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

PaizoCon 2014!

Why is Pathfinder so bad at balance?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

151 to 167 of 167 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Morgen wrote:
I thought the point of Warmage was to go Rainbow Servant and gain every cleric spell to your spells known?

Bad misreading of Rainbow Servant! No biscuit!


The challenge with PF and balance is that the material balances itself out if you actually read all the pertinent sections of the rules. The trick is knowing what sections are pertinent and where to find them. This is the biggest problem caused by carrying over the 3.5 chassis; everything is spread out to the point where it is easy to contradict oneself.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Morgen wrote:
I thought the point of Warmage was to go Rainbow Servant and gain every cleric spell to your spells known?
Bad misreading of Rainbow Servant! No biscuit!

Yeah, I was wondering where he got that idea too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

I was about to point this out but you beat me to it.

as for spell casters apeing everyone else's schtick? it's all fun and games right up until the point someone drops a dispel magic then the spellcaster is right back where he / she started. While the rogue is still going to be hidden and the fighter is still going to be able to cause damage with that oversized pig sticker theyre carrying...

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

17 people marked this as a favorite.

Look, I understand that complex systems are hard to comprehend and that sometimes those who aren't up to the challenge need to boil it down to a simple series of numbers to create the illusion of system mastery. It's a cute trick, and I'm sure it impresses the middle school girls and my mom (who, to be fair, is easily impressed). This can be particularly true if you've never actually played the game with friends (and this challenge is magnified when a lack of social skills prevents a person from having friends), but the way the game is actually played, by most people who play it, most of the time, it works pretty well and is pretty fun.

And that's all it really needs to be and do. Not be perfect; not have all options be entirely equal; not allow you to wins the internets.

Anyhow, best of luck to you, Tommy. Maybe someday you'll be kind enough to present the pearls of wisdom and god-like skills at game design to us in a new rpg. I for one, eagerly anticipate Enchanter Tommy the RPG, the only 100% balanced RPG that's fun to play and super awesome.


Sebastian wrote:

Look, I understand that complex systems are hard to comprehend and that sometimes those who aren't up to the challenge need to boil it down to a simple series of numbers to create the illusion of system mastery. It's a cute trick, and I'm sure it impresses the middle school girls and my mom (who, to be fair, is easily impressed). This can be particularly true if you've never actually played the game with friends (and this challenge is magnified when a lack of social skills prevents a person from having friends), but the way the game is actually played, by most people who play it, most of the time, it works pretty well and is pretty fun.

And that's all it really needs to be and do. Not be perfect, not have all options be entirely equal; not allow you to wins the internets.

This is radiant truth.

The subsequent paragraph was just Sebastian being mean.


John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I'm sorry. You appear to be continuing a different argument than you started. Perhaps you would care to tell us the specifics of that argument you are continuing?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Evil Lincoln wrote:

This is radiant truth.

The subsequent paragraph was just Sebastian being mean.

That's not his default nature?


ShinHakkaider wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

I was about to point this out but you beat me to it.

as for spell casters apeing everyone else's schtick? it's all fun and games right up until the point someone drops a dispel magic then the spellcaster is right back where he / she started. While the rogue is still going to be hidden and the fighter is still going to be able to cause damage with that oversized pig sticker theyre carrying...

You mean the 3.5 Cleric who has heavy armor proficiency and only a need of 19 Wisdom (by level 18) to have full divine casting? And is only limited by 3/4 BAB and d8? Or the Druid who gets a large, powerful creature as inherent companion and can change into large, powerful creatures as a SU ability? Yeah, the Dispel Magic is TOTALLY going to make them look like nothing compared to the Fighter.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
Sebastian wrote:

Look, I understand that complex systems are hard to comprehend and that sometimes those who aren't up to the challenge need to boil it down to a simple series of numbers to create the illusion of system mastery. It's a cute trick, and I'm sure it impresses the middle school girls and my mom (who, to be fair, is easily impressed). This can be particularly true if you've never actually played the game with friends (and this challenge is magnified when a lack of social skills prevents a person from having friends), but the way the game is actually played, by most people who play it, most of the time, it works pretty well and is pretty fun.

And that's all it really needs to be and do. Not be perfect, not have all options be entirely equal; not allow you to wins the internets.

This is radiant truth.

The subsequent paragraph was just Sebastian being mean.

I assume by "subsequent paragraph," you mean "entire post."


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

I was about to point this out but you beat me to it.

as for spell casters apeing everyone else's schtick? it's all fun and games right up until the point someone drops a dispel magic then the spellcaster is right back where he / she started. While the rogue is still going to be hidden and the fighter is still going to be able to cause damage with that oversized pig sticker theyre carrying...

You mean the 3.5 Cleric who has heavy armor proficiency and only a need of 19 Wisdom (by level 18) to have full divine casting? And is only limited by 3/4 BAB and d8? Or the Druid who gets a large, powerful creature as inherent companion and can change into large, powerful creatures as a SU ability? Yeah, the Dispel Magic is TOTALLY going to make them look like nothing compared to the Fighter.

Sorry I thought we we discussing Pathfinder here, not 3.5.


ShinHakkaider wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

I was about to point this out but you beat me to it.

as for spell casters apeing everyone else's schtick? it's all fun and games right up until the point someone drops a dispel magic then the spellcaster is right back where he / she started. While the rogue is still going to be hidden and the fighter is still going to be able to cause damage with that oversized pig sticker theyre carrying...

You mean the 3.5 Cleric who has heavy armor proficiency and only a need of 19 Wisdom (by level 18) to have full divine casting? And is only limited by 3/4 BAB and d8? Or the Druid who gets a large, powerful creature as inherent companion and can change into large, powerful creatures as a SU ability? Yeah, the Dispel Magic is TOTALLY going to make them look like nothing compared to the Fighter.
Sorry I thought we we discussing Pathfinder here, not 3.5.

Oh, that changes everything ENTIRELY. I mean now the Cleric has to take a FEAT to get heavy armor proficiency. And now the Druid is limited by the change to the Polymorph spells. However will they compete with Fighters after someone succeeds at dispelling their innumerable buffs?


Sebastian wrote:
And that's all it really needs to be and do. Not be perfect; not have all options be entirely equal.

I suppose it boils down to expectations. To me, the game feels half-done, with most of the stuff that we know didn't work very well in 3.X still not working very well. Even so, if my personal valuation of a proper core rules book would be, say, $80, then I'm getting my money's worth with a half-finished rules book for $40.

But that still leaves me to fix the other half myself, if for some reason I want a relatively finished product. Personally, I sort of like tinkering with rules, so it's a good deal for me all around -- but for someone who expected a complete rules set from the get-go, I can see why they'd feel a bit left out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian wrote:

Look, I understand that complex systems are hard to comprehend and that sometimes those who aren't up to the challenge need to boil it down to a simple series of numbers to create the illusion of system mastery. It's a cute trick, and I'm sure it impresses the middle school girls and my mom (who, to be fair, is easily impressed). This can be particularly true if you've never actually played the game with friends (and this challenge is magnified when a lack of social skills prevents a person from having friends), but the way the game is actually played, by most people who play it, most of the time, it works pretty well and is pretty fun.

And that's all it really needs to be and do. Not be perfect; not have all options be entirely equal; not allow you to wins the internets.

Sebastian, I realize that you're not used to being challenged. In fact, I can see you as the wisened greybeard GM at the table who pats his heavy belly and proclaims a ruling, and the players take it as gospel, because that's just how it's going to be. Unfortunately, it just makes you look foolish when you display your own insecurities by responding to an argument with "WELL YOU'RE JUST A JERK AND NOT PLAYING THE GAME RIGHT AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY FRIENDS ANYWAY."

Just because math isn't your strong suit doesn't mean that the rest of us need to pretend it doesn't exist. Certainly, we could all be like you, quivering with irritation, chins shaking at the thought of a player optimizing. We could just dismiss mathematical analysis and trouble with a lofty wave of the grease-stained hand and a bold proclamation of "IT WORKS GOOD FOR EVERYONE ELSE, SO YOU MUST BE PLAYING IT WRONG" punctuated with a spray of saliva and processed food particles.

But that would be lazy. Like I said, I realize math isn't your strong suit. School probably never was. And you're lashing out in embarrassment at the thought of your chosen game being imperfect. That's okay if you want to play the game as if the numbers don't mean anything. But when someone like me--who is good at math--comes on and starts discussing mathematical probability, it would be doing everyone a favor if you would stop pouting and lashing out. Perhaps post in a different thread discussing fluff rather than crunch? I'm sure there's a thread about changing the oracle's name that has your number written all over it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cartigan wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.

Cartigan I find at most times this happens because people who listen to people like you or Professor Cinero and just assume this true. It is not.

I rather have a 20 th level rogue sneaking around than all the invisible wizards you can shake a stick at.

I rather have the purposely built fighter to do what he does best than in the end a buffed up cleric trying to be a fighter thru spells.

The balance has always been ou can easily counter magic a thousand ways actualy...but you can't counter a skill. If you ignore that sure it is unbalanced...but than that is a problem with you not the game.

I was about to point this out but you beat me to it.

as for spell casters apeing everyone else's schtick? it's all fun and games right up until the point someone drops a dispel magic then the spellcaster is right back where he / she started. While the rogue is still going to be hidden and the fighter is still going to be able to cause damage with that oversized pig sticker theyre carrying...

You mean the 3.5 Cleric who has heavy armor proficiency and only a need of 19 Wisdom (by level 18) to have full divine casting? And is only limited by 3/4 BAB and d8? Or the Druid who gets a large, powerful creature as inherent companion and can change into large, powerful creatures as a SU ability? Yeah, the Dispel Magic is TOTALLY going to make them look like nothing compared to the Fighter.
Sorry I thought we we discussing Pathfinder here, not 3.5.
Oh, that changes everything ENTIRELY. I mean now the Cleric has to take a FEAT to get heavy armor proficiency. And now the Druid is...

Wow are you trying to be a complete douchebag here?

Here, lets try this: Pretend for a moment that you and I are actually sitting / standing in front of one another having this conversation. If you can mouth off like that in meat space without having to worry about getting punched in the chops? Then YOU WIN THE INTERNETS. Otherwise? Slow your roll.

There were enough people complaining about the fact that they had to take an extra feat as a cleric to get thier heavy Armor proficiency back for it to be considered a nerf. The same thing applies to the changes to the Polymorph, excuse me, Beast Shape spells for the Druid.

I mean, do you actually PLAY or RUN the game or you one of these internet tough guys who do nothing but troll the boards looking to pick fights with people?

Paizo Employee PostMonster General

18 people marked this as a favorite.

This thread is unnecessary at this point. Pathfinder is what it is. We're not going to revise it or release a new edition anytime soon. If somebody thinks they can make a more balanced game, there's the PRD. It's OGL. Go for it.

151 to 167 of 167 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Why is Pathfinder so bad at balance? All Messageboards

©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.