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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Getting use out of Ultimate Magic


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

651 to 700 of 732 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

This thread has veered so far away from doing anything useful that it (PLEASE!) needs to be killed.


LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

Although if you want a high magic + few magic items game, check out earthdawn. Magic items do very little until you invest experience tying them to your character. So as you grow more powerful, so does your sword. I would by a supplement that explored that concept in Pathfinder.

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Do we REALLY need to go into a discussion about how intangible, local game dependent things are not replacements for item rewards? Really

How do you even propose Paizo write anything that instructs DMs running their own personal games to reward people with certain intangible things like clues or NPC contacts as rewards for increasing in experience?

Moreover, how does that even relate to system balance?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

FIIIIIIIIIIGHT!


Cartigan wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
"MMORPG" isn't derogatory, it's descriptive. Show me some example where "holier than thou" has ever been used without being derogatory.

You may not think its derogatory, but what about your audience? Ever think that perhaps the one you're saying it about does?

The way your post sounds the answer is no. And if the answer is no, that does mean you come off as "holier than thou" with all its negative connotations.

You may have good points, you may not. I don't care. But if you piss your audience off they're not going to listen to your points.

ShadowcatX, I need a term to describe that style of play. MMORPG-style is the most accurate term I know.
Try "D&D style."

Which points out what I've been saying. While I've sayed that different people play the game in different ways, Cartigan thinks that the way he plays the game is the only legitimate way to play the game.


Cartigan wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

Although if you want a high magic + few magic items game, check out earthdawn. Magic items do very little until you invest experience tying them to your character. So as you grow more powerful, so does your sword. I would by a supplement that explored that concept in Pathfinder.

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Do we REALLY need to go into a discussion about how intangible, local game dependent things are not replacements for item rewards? Really

How do you even propose Paizo write anything that instructs DMs running their own personal games to reward people with certain intangible things like clues or NPC contacts as rewards for increasing in experience?

Moreover, how does that even relate to system balance?

I'd love to, but with someone who could actually hold their side of the conversation.


LilithsThrall wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
"MMORPG" isn't derogatory, it's descriptive. Show me some example where "holier than thou" has ever been used without being derogatory.

You may not think its derogatory, but what about your audience? Ever think that perhaps the one you're saying it about does?

The way your post sounds the answer is no. And if the answer is no, that does mean you come off as "holier than thou" with all its negative connotations.

You may have good points, you may not. I don't care. But if you piss your audience off they're not going to listen to your points.

ShadowcatX, I need a term to describe that style of play. MMORPG-style is the most accurate term I know.
Try "D&D style."
Which points out what I've been saying. While I've sayed that different people play the game in different ways, Cartigan thinks that the way he plays the game is the only legitimate way to play the game.

As opposed to LillithsThrall and Co, with their "sophisticated" and "complex" game while people that have played the game the way it has been designed and balanced for the past decade are simpletons who have not yet aspired to such a level of gameplay and satisfy themselves with just playing the game as it is.

LilithsThrall wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

Although if you want a high magic + few magic items game, check out earthdawn. Magic items do very little until you invest experience tying them to your character. So as you grow more powerful, so does your sword. I would by a supplement that explored that concept in Pathfinder.

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Do we REALLY need to go into a discussion about how intangible, local game dependent things are not replacements for item rewards? Really

How do you even propose Paizo write anything that instructs DMs running their own personal games to reward people with certain intangible things like clues or NPC contacts as rewards for increasing in experience?

Moreover, how does that even relate to system balance?

I'd love to, but with someone who could actually hold their side of the conversation.

I will take that as "I have no idea."


nathan blackmer wrote:

This thread has veered so far away from doing anything useful that it (PLEASE!) needs to be killed.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to agree. A discussion about the "it's the hero, not the gear" game philosophy is interesting and needs to take place, but Cartigan is preventing that from happening.


LilithsThrall wrote:
nathan blackmer wrote:

This thread has veered so far away from doing anything useful that it (PLEASE!) needs to be killed.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to agree. A discussion about the "it's the hero, not the gear" game philosophy is interesting and needs to take place, but Cartigan is preventing that from happening.

"Help, help, I'm being repressed! Did you see him repressing me? You saw him, Didn't you? "

EDIT: I am perfectly willing to have that discussion with someone whose pullstring line is something other than "People who don't play like me are simpletons who can only understand limited MMORPGs." Ie, not you.

Shadow Lodge

Cartigan wrote:
EDIT: I am perfectly willing to have that discussion with someone whose pullstring line is something other than "People who don't play like me are simpletons who can only understand limited MMORPGs." Ie, not you.

The irony is getting pretty damned thick in here.

Liberty's Edge

You are both being deliberately insulting and it is harming the thread. I would suggest you both, heck everyone really, take a step back and take a breath. Then perhaps discussion can resume without hard feelings, preconceived notions, and insults.

Please?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber
ShadowcatX wrote:

You are both being deliberately insulting and it is harming the thread. I would suggest you both, heck everyone really, take a step back and take a breath. Then perhaps discussion can resume without hard feelings, preconceived notions, and insults.

Please?

Man, no way! This is the ultimate showdown, the unstoppable force that meets an immovable object, the clash of titans, der Gotterdamerung, A War to End All Wars, Carty and LT are going mano a mano (or perhaps, trollo a trollo), and we have front row tickets!


ShadowcatX wrote:

You are both being deliberately insulting and it is harming the thread. I would suggest you both, heck everyone really, take a step back and take a breath. Then perhaps discussion can resume without hard feelings, preconceived notions, and insults.

Please?

You think I'm being deliberately insulting because I describe his style of play as MMORPG-style.

I told you that I couldn't think of a more accurate term and you didn't offer one. Instead, Cartigan jumped to the opportunity to insinuate that he's is the only legitimate way to play the game.

I made an attempt to disccuss this topic civilly. Hell, I made multiple attempts. I can't say how many times I said that everybody plays the game differently and that there is no badwrongfun. For my efforts, Cartigan replies that the game shouldn't support my style of play.


Revan wrote:

Again: if it's intended to be 'just an RP choice', then why have a mechanic at all? Any character is capable of refusing to use items, deliberately crippling themselves in the process. Once you've decided to make an actual mechanic, though, you've effectively already decided to support the mechanical efficacy of the concept, which UM Vow of Poverty fails to do.

Incidentally, as regards the complexities of the mechanics, I whipped this Vow of Poverty up in about two minutes: The character maintains a simple and ascetic lifestyle; he wears plain, simple clothing, and carries with him little more than the clothes on his back, a bowl and/or cup for food, water, and begging, and perhaps a Simple weapon. He must take a fair portion of any adventuring loot and donate it to the church/his monastery/assorted other good causes. In return, at every level up, he gets to spend 'virtual WBL' equal to (or, if you prefer, slightly under, say 85-90%) standard WBL for his character level, filling virtual item slots with virtual items, and enhancing his unarmed strike or simple weapon as if it was a masterwork manufactured weapon.

Simple, straightforward, and it seems relatively well-balanced to me. Not perfect, I'm sure, but I'm not a professional RPG designer, and I whipped it up quickly. I can't imagine it would take that much tweaking to turn that into a mechanic that could slot easily into any Pathfinder game willing to have ascetic characters in the first place.

Virtual items was one of the things I've suggested. Earlier in the other VoP thread but again that is a subsystem that should be free for all, not what the VoP should do. I suspect that the writer seriously underestmated how much power from items the character needs if it is to be compared to fully stocked characters.


You wouldn't think it would be terribly hard for Paizo to make a passable wholly contained Monk given what they did with the Paladin and progressive class benefits in general.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
You are both being deliberately insulting and it is harming the thread.

Dude, it is the thread.

These two have much to teach each other. And us.

*doo doo dee doo!*


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

Shadow Lodge

deinol wrote:

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

Played in a game once where we got a deck of many things. Definately was less fun, lol :(


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Varthanna wrote:
deinol wrote:

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

Played in a game once where we got a deck of many things. Definately was less fun, lol :(

Deck of many things != loot. Deck of many things is a cursed item that tricks you into thinking it is loot. It even tricks you out of game. If you didn't burn it immediately and move on, you fell for the curse.


deinol wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

If I gave your character immunity to all damage, complete knowledge of anything you wanted to know - including what the GM was planning, the ability to kill anything with merely a thought, etc. etc. ad nauseum, I wonder just how long it would take you to get bored with the lack of challenge.

"More" != "better"


Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A


deinol wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

I most definitely can. If you've ever played in a real Mpnty Haul campaign in which everyone is swimming in loot, you'll know that it gets old real fast. The game reaches the level of ridiculous parody and ceases being fun at all.


Brian Bachman wrote:
deinol wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
deinol wrote:

You know why the Christmas Tree effect exists? People like getting rewards during play.

Interesting story < Interesting story + loot

But the rewards don't have to be magic items. They could be anything from clues to a mystery to NPC contacts, etc.

Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

I can play this game all day. I can't think of any situation where a player has LESS fun by getting MORE stuff.

I most definitely can. If you've ever played in a real Mpnty Haul campaign in which everyone is swimming in loot, you'll know that it gets old real fast. The game reaches the level of ridiculous parody and ceases being fun at all.

Yeah, anybody who has played the Baldur's Gate series knows that in a very short time Throne of Bhaal gets utterly ridiculous in the sheer amount of random magical crap your characters have on them at any one time, to the point where you stop picking up "just" +2 weapons because you don't want to waste the inventory space and time carting them around to sell, and each character has about 5 rings, a half dozen belts and bracers, and too many cloaks and weapons to possibly ever use. When the game gets to the point of being "wow, look at that, another unique +4 artifact level weapon that's just a little worse than my 3 +5 artifacts, guess it goes in the bag of holding with everything else since there's no reason to sell it with my hundreds of thousands of gold pieces" you know the loot is out of control.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:

If I gave your character immunity to all damage, complete knowledge of anything you wanted to know - including what the GM was planning, the ability to kill anything with merely a thought, etc. etc. ad nauseum, I wonder just how long it would take you to get bored with the lack of challenge.

"More" != "better"

I never said the GM shouldn't use judgement to determine the quality of loot. I don't care if you use 1/4 WBL or 4*WBL. A steady inflow of rewards improves the experience of the players. Nobody is saying they should become gods after one quest.


You said

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

which, I think justifiably, made me think you were trying to make some sort of point, but when you acknowledged in your last post that

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts + Loot

isn't inherently better, it's left me wondering what that point might be.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:

You said

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

which, I think justifiably, made me think you were trying to make some sort of point, but when you acknowledged in your last post that

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts + Loot
isn't inherently better, it's left me wondering what that point might be.

My point is that getting loot is fun. I acknowledge that the formula only works for values of loot where the GM is not an insane strawman.


for any value of x

x < Clues + Contacts + Loot + Wenches

Liberty's Edge

Comparing "immunity to all damage, complete knowledge of anything you wanted to know - including what the GM was planning, the ability to kill anything with merely a thought, etc. etc. ad nauseum" to "loot" is a logical fallacy known as a straw man. You're purposefully over stating your opponent's argument so you can tear down your over statement and pretend that it is the same as tearing down your opponent's argument.

Your gaming style might be "sophisticated" but your debating style is definitely not.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evil Lincoln wrote:

for any value of x

x < Clues + Contacts + Loot + Wenches

Not true if X= Wenches. Clues, contacts, and loot just subtract from the time you're spending with the wenches.


deinol wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

You said

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts < Clues + Contacts + Loot

which, I think justifiably, made me think you were trying to make some sort of point, but when you acknowledged in your last post that

deinol wrote:
Clues + Contacts + Loot
isn't inherently better, it's left me wondering what that point might be.
My point is that getting loot is fun. I acknowledge that the formula only works for values of loot where the GM is not an insane strawman.

I took the case to the extreme in order to show that there comes a point where adding more loot actually reduces the fun.

Which shouldn't be surprising because the thing that actually causes fun is overcoming challenges through imaginative problem solving and roleplaying, not gaining loot.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Back in mah day we nevuh had non'dis lut.

We mayuhd dew with stiyaks and stonehs and the twiztuhd falisees uh thu falluhn.

Ayuhp.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Revan wrote:
Since the reason most people want such a system is to play characters whose power comes from themselves, not from their gear, just giving them the gear would not satisfy. Giving them the effects of the gear as an inherent part of their character (even if only by virtue of making the gear 'virtual'), would.

Yep. Or at least some alternate source of power beyond magical gear(or anything else that can be traced back to "a caster did it for you").

Some of these bonuses could be vulnerable to being temporarily dispelled perhaps. Some(or all) may depend on the character maintaining a code of conduct or some other criteria they need to be mindful of(like say a Vow), or else they lose the benefits. If that's what it would take to be in line with standard geared characters, to make up for whatever advantages they get by not having breakable gear, I'd be fine with it. It would at least be strengths coming from teh character in any case.

Hell, Paizo could put such a system in Pugwampis of Golarion and I'd still buy it.

I'd cut the relevant pages out and stab the rest repeatedly while screaming and crying but I'd still buy it.

Just as long as such a character would be able to play alongside standard characters. Ascetic flavor lends itself to the easiest solution: they give their share of loot away to the needy, either directly or through the appropriate organizations.


What the hell even is "MMOG" gaming other then "Thing Lilith Dislikes"

Don't answer here, take it to other forums. Be gone with ye, edition wars!

Also, gaining loot owns, sorry. But the reason gaining loot owns is - or should be - because it adds something to your character.

The reason I'd like a form of inherent bonuses is because then magic items can be exciting again. Sorry, going "Oh man +2 strength!" isn't exciting in the least. +x weapons are boring as hell.

Also also, monks aren't just not the least "item intensive," they're one of the most. Fighters are potentially one of the only ones hovering above them.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Dang, I get stuck in transit for a day and miss an epic troll war.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Dang, I get stuck in transit for a day and miss an epic troll war.

I'm sure it ain't over yet, TOZ. LT and Carty just haven't woken up yet.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Brian Bachman wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Dang, I get stuck in transit for a day and miss an epic troll war.
I'm sure it ain't over yet, TOZ. LT and Carty just haven't woken up yet.

I actually hope it is over, if only to increase the chances that the developers will read the thread instead of zoning it out due to RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE


Mikaze wrote:
Brian Bachman wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Dang, I get stuck in transit for a day and miss an epic troll war.
I'm sure it ain't over yet, TOZ. LT and Carty just haven't woken up yet.
I actually hope it is over, if only to increase the chances that the developers will read the thread instead of zoning it out due to RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

...why exactly would they read this thread? (1) It has roughly nothing to do with anything (2)They ignored the hell out of the Antagonize feat threat and, most importantly, (3) I took over for Sean K Reynolds in defense against some ridiculous arguments a few pages back

Since you were the ones MAKING those arguments, Mikaze, you should know this.

I haven't been replying to LT because the argument being made have been the same ones LT makes in EVERY THREAD about ANYTHING and I have debunked them several times. How many times do you propose I need to point out LT's hypocrisy and elitism? Or how many times do I need to explain how the game works? I have made a couple replies that were simply sniping (see Monty Python quote and Konami Code) because addressing the SAME THINGS in depth over and over is tedious and pointless.


Mikaze wrote:
I actually hope it is over, if only to increase the chances that the developers will read the thread instead of zoning it out due to RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

I hope it never ends.

It's like some weird performance art. If I had to choose two posters to remain locked in combat for all time, it would probably be these two.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:

...why exactly would they read this thread? (1) It has roughly nothing to do with anything (2)They ignored the hell out of the Antagonize feat threat and, most importantly, (3) I took over for Sean K Reynolds in defense against some ridiculous arguments a few pages back

Since you were the ones MAKING those arguments, Mikaze, you should know this.

1. The arguments I'm hoping they would look at have a lot to do with the monk and on a wider scale how martial characters can feasibly gain power through sources other than caster-made stuff, if only they would explore the concept.

2. Hope springs eternal.

3. You've been arguing against low-magic games period and getting into it with LT which snowballed the postcount. I, and others, are talking about optional rules to enable low-gear characters.

Excuse me while I try to be optimistic.


So you forgot your whole debate with SKR like 3 pages back?

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
So you forgot your whole debate with SKR like 3 pages back?

No.

But apparently you forgot what I was debating for.

I was debating specifically for an alternate means of character strength besides magical gear. Be it "virtual gear", a simple set of tiered inherent bonuses, anything. AND that it COULD work just fine with the flavor of a fantasy setting, as could the concept of an ascetic hero that was just as fantastic as the standard magic gear lot.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
4e has already shown that there are a lot of people who don't like MMORPG-style gaming.

And yet people are still playing it. Quite a few in fact.

Enough that if I could stomach writing 4ed material I'd probably be making more money from that.

I didn't say that there aren't people who like MMORPG-style gaming and to each their own. I said it's been demonstrated that many players don't like that style.

I'm always amused when someone tosses out "MMORG-style playing" in a venue like this, intimidating that MMORG-like is something different than D&D, when most MMORGs including WOW are essentially built on a D&D model.


Mikaze wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
So you forgot your whole debate with SKR like 3 pages back?

No.

But apparently you forgot what I was debating for.

I was debating specifically for an alternate means of character strength besides magical gear. Be it "virtual gear", a simple set of tiered inherent bonuses, anything. AND that it COULD work just fine with the flavor of a fantasy setting, as could the concept of an ascetic hero that was just as fantastic as the standard magic gear lot.

And do you propose he would change his response if he suddenly reappared in the thread?

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
So you forgot your whole debate with SKR like 3 pages back?

No.

But apparently you forgot what I was debating for.

I was debating specifically for an alternate means of character strength besides magical gear. Be it "virtual gear", a simple set of tiered inherent bonuses, anything. AND that it COULD work just fine with the flavor of a fantasy setting, as could the concept of an ascetic hero that was just as fantastic as the standard magic gear lot.

And do you propose he would change his response if he suddenly reappared in the thread?

I'm hoping that we can convince him that there is a very valid playstyle and design method that's worth looking into, and that it isn't as problematic as its been made out to be.

But I'm also hoping that other developers are reading this thread, and that some of them are open to the concept and willing to explore it.

Beats just giving up and continuing to be unhappy with the class.

Because it sure would be nice to be able to play a monk that feels right.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Mikaze wrote:
I actually hope it is over, if only to increase the chances that the developers will read the thread instead of zoning it out due to RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

I hope it never ends.

It's like some weird performance art. If I had to choose two posters to remain locked in combat for all time, it would probably be these two.

FAWTL: UM Edition.


Mikaze wrote:


Beats just giving up and continuing to be unhappy with the class.

Because it sure would be nice to be able to play a monk that feels right.

Except you want a change to the class to appease a subset of players, not a change to the class to FIX the class.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
Mikaze wrote:


Beats just giving up and continuing to be unhappy with the class.

Because it sure would be nice to be able to play a monk that feels right.

Except you want a change to the class to appease a subset of players, not a change to the class to FIX the class.

That would be fine too.

But given the chances of that, barring some serious love in Ultimate Combat, I don't see why I'm not allowed to argue the case for that subset.

Then again I'm part of that subset, so maybe I'm biased.

Oh well.

And again, I want the option. Not a shifting of the standard(except where that shift actually might help bring the monk in line with everyone else).


At this point I'm just gonna sip my coffee and watch the show.


Mikaze wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Mikaze wrote:


Beats just giving up and continuing to be unhappy with the class.

Because it sure would be nice to be able to play a monk that feels right.

Except you want a change to the class to appease a subset of players, not a change to the class to FIX the class.

That would be fine too.

But given the chances of that, barring some serious love in Ultimate Combat, I don't see why I'm not allowed to argue the case for that subset.

Then again I'm part of that subset, so maybe I'm biased.

Oh well.

And again, I want the option. Not a shifting of the standard(except where that shift actually might help bring the monk in line with everyone else).

The problem is the chance that the base Monk will be fixed to usability is between slim and none. It would require changing the Monk itself entirely in errata - which they are fairly dedicated to refusing to do. Any achetypal change will not significantly improve the Monk or make it worthwhile beyond what it is as a novelty class.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2014

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:


The problem is the chance that the base Monk will be fixed to usability is between slim and none. It would require changing the Monk itself entirely in errata - which they are fairly dedicated to refusing to do. Any achetypal change will not significantly improve the Monk or make it worthwhile beyond what it is as a novelty class.

So that's your pessimistic outlook. So why do you take issue with people asking for support for gearless monks? Or support for other characters that have an alternate source of strength besides magic gear?

Some people want support for that. We have the freedom to ask for it, and debate for its worth.

Which is what we were doing.


Mikaze wrote:
Cartigan wrote:


The problem is the chance that the base Monk will be fixed to usability is between slim and none. It would require changing the Monk itself entirely in errata - which they are fairly dedicated to refusing to do. Any achetypal change will not significantly improve the Monk or make it worthwhile beyond what it is as a novelty class.

So that's your pessimistic outlook. So why do you take issue with people asking for support for gearless monks? Or support for other characters that have an alternate source of strength besides magic gear?

Some people want support for that. We have the freedom to ask for it, and debate for its worth.

Which is what we were doing.

I take issue with LT and other people making an argument on the basis their opinions are superior and thus should be rather than making an argument.

I've elaborated on the problems and issues relating to creating such a system, obviously it was drowned out by accusations and snobbery.

651 to 700 of 732 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Getting use out of Ultimate Magic All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 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.