... Why wouldn't I choose to be effective?
"Optimized" and "effective" are not, despite people trying to constantly use them that way, synonyms. Something does not have to be optimal to be effective. It isn't an on/off switch.

Optimize

verb (used with object), optimized, optimizing.
1.
to make as effective, perfect, or useful as possible.
2.
to make the best of.

- - -

Again: Optimization (or lack there of) has no impact on my ability to role play... So why would I choose to make a less effective character?

If I'm too powerful for the campaign, I can just hold back... But if I'm too weak, I can't suddenly get stronger.

So again... Why wouldn't I try yo make my character as competent and effective as possible at whatever it is that I want him to be competent and effective?


Yeah... You're much better off buffing Fightera than nerfing Barbarians.

Barbarians are a balanced, effective class... Fighters... Kinda suck.


JoelF847 wrote:
Lemmy wrote:

I'm still annoyed at Zoom's stupid victory, though... I makes no sense. -.-'

At this point they might as well change the intro to "My name is Barry Allen... And I am among the top 10 fastest men alive... Probably."

-.-'

Well, if the narration is from a future Barry Allen talking about his adventures from the past, he might be the fastest man alive then...after getting EVAN FASTR!

I don't think so... His voice is still the same and he speaks in present tense. At one point, back in season 1 when he first met Reverse Flash, he even says "(...) And I am not the fastest man alive (...)".


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm still annoyed at Zoom's stupid victory, though... I makes no sense. -.-'

At this point they might as well change the intro to "My name is Barry Allen... And I am among the top 10 fastest men alive... Probably."

-.-'

1 to 50 of 8,454 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.