What do you want to see fixed in Pathfinder?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

401 to 421 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Darkwing Duck wrote:
Reecy wrote:
See I think a lot of DMs forget how encounters are supposed to work, If you want a player to stress about a fight, you throw smaller stuff out there and keep hammering on them until they have used about half of their power, now is when it gets tricky you gotta keep them on the move. Once you can swing that they start stressing a little, no time to rest anything could jump out, now you have established the scene next YOU STRIKE!

So, your party is raiding an undead lair. They go three fights into it and the cleric is down.

They try to rest. But, more undead come on them (they are, after all, in an undead lair). The undead overwhelm them, because the GM designed the lair assuming there'd be a cleric.

Same problem.

I call this death by stupidity.

1) Didn't they have any means of resuscitating the cleric? Not even a potion? Not very foresighted.

2) Why didn't they retreat?

I recently rubbed my group's nose in this one. They went into a labyrinth of different sections around a 'neutral area'. They get halfway through one full of undead, and decide to rest up where they were. The watching lich, of course, attacked them as they were resting with all the forces at his disposal. They lived, just.

Then in the next section of labyrinth they did it again. Again, they were attacked. This time they got the hint that the middle of a powerful wizard's lair is not a safe place to rest.

All that said, the encounter should not be so scaled that without one character the party will fail. Struggle, yes, face dire odds, yes, fail, no.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

"Hey, I'll keep watch while you rest to regain spells."

That became a running joke after the first disaster in my group. :3


Paizo did a great job with the Beginner Box. I'd love to see that applied to the CRB!


Dabbler wrote:


I call this death by stupidity.

1) Didn't they have any means of resuscitating the cleric? Not even a potion? Not very foresighted.

2) Why didn't they retreat?

When I said that the cleric is down, I meant that the cleric is dead.

And no party I've ever played in has an infinite number of Raise Dead scrolls. It is entirely possible that a cleric can drop and not be raisable.

That does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).

Scarab Sages

Hrm... I would like Item Creation feats similar to Arcana Evolved... aka one for spell trigger items, one for single use items, etc.


Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).

That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?


Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?

Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?


Darkwing Duck wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?
Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?

Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.

Liberty's Edge

Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?
Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?
Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.

Or your DM is kind enough to not have enemies think.


ciretose wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?
Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?
Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.
Or your DM is kind enough to not have enemies think.

That depends on the enemies, Ciretose, as I am the DM I get to choose. And yes I have trapped parties before, when they were good enough to walk into it. However, I play foes as I understand them to think: a crypt of undead all hovering around their own tombs will generally not move around much, save perhaps to walk toward the living things. A fortress of humanoids expecting war will respond very differently to an incursion.

Liberty's Edge

Dabbler wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?
Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?
Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.
Or your DM is kind enough to not have enemies think.
That depends on the enemies, Ciretose, as I am the DM I get to choose. And yes I have trapped parties before, when they were good enough to walk into it.

It does depend on the enemy. But one would thing that an enemy intelligent enough to devise some sort of fortification would also be bright enough to know the layout of the place so they could get flank attackers, assuming it isn't just a linear layout.

You are the one saying players are smart enough not to leave live enemies behind. I'm simply praising the DM who sometimes has enemies smart enough to not just stand and be slaughtered, sequentially.


ciretose wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
that does not mean that the party should just head right out of the lair. Sometimes, just to get to the lair's entrance, the party needs to sleep first to respell, because the path back to the lair's entrance can have creatures in it (which have come in from side paths or from outside).
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap. I mean if they had cleared so far, then retreating should not be too difficult in normal circumstances. What was blocking their path?
Do the dungeons your GM uses resemble a bowling alley with no side corridors? If they do have side passages, then are there monsters in those side passages? If there are monsters in those side passages, then do those monsters ever wander into the path between you and the exit?
Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.
Or your DM is kind enough to not have enemies think.
That depends on the enemies, Ciretose, as I am the DM I get to choose. And yes I have trapped parties before, when they were good enough to walk into it.

It does depend on the enemy. But one would thing that an enemy intelligent enough to devise some sort of fortification would also be bright enough to know the layout of the place so they could get flank attackers, assuming it isn't just a linear layout.

You are the one saying players are smart enough not to leave live enemies behind. I'm simply praising the DM who sometimes has enemies smart enough to not just stand and be slaughtered, sequentially.

I think we are much more on the same page than you think. How my foes respond depends on the circumstances: Sometimes you are invading a fortress, literally, and there will be an organised response once they realise you are there. Sometimes you are exploring a ruin, and the creatures you encounter just happen to be there. Some will respond intelligently and some will not.

Undead, unless they have a powerful organising intelligence, tend to react as individuals and few of them react intelligently, though some certainly do - a pack of ghouls will respond differently to a wraith or a stack of zombies. Ghouls hunger for flesh, but they want to survive too, so the ghouls might bargain with those leaving rather than just trap them, to get them to drop the corpse on the basis that one free meal beats four you might have to die for.

Shadow Lodge

Dabbler wrote:
Hell no - my players are just smart enough to work through them to make sure they don't leave live enemies behind them.

Not always possible. For a good upcoming example...you don't "clear" Rappan Athuk...it clears YOU.

Shadow Lodge

Dabbler wrote:
That sounds like the dungeon was some kind of trap.

Isn't that kind of the point of dungeons?


Dabbler wrote:

And I am pointing out that where you have used the word 'most' you actually seem to mean a small minority. It's not snark, it's underlining that whatever you may think, the monk is considered very difficult if not impossible to make effective and functional in it's stated role. Clearly if there are that many threads, posts etc. out there, there is a serious problem.

You do realize that the small minority of people that post on this forum, that complain about the monk, are not the majority of people that play pathfinder?


A lot of it has to do with the layout of the dungeon as well.

Even a simple cross path (or even a 'T' junction) can create the problem I'm talking about. If you move up the long end of the 'T' and take a left turn, there's nothing stopping the critters which are down the right turn from coming up behind you.


Economics that makes sense.
Trade goods that have differnt prices depending on where you are.
Rules for players to own a business.

A place that is doing okay.


Kakitamike wrote:
Dabbler wrote:

And I am pointing out that where you have used the word 'most' you actually seem to mean a small minority. It's not snark, it's underlining that whatever you may think, the monk is considered very difficult if not impossible to make effective and functional in it's stated role. Clearly if there are that many threads, posts etc. out there, there is a serious problem.

You do realize that the small minority of people that post on this forum, that complain about the monk, are not the majority of people that play pathfinder?

Oh yes, I am aware of that, but the question is, is it a representative sample? Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing, but I for one have no reason to assume it isn't. At the same time, if we can demonstrate mechanically our stances, that combines with the sample of opinions should be fairly strong reinforcement.


Dabbler wrote:
Kakitamike wrote:
Dabbler wrote:

And I am pointing out that where you have used the word 'most' you actually seem to mean a small minority. It's not snark, it's underlining that whatever you may think, the monk is considered very difficult if not impossible to make effective and functional in it's stated role. Clearly if there are that many threads, posts etc. out there, there is a serious problem.

You do realize that the small minority of people that post on this forum, that complain about the monk, are not the majority of people that play pathfinder?
Oh yes, I am aware of that, but the question is, is it a representative sample? Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing, but I for one have no reason to assume it isn't. At the same time, if we can demonstrate mechanically our stances, that combines with the sample of opinions should be fairly strong reinforcement.

I guess it's just hard to quantify if something is or isn't broken or needs fixed, because we don't even really have an agreeable baseline to judge by. Even if everyone played the same core rules and the same access to magic gear, that doesn't even take into account what people see in their given campaign.

When other ultimate books came out, gunslinger and summoner eventually made it onto my list of classes i don't allow more of one of in a game, because i find them too powerful. Previously that class list was monk and cleric.

I'm sure there are a number of people that would just scratch their head at that statement, but again, I scratch my head at anyone who factors magic items into any theoretical class build.


Kakitamike wrote:
I guess it's just hard to quantify if something is or isn't broken or needs fixed, because we don't even really have an agreeable baseline to judge by.

Sure there is! The agreeable baseline is 'is the game funner than anything else I could be spending my time on'.


Kakitamike wrote:

I guess it's just hard to quantify if something is or isn't broken or needs fixed, because we don't even really have an agreeable baseline to judge by. Even if everyone played the same core rules and the same access to magic gear, that doesn't even take into account what people see in their given campaign.

When other ultimate books came out, gunslinger and summoner eventually made it onto my list of classes i don't allow more of one of in a game, because i find them too powerful. Previously that class list was monk and cleric.

I'm sure there are a number of people that would just scratch their head at that statement, but again, I scratch my head at anyone who factors magic items into any theoretical class build.

I can understand that, actually. Monks built for pure defence are extremely hard to pin down and hurt, after all - and they can run away faster than anyone. Problem is, they can't easily do much to a moderately strong foe. Monk defences are not the problem with the class, it's the inability to go up against a tough, non-humanoid melee opponent and not end up as sushi while missing completely.

401 to 421 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What do you want to see fixed in Pathfinder? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.