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!

Theorycrafting and why it's starting to bother me.


Gamer Talk

Andoran

It's like a week can't go by without someone coming on thes boards and going "OMG feat/spell/item/class etc i broken". "it's going to ruin the game and end the shelf life of PF as a rpg overnight.Then you read the threads and find out. Either that the OP is overreacting. That the perceived problme in question is not that big of a problem. And whatever is overpowered ends up either not being overpowered. Take for example the Ring of Continuation. Do I think it's slightly overpowered as a item yes. To a gambebreaking level to be honest no. Yes having a spell fo that length of time is a huge bonus. Ezxcept it cost 56K. The spells on it can be dispelled. A DM can outlaw it. Not to mention not too many parties I know are going to want to hoard that much money for a item that can benefit one person at a time. It assumes a player is going to abuse such an item all the time. Yeah having timestop for such a length of time is great. One problem do that too often and your left with just you and the DM at the table because the rest of the players got tired of doig nothing during timestop effect.

Don't get me wrong theorycrafting has it's place. Pointing out how horrible the flurry of blows is to monks and prone shooter imo. All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc. Or for something with a overwhelmong benefit little to no negative and tha can factual break a campaign. It just that the rate of theorycrafting makes me wonder if those engaging in it want to play PF because it seems like they find a new problem with every new product. So I'm not saying don't do it. Tone it down a little is all I'm asking.


I think that the problem there is the catastrophizing, not the theorycrafting. I do the latter all the time, creating thought-experiments of how different rules and characteristics would interact. Nothing wrong with that; it's part of how I enjoy the game, hand-in-hand with reporting errata and answering questions. But I'm an optimist, so I don't automatically see brokenness -- and I expect that you find catastrophizing to be just as annoying when it's about real life things ("I was just passed over for promotion once, so I'm doomed to a lifetime of mediocrity!").

Taldor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Think you will have better luck avoiding the threads yourself then getting people to post what you think is a legit concern.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Theorycrafting is how many, dare I say most, of the options for this game are created. The vast majority of things released are never playtested by Paizo and the freelancers are theoretically responsible for playtesting. There's no guarantee although some freelancers are better than others at this.

Quote:
All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc.

That there's a penalty, cost, feat, attribute and/or level requirement does not mean something is automagically balanced. That there are even 3 or 4 such penalties does not mean it's balanced. It being balanced means it's balanced.


Cheapy wrote:

Theorycrafting is how many, dare I say most, of the options for this game are created. The vast majority of things released are never playtested by Paizo and the freelancers are theoretically responsible for playtesting. There's no guarantee although some freelancers are better than others at this.

Quote:
All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc.
That there's a penalty, cost, feat, attribute and/or level requirement does not mean something is automagically balanced. That there are even 3 or 4 such penalties does not mean it's balanced. It being balanced means it's balanced.

Building on this idea, balancing in a tactical setting like Pathfinder is inherently difficult. An option can be very good in some settings and terrible in others (see: Mount class feature for Cavalier). Alternatively, a character can find themselves suddenly the subject of a lot of attention based on their focus once a situation changes (i.e. a social character built to Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate being taken from combat to a social situation).

Because of the breadth and scope of the gameplay, it is quite impossible to have a 100% balanced item/feature/feat. There are times when it's good and times when it's terrible. Balancing cost or risk with reward is difficult, and that's where most of these issues come into play.

I can tell you for certain, however, that the elimination of just map combat by itself drastically alters the way you calculate everything.


I know what you mean about the threads. I think they're rediculous too, as these "problems" have never in my memory presented themselves as problems at the table I play at. I must simply remind myself that others have different playstyles, and some of those styles push the rules to their limit.

Andoran

Cheapy wrote:


Theorycrafting is how many, dare I say most, of the options for this game are created. The vast majority of things released are never playtested by Paizo and the freelancers are theoretically responsible for playtesting. There's no guarantee although some freelancers are better than others at this.

As I said nothing against Theorycrafting. It's the worst case scenario doomsday end of the world PF is doomed type of theorycrafting that bothers me. That and the fact that usually those that engage in that style of catastrophizing have either not playtested the offending material. Or assume it will impact the game in the most negative way possible based on opinion not factual information. I still think Fighters are underpowered. Not to the extent that it makes PF unplayable. Somehow I doubt James and the other Devs approach creating new material by sending each other "OMG! we can't put this in the next book it's broken" style emails. I think they are more levelheaded, rational and have better things to do than catastrophizing all day long.

It's becoming a weekly if not some cases daily occurence that we see catastrophizing. Yes one can ignore it yet imo becoming so frequent that after awhile imo impossible to ignore. Wish the devs would make a board rule mkaing it so that catastrophizing style thread shou;d be kept to a minimum. Proper theorcrafting to me is "hey guys I have a new class/feat/item etc for PF I'm going to post it up and I want your honest feedback". Not taking something in the game posting a catastrophizing scenario while also expecting validation of the scenario.

Cheapy wrote:


That there's a penalty, cost, feat, attribute and/or level requirement does not mean something is automagically balanced. That there are even 3 or 4 such penalties does not mean it's balanced. It being balanced means it's balanced.

Uh no usually it is actually. As a gamer in your opinion it may not be balanced yet 99% of the time it is. Anatgonize imo non errata is a good example of the 1%. Not to mention if something that requires me to have a penalty, cost, feat, attribute and level requirement it better damn well be worth be the investment. No way am I investing so much for a mediocre choice at the end.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm saying that the mere existence of a cost, etc does not mean something is balanced. Are you saying that the mere existence of a cost, etc does mean it's balanced, or did I misinterpret your "uh no usually it is actually"?

Andoran

Cheapy wrote:
I'm saying that the mere existence of a cost, etc does not mean something is balanced. Are you saying that the mere existence of a cost, etc does mean it's balanced, or did I misinterpret your "uh no usually it is actually"?

Yes I am actually. As long as the benefit I receive is not to unbalanced and has some sort of cost(s) then yes I think that balnaces out the unbalance. Or are you ones of those types that beleives that for players to get a benefit it needs to also have a overwhelmingly crippling penalty. As a player if I pay my dues so to speak I expect a reward. As my players feel the same way.

Take the Ring of Continuation. I would reduce it to a 12 hour time frame. Anything less is a joke imo for a cost of 56K and the risk of it being dispelled or stolen. I sure as hell am nor going to spend that much money on a item that has a short duration. Long casting time balanced out by a cost in miney, the ability to be dispelled and or stolen.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I know what you mean about the threads. I think they're rediculous too, as these "problems" have never in my memory presented themselves as problems at the table I play at. I must simply remind myself that others have different playstyles, and some of those styles push the rules to their limit.

I don't know sometimes. With the amount of catastrophizing certain posters do it makes me wonder why they even play PF. If as a person your going out of your way to find stuff broken in the game imo somehwat of a conflicted individual who must have a love/hate relationship wiht PF.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think he's saying that the following questions should be asked:

Is it balanced vs the cost?

The cost can be far more that the GP value or feat slot.

"Balanced" must be defined

"It being balanced means it's balanced" is not a definition of balanced. It's a self-reference.


memorax wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I know what you mean about the threads. I think they're rediculous too, as these "problems" have never in my memory presented themselves as problems at the table I play at. I must simply remind myself that others have different playstyles, and some of those styles push the rules to their limit.
I don't know sometimes. With the amount of catastrophizing certain posters do it makes me wonder why they even play PF. If as a person your going out of your way to find stuff broken in the game imo somehwat of a conflicted individual who must have a love/hate relationship wiht PF.

And perhaps too much time on their hands.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:

Swift Movements

You move swifter than most, doing everything just a little bit faster.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Dodge
Benefit: You can perform an extra standard action on your turns.
Normal: You may only perform one standard action per turn.

Since this has two prereqs and a feat cost, which qualifies for the "mere existence of a cost" that you said makes something balanced, you believe this is a balanced feat, right?

If not, what is your actual view? Saying that's an unbalanced feat would contradict your statement that the mere existence of a cost balances something out. I'm saying that there's a value judgment in the cost of things.

If the mere existence of a cost balances out a feat, or anything else, really, then what's the point of having game designers? Anyone can slap costs on things in the game, and according to all you've said so far, this would be balanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Looks like this thread is degenerating already. Someone is posting a straw man argument.


memorax wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I know what you mean about the threads. I think they're rediculous too, as these "problems" have never in my memory presented themselves as problems at the table I play at. I must simply remind myself that others have different playstyles, and some of those styles push the rules to their limit.
I don't know sometimes. With the amount of catastrophizing certain posters do it makes me wonder why they even play PF. If as a person your going out of your way to find stuff broken in the game imo somehwat of a conflicted individual who must have a love/hate relationship wiht PF.

Agreed. EVERY game has loopholes and exploits. People that go out of their way to theory-craft the most ridiculous scenarios to prove a point are just ruining the game for themselves and anyone gullible enough to listen.

2 former gaming buddies of mine used theory-crafting and rules exploits as their justification for dumping 3.5 for 4e. They couldn't just say "Hey, we prefer 4e and find it more fun." Nope, their cause was "we made the most ridiculous, broken characters we could make in 3.5, and saw how broken the whole system was so we switched to 4e..." I'm not exaggerating; that's what they said.

If people stop playing table-top RPG's like the DPR Olympics, I think there'd be a lot fewer of these catastrophizing threads popping up every other day, in my opinion.

Andoran

darkwarriorkarg wrote:

I think he's saying that the following questions should be asked:

Is it balanced vs the cost?

The cost can be far more that the GP value or feat slot.

"Balanced" must be defined

"It being balanced means it's balanced" is not a definition of balanced. It's a self-reference.

Imo about 90-95% of the stuff in PF is balanced vs the cost. Do we have 5-10% that is not balanced sure. Then again which rpg on the makrket can hold the title of being perfectly balanced. Balanced must be defined except imo that is up to the devs and not the players. The devs imo are the final say. If they leave the ring of continuation as is then they the ultimate authority see it as balanced. Dms can of curse houserule it.

Andoran

darkwarriorkarg wrote:

Looks like this thread is degenerating already. Someone is posting a straw man argument.

Agreed and seconded. Was going to respond to Cheapy last post but really a feat you never ever will see outside of a DM houserules.

But hey why not try and improve the feat:

Swift Movements

You move swifter than most, doing everything just a little bit faster.
Prerequisites: BAB +12 or more Dex 21+, Dodge, mobolity, spring attack. must be wearing light armor and at least 15th level.
Benefit: You can perform an extra standard action on your turns. Only in light armor and no shield. Only once every three rounds.
Normal: You may only perform one standard action per turn.

something I can see being used at a table. Taking a standard action is a decent advantage. Coupled with requirements.


I think the core books are fairly good with proper cost/benefits for feats and abilities and so forth, but I'm not so convinced about newer books.

I think one of the reasons core stuff is reasonably balanced is because it's been through so many design and play(test) cycles that the true value of a given power has become understood.

It's a lot harder to properly price new things.

I also think that the most dangerous things are open-ended items and powers. For example the Ring of Continuation: there are so many spells, you have to check them all to figure out how powerful this item really is. And then you discover that Inner Sea Magic has a lot of round/level self-buffs that become ridiculous with The Ring.

That's the problem with open-ended stuff: it stacks very weirdly with other products, and the more products there are, the bigger the surprises. In general since 3.x there was a move to reduce this phenomenon, by assigning types to bonuses for example.

Another example of open-ended powers being risky: Paragon Surge.

Andoran

I amd possibly others in this thread are not saying that when a concern is valid that pointing out a flaw or a too strong of a benefit does not have it's place. It's when it happens weekly and sometimes daily on rules that more often than not are not broken or need fixing and a poster is catastrophizing a doomsday scenario with a whole bunch of "if"s along with ridiculous scenarios that 99% of the time never happen at any gaming table.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
darkwarriorkarg wrote:

I think he's saying that the following questions should be asked:

Is it balanced vs the cost?

The cost can be far more that the GP value or feat slot.

"Balanced" must be defined

"It being balanced means it's balanced" is not a definition of balanced. It's a self-reference.

If he's saying it must be balanced vs the cost and that there's a value judgment of the cost that must be taken into consideration, then he and I are in agreement. But when I asked for a clarification on if he saying the mere existence of a cost means it's balanced, he said that was what he was saying.

Perhaps "mere existence" needs to be defined to make sure we're all on the same page: If it has a cost, no matter what it is, then there's a "mere existence" of a cost.

But I suppose this isn't terribly related to the "tone down the theorycrafting!" message, so I'll read all the responses to my posts and then save them for a thread I've been thinking about for days.


Right on, I mean, if something IS "broken" as in, not working as intended, then discussion should be raised. If someone is using a cantrip to overthrow a kingdom, then there might be some cause for alarm.

All I'm saying is that if someone has to make a series of unlikely hoops to jump through in order to present something as broken in a very niche, or unlikely situation, maybe they're just desperate for attention.

The beauty part is, and this will quickly get dismissed as some fallacy or another, is that all groups can adjust as needed on the fly. We're not tied to a server and video engine, restricted by processing speeds and connectivity in order to see a change; we can just say "Hey, this really doesn't fit our game. It's outta here." Official errata and rules fixes are always best, as they create a standard for the player base to draw from, but really, if it gets bad, we're capable of fixing it ourselves.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It appears what memorax was actually saying was that there needs to be some value judgment involved in the cost of something. So we're on the same page. Good :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:
I amd possibly others in this thread are not saying that when a concern is valid that pointing out a flaw or a too strong of a benefit does not have it's place. It's when it happens weekly and sometimes daily on rules that more often than not are not broken or need fixing and a poster is catastrophizing a doomsday scenario with a whole bunch of "if"s along with ridiculous scenarios that 99% of the time never happen at any gaming table.

The recent doomsday-scenario threads about Magic Item Creation come to mind.


Josh M. wrote:
memorax wrote:
I amd possibly others in this thread are not saying that when a concern is valid that pointing out a flaw or a too strong of a benefit does not have it's place. It's when it happens weekly and sometimes daily on rules that more often than not are not broken or need fixing and a poster is catastrophizing a doomsday scenario with a whole bunch of "if"s along with ridiculous scenarios that 99% of the time never happen at any gaming table.
The recent doomsday-scenario threads about Magic Item Creation come to mind.

+1 to this.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem comes when someone is actively trying to break the game, and that becomes something that is valued and praised by the community.

If something is broken, causing unintended consequences that throw off balance or verisimilitude, it should be pointed out and fixed. And if the post is "Hey guys, I think the devs missed this loophole", that type of thread should be praised.

If, on the other hand, someone posts "I gotz this unstoppable power move, I am tey AWESOME!" then gets mad when someone points out that A)It doesn't work or B)It shouldn't work, we should go all Charlie the Unicorn and shun them.

For example, the recent potted plant of doom in another thread...

If you have a good GM with a strong GM hand, Item Creation and theorycraft aren't an issue. But many of us have seen good groups and games ruined by selfish players trying to beat the game rather than play the game.

We should all be trying to make the game the most fun it can be for all the players at the table, rather than trying to figure out creative ways to subvert the rules.


Gaming groups are unbalanced and should be removed from the next edition.

Andoran

ciretose wrote:

The problem comes when someone is actively trying to break the game, and that becomes something that is valued and praised by the community.

If something is broken, causing unintended consequences that throw off balance or verisimilitude, it should be pointed out and fixed. And if the post is "Hey guys, I think the devs missed this loophole", that type of thread should be praised.

If, on the other hand, someone posts "I gotz this unstoppable power move, I am tey AWESOME!" then gets mad when someone points out that A)It doesn't work or B)It shouldn't work, we should go all Charlie the Unicorn and shun them.

For example, the recent potted plant of doom in another thread...

If you have a good GM with a strong GM hand, Item Creation and theorycraft aren't an issue. But many of us have seen good groups and games ruined by selfish players trying to beat the game rather than play the game.

We should all be trying to make the game the most fun it can be for all the players at the table, rather than trying to figure out creative ways to subvert the rules.

+1 to all of the above. What it really comes down to is that what makes the catastrophizing stuyle threads just bothersome to read after a certain point. Is that unlike say the change to flurry of blows the catastrophizing style threads no only assume the worst case scenario it assumes a whole bunch of things that usually never happen at the table.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Most of those discussions are just one or more people desperate to prove they are smart.

Some of them actually are smart.

But it has nothing to do with actually playing the game, let alone playing it (or GMing it) well.


Somethings are going to be stronger than others, however that doesn't mean everyone is going to exploit the options to their full potential. Just pay attention to your group and communicate with them and everything should be fine. I've had times where I've asked my DM if this seems a little too powerful and sometimes he has said said and other times he has said no. A lot of theory crafting doesn't come into play. In the end a lot of people just use theory crafting as a topic to talk about.


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Gaming groups are unbalanced and should be removed from the next edition.

We need to create perfect Pathfinder AIs who can simulate both the players and the DM. Only then will we have peace.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I have to agree with several of the folks here. Theorycrafting in and of itself is not a problem. It can be fun and also a good way to learn the rules better.

It is when theorycrafting is combined with a super dose of dram and panic that it become a pain. Mose issues can be resolved with some action by the GM or a minor erata. But almost none of the issue will "break" the game and make in unplayable.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Paizo gaming universe... even for PFS players has an existence beyond these boards.

For most of that universe, the titanic quakes of these threads are scarcely a ripple in the pond.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:

The Paizo gaming universe... even for PFS players has an existence beyond these boards.

For most of that universe, the titanic quakes of these threads are scarcely a ripple in the pond.

That sounds pretty nihilistic as you could argue that for all human endeavors.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:

It's like a week can't go by without someone coming on thes boards and going "OMG feat/spell/item/class etc i broken". "it's going to ruin the game and end the shelf life of PF as a rpg overnight.Then you read the threads and find out. Either that the OP is overreacting. That the perceived problme in question is not that big of a problem. And whatever is overpowered ends up either not being overpowered. Take for example the Ring of Continuation. Do I think it's slightly overpowered as a item yes. To a gambebreaking level to be honest no. Yes having a spell fo that length of time is a huge bonus. Ezxcept it cost 56K. The spells on it can be dispelled. A DM can outlaw it. Not to mention not too many parties I know are going to want to hoard that much money for a item that can benefit one person at a time. It assumes a player is going to abuse such an item all the time. Yeah having timestop for such a length of time is great. One problem do that too often and your left with just you and the DM at the table because the rest of the players got tired of doig nothing during timestop effect.

Don't get me wrong theorycrafting has it's place. Pointing out how horrible the flurry of blows is to monks and prone shooter imo. All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc. Or for something with a overwhelmong benefit little to no negative and tha can factual break a campaign. It just that the rate of theorycrafting makes me wonder if those engaging in it want to play PF because it seems like they find a new problem with every new product. So I'm not saying don't do it. Tone it down a little is all I'm asking.

The item is still troublesome at best. As for the GM can outlaw it, that is never a good defense. That just means there is a problem if that is the common solution.

I do understand your concern, but there are players(will abuse any rule they can) like that and GM that dont/wont stop them. Now you might say that is the GM's fault, but that does not change that fact that the problem might be there if something is easy to abuse. I also see calling something out as broken when it is not to be annoying. Often the issue is that the group's playstyle does not mesh well with that particular option.


chaoseffect wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Gaming groups are unbalanced and should be removed from the next edition.
We need to create perfect Pathfinder AIs who can simulate both the players and the DM. Only then will we have peace.

We can call it... Painet.

It will then decide that human gamers are the most broken and will then take over the world in order to eliminate them.

In order to eliminate the leader of the gamer resistancetance, it will send plastic covered cast-irone figurines into the past in order to corrupt him.


wraithstrike wrote:


The item is still troublesome at best. As for the GM can outlaw it, that is never a good defense. That just means there is a problem if that is the common solution.

I do understand your concern, but there are players(will abuse any rule they can) like that and GM that dont/wont stop them. Now you might say that is the GM's fault, but that does not change that fact that the problem might be there if something is easy to abuse. I also see calling something out as broken when it is not to be annoying. Often the issue is that the group's playstyle does not mesh well with that particular option.

Or that particular player. I've experienced selfish powergamers inserted into a group of friends (due to lack of players). Did not end well. We had the LG Cleric of Tyr (it was FR) behaving like a CN cleric of tempus who spent all his time self buffing (fights were generally over by the time he got to them).

Pretty much sounded like one of those mythical DBZ style 3.5 cleric players I heard about. Except he was useless AND irritating. He self booted himself from the game the day before we were going to do it to him. Diplomatic methods rolled right over him as asking him to tone it down was "telling him how to play his character".

Give someone like that an item that could be abused and he WILL abuse it. Because he can and he'll run right over the GM and everyone else. He's having fun, too bad you're not.

Sometimes people confuse the issue and what they have is a bad player making up for inadequacies in life rather than a bad rule/item/exploit.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:

It's like a week can't go by without someone coming on thes boards and going "OMG feat/spell/item/class etc i broken". "it's going to ruin the game and end the shelf life of PF as a rpg overnight.Then you read the threads and find out. Either that the OP is overreacting. That the perceived problme in question is not that big of a problem. And whatever is overpowered ends up either not being overpowered. Take for example the Ring of Continuation. Do I think it's slightly overpowered as a item yes. To a gambebreaking level to be honest no. Yes having a spell fo that length of time is a huge bonus. Ezxcept it cost 56K. The spells on it can be dispelled. A DM can outlaw it. Not to mention not too many parties I know are going to want to hoard that much money for a item that can benefit one person at a time. It assumes a player is going to abuse such an item all the time. Yeah having timestop for such a length of time is great. One problem do that too often and your left with just you and the DM at the table because the rest of the players got tired of doig nothing during timestop effect.

Don't get me wrong theorycrafting has it's place. Pointing out how horrible the flurry of blows is to monks and prone shooter imo. All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc. Or for something with a overwhelmong benefit little to no negative and tha can factual break a campaign. It just that the rate of theorycrafting makes me wonder if those engaging in it want to play PF because it seems like they find a new problem with every new product. So I'm not saying don't do it. Tone it down a little is all I'm asking.

O boy... Where to start.

A. This is a Forum... online... about Pathfinder... What do you expect? Half the people who come to these boards post for enjoyment of interacting with others that have a love for Pathfinder or Table Top gaming in general... the other half post to DEBATE. I bolded that for a reason. There will always be extreme views, embellished examples, straw man arguments, and outright lies. Its the nature of ANY high traffic forum site. I'm also a huge sports fan. THE SAME thing happens on the blogs and forums on ESPN.

B. People love to theorycraft because its a meta-game within a game. Cant get your PF fix... come to the boards and post up the most resent exploit/combo/feat/ect you recently found. Then set back and get ready to post up rules, FAQ's, have lengthy debates whether something is RAW or RAI, ect. Its just a way for people to get together and discuss the game they love.

C. The nature of the internet lends itself to snap judgements and instant proclamations of "OMG feat/spell/item/class etc i broken". There is little to no accountability and zero repercussions for what you say. Until someone can reach through a screen and smack someone for saying something dumb... you will have to ignore it.

In conclusion. Try and understand where you are and what the motives are of most posters. And don't get upset or annoyed by posters who post what they feel is broken. You yourself say there is a time and place, but who's to say what you think is valid others might think is hogwash. Take what is said here with a grain of salt, and if you get annoyed simply move on to another post.

My 2 cents.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
chaoseffect wrote:
LazarX wrote:

The Paizo gaming universe... even for PFS players has an existence beyond these boards.

For most of that universe, the titanic quakes of these threads are scarcely a ripple in the pond.

That sounds pretty nihilistic as you could argue that for all human endeavors.

It's the opposite really. It highlights the fact that many more people just play the game than spend their time theorycranking and nerdraging in this venue.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Dragonamedrake wrote:
memorax wrote:

It's like a week can't go by without someone coming on thes boards and going "OMG feat/spell/item/class etc i broken". "it's going to ruin the game and end the shelf life of PF as a rpg overnight.Then you read the threads and find out. Either that the OP is overreacting. That the perceived problme in question is not that big of a problem. And whatever is overpowered ends up either not being overpowered. Take for example the Ring of Continuation. Do I think it's slightly overpowered as a item yes. To a gambebreaking level to be honest no. Yes having a spell fo that length of time is a huge bonus. Ezxcept it cost 56K. The spells on it can be dispelled. A DM can outlaw it. Not to mention not too many parties I know are going to want to hoard that much money for a item that can benefit one person at a time. It assumes a player is going to abuse such an item all the time. Yeah having timestop for such a length of time is great. One problem do that too often and your left with just you and the DM at the table because the rest of the players got tired of doig nothing during timestop effect.

Don't get me wrong theorycrafting has it's place. Pointing out how horrible the flurry of blows is to monks and prone shooter imo. All that I ask is that you take a good hard look at whatever you think is broken and overpowered and make sure it has no actual penaties, costs, feat taxes attribute and level requirements etc. Or for something with a overwhelmong benefit little to no negative and tha can factual break a campaign. It just that the rate of theorycrafting makes me wonder if those engaging in it want to play PF because it seems like they find a new problem with every new product. So I'm not saying don't do it. Tone it down a little is all I'm asking.

O boy... Where to start.

A. This is a Forum... online... about Pathfinder... What do you expect? Half the people who come to these boards post for enjoyment of interacting with others that have a love for Pathfinder or Table Top gaming in...

To lazy to write it myself but I agree 100 % with Dragonamedrake .. even if deep down I would like to argue ^^


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Now, here is the thing.

There are a number of quotes on this board from the developers, from Paizo staff...that have admitted that the atmosphere here has driven them away from involvement in the forums.

They just don't post, because some of the posts (in their words and the words of other community members) don't treat them as human.

When we fall that far in how we treat one another, something is wrong. Now, we can say: they should have thicker skin!

However, the responsibility lies on both sides.

It's had very real consequences, too. The very folks wanting the answers so badly are also the folks driving away the interest and involvement of the people who can give them.

So we can't say there isn't an issue--not when there are very real consequences. We can't shrug it off and say, "it's not our fault!"

We can, however, look to the future and work to make that future, and these boards, a better place. We are all capable of that.

The problem isn't with theorycrafting; it's with attitude. There are folks who've made an effort to moderate these sorts of things, to bridge the gap, as it were. Wraithstrike is one of them; but, he and others can't do it alone.

Yes, this sort of thing "happens on the internet." However, a community is everyone's responsibility to maintain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When it's getting bad enough that the people who made the game won't come around, it's time for a change.

Andoran

I'm also starting to find well it's the internet can't be helped to be less a reason and more of a excuse. It's not like humna beings are like animals and make decisions based on instinct. We can think things through. Nor are posters forced to post anything. As I'm also not forced to read a thread. Except it's hard to ignore when everytime a new book is released a whole bunch of catastrophizing style threads appear usually from the same posters crafting doomsday scenarios only they can see.

Theorycrafting has it's place. Nothing is every going to convince me that Prone Shooter is a good feat. I found that out from a theorycrafting thread in the first place. It's when it's "omg! it's the end of the world because ring of continuation is a item in UE. I aslo agree with Josh that it keeps the devs away from the boards and that's not a good thing. Would not surprise me if the devs are getting annoyed at this point.


On the other hand some real problems get done away with as theorycrafting while they are soundly rooted in the experience of critical 3.5->PF players, such as monks and rogues being below par, the caster/martial disparity, off the RNG issues and so on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That's something that bothers me. The experiences and lessons of 3.5 aren't really being re-analyzed in PF.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A lot of the theorycrafting does seem to be groupthink.


Cheapy wrote:
That's something that bothers me. The experiences and lessons of 3.5 aren't really being re-analyzed in PF.

I wholeheartedly agree there. New toys are fun and all, but just changing the words around and changing the dice used does not always equal "fixed."


It isn't that I mind, so much, the arguing that is part of this hobby, as much as it is the lack of "make up sex" that should come afterward.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gamer Life / Gamer Talk / Theorycrafting and why it's starting to bother me. 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.