Magic: The Actual Problems


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

701 to 714 of 714 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Nicos wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
due to the way magic resistance worked
Yeah, crazy f***ing notion, it actually made things resistant to magic.
the days when the golems were scary.

The days when everything was scary. 3x was good for what it was, but it sure wasn't as good as its predecessors at high level. E6 was probably the best house rule that happened to 3x.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

3.x might have been a much better game if every even-numbered level was a completely dead level. IE, you got absolutely nothing...making a 20th level whatever functionally the same as a 10th level whatever in the actual published rules.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
knightnday wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
the secret fire wrote:

I find that a whole lot of the imbalances that people complain about disappear when the DM simply exercises a bit of executive discretion.

So, basically, ignoring and house ruling.

I wish people didn't forget Pathfinder is 3x with a different grapple system and some consolidated skills. It isn't a "fix" of 3x and still has all of the same problems. 3x was fun from a playing standpoint, builds are interesting to create, but in actual play it is a sluggish mess that breaks down as soon as spell casters realize they can do everything.

Houseruling doesn't excuse poor design, nor does it make up for it. It's a bandaid.

Perhaps it doesn't excuse or make up for it, but house rules --- whether they are small or as complicated as Kirth's documents -- can make the game function quite well. It may be a bandaid, but unless or until something else comes along that answers all the questions and corrects all the problems it certainly allows the game to function. And for quite a number of people, that's all they are asking for.

The point is, without a lot of work or DM fiat, 3x/PF doesn't, not by RAW. You have to do a ton of mental gymnastics to look the other way or ignore (or flat out tell players the book is irrelevant) to make it work for everyone. That is bad game design. Now, given Paizo's stated goal with Pathfinder when the play test was going on (backward compatibility), their hands were tied and they really couldn't fix anything.

The problem is, somewhere in the '90s, people stopped wanting to play games and started wanting to have story hour with pointless dice rolling that meant nothing (seriously, if the dice mean anything, characters would die a lot more than they do in modern gaming). AD&D was a game, and you had to actually think about your limitations to survive. Magic users had to be cautious, and even when they were powerful, they weren't the end all be all. Even Tenser had to recruit a couple of mercenary fighters to save Mordenkainen's bacon in the original Maure Castle game, because wizards couldn't do EVERYTHING.

Grand Lodge

houstonderek wrote:
knightnday wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
the secret fire wrote:

I find that a whole lot of the imbalances that people complain about disappear when the DM simply exercises a bit of executive discretion.

So, basically, ignoring and house ruling.

I wish people didn't forget Pathfinder is 3x with a different grapple system and some consolidated skills. It isn't a "fix" of 3x and still has all of the same problems. 3x was fun from a playing standpoint, builds are interesting to create, but in actual play it is a sluggish mess that breaks down as soon as spell casters realize they can do everything.

Houseruling doesn't excuse poor design, nor does it make up for it. It's a bandaid.

Perhaps it doesn't excuse or make up for it, but house rules --- whether they are small or as complicated as Kirth's documents -- can make the game function quite well. It may be a bandaid, but unless or until something else comes along that answers all the questions and corrects all the problems it certainly allows the game to function. And for quite a number of people, that's all they are asking for.

The point is, without a lot of work or DM fiat, 3x/PF doesn't, not by RAW. You have to do a ton of mental gymnastics to look the other way or ignore (or flat out tell players the book is irrelevant) to make it work for everyone. That is bad game design. Now, given Paizo's stated goal with Pathfinder when the play test was going on (backward compatibility), their hands were tied and they really couldn't fix anything.

The problem is, somewhere in the '90s, people stopped wanting to play games and started wanting to have story hour with pointless dice rolling that meant nothing (seriously, if the dice mean anything, characters would die a lot more than they do in modern gaming). AD&D was a game, and you had to actually think about your limitations to survive. Magic users had to be cautious, and even when they were powerful, they weren't the end all be all. Even Tenser had to recruit a...

Not quite sure what the problem is with "story hour" is (you don't really identify it in your post). Also, if your die rolling is pointless then your DM is probably failing at the whole "story hour" thing but that is a problem with the game as it is being run, not the game itself.


Actually was just writing about this in another thread but basically:
Note that this specifically targets 3.5 / PF Casters

====================================
Why 3.5 / PF Casters are AWESOME
====================================

* Frequency - Any spell you can cast, no matter how powerful, can be cast the next day with a good rest. Also you never have to worry about casting for more than six seconds. This is even better, because in PF, all those cantrips can be cast as often as you like! No need for rituals and magic circles in this game, you can summon a demon in six seconds flat.

* Access - Start with all those cantrips. Did you level up? Take 2 more spells. Are you a divine caster? Take ALL the spells. Don't have a spell? Take out your gold pouch, because we'll find some scrolls to scribe.

* Components are a cinch - Some say casting is expensive, and it may be true, but hey at least it's convenient. Don't ever need to worry about those weird, unique, and flavorful components with the spell component pouch, this is a game. Don't have that unique expensive item? That's cool, as long as you have the gold equivalent, the spell will be fine. God, could you imagine having to go on a quest for that stuff? Or being one of those weirdos sacrificing a virgin when they could have just payed for gold? Those penny pinching sickos...

* Not so Vulnerable - Man can you imagine being a caster of ye olden day when so much as a scratch while waving your arms, pulling out the right components, and meticulously chanting the proper verses would disrupt your whole spell? Well now as long as you concentrate, you can manage that spell.

* No Penalties - Magic has been perfected to science, unless your talking about that wild magic nonsense. But this civilized magic will blow your mind, well not yours, this magic is controlled and will only blow your opponent's mind away. Guaranteed for expected result. No being possessed, no worrying about unknown side effects, no losing your life for casting. Phew. We like to be risk free in this getup.


Kthulhu wrote:
I've been thinking about a neat little item that could be introduced into the game. I don't have a name for it yet, but it would be a small orb, approximately the size of a marble. And it basically radiates a dead magic zone in a 25 foot radius. The really fun bit is that when you bring two or more of these little orbs together, instead of it being two 25 foot radius spheres of dead magic zone, they merge together and form a single dead magic zone sphere, with twice the radius (ie, 50 ft).

Dead magic zones like 2E FR? I did run an FR adventure not so long ago in 2E and PCs were a little shocked by dead magic zones and shadow magic. We had a wild mage as well. I have added the things from 3E I liked to 2E (no level limits, no racial restrictions tweaked human, ascending AC and BAB) and the game runs so much better.

My perfect D&D would be some sort of 2E and 3.5 hybrid or a fixed 3.5 with modular magic item creation rules so magic items can go under DM control again.

Grand Lodge

So a fix would be to bring magic back in line with 2E and MR instead of SR?


houstonderek wrote:
The problem is, somewhere in the '90s, people stopped wanting to play games and started wanting to have story hour with pointless dice rolling that meant nothing (seriously, if the dice mean anything, characters would die a lot more than they do in modern gaming). AD&D was a game, and you had to actually think about your limitations to survive. Magic users had to be cautious, and even when they were powerful, they weren't the end all be all. Even Tenser had to recruit a couple of mercenary fighters to save Mordenkainen's bacon in the original Maure Castle game, because wizards couldn't do EVERYTHING.

This seems to me more a complaint about versions (or certain play-styles) of D&D from 2e and later, rather than about games in general. It's not as if D&D was ever noted as being a particularly deadly system, especially in higher-level play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Larkspire wrote:


You got it Bave,I see what your talking about as well...there is a jump around 9th also.
That's also my pet theory about why organized play just happens to wrap up around 12th level.
At least it was last I checked.

Well, I suppose that might be why or maybe that the game dramatically slows down around 11th-ish level because of the time involved in the adjudication of all the spells, effects, and special abilities of everyone/thing involved.


Raltus wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I did bold a part, to me the RAW don't say anything about not...

Reading the description, it looks like in order for the object to disappear when picked up, it has to be put in a pouch or tucked away somehow. If you just pick something up, it's still visible. So I think the flour thing still works for that.

Plus, there's flour on the floor and until they lift their feet there's gonna be foot shaped holes in the flower.


houstonderek wrote:
knightnday wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
the secret fire wrote:

I find that a whole lot of the imbalances that people complain about disappear when the DM simply exercises a bit of executive discretion.

So, basically, ignoring and house ruling.

I wish people didn't forget Pathfinder is 3x with a different grapple system and some consolidated skills. It isn't a "fix" of 3x and still has all of the same problems. 3x was fun from a playing standpoint, builds are interesting to create, but in actual play it is a sluggish mess that breaks down as soon as spell casters realize they can do everything.

Houseruling doesn't excuse poor design, nor does it make up for it. It's a bandaid.

Perhaps it doesn't excuse or make up for it, but house rules --- whether they are small or as complicated as Kirth's documents -- can make the game function quite well. It may be a bandaid, but unless or until something else comes along that answers all the questions and corrects all the problems it certainly allows the game to function. And for quite a number of people, that's all they are asking for.
The point is, without a lot of work or DM fiat, 3x/PF doesn't, not by RAW. You have to do a ton of mental gymnastics to look the other way or ignore (or flat out tell players the book is irrelevant) to make it work for everyone. That is bad game design. Now, given Paizo's stated goal with Pathfinder when the play test was going on (backward compatibility), their hands were tied and they really couldn't fix anything.

You've put your finger on the problem in Pathfinder, which is backwards compatibility. We shall see what becomes of Unchained. The problem is that once certain genies are out of the bottle, they're very difficult to put back in. Can Paizo roll back the assembly line-style distribution of magic items without alienating a lot of their customer base? I dunno. Can they address the caster/martial divide without simply nerfing the casters? I dunno. It's a difficult position. D&D 3rd ed. was great in some ways, which is why the chassis remains popular to this day. It hugely liberalized and improved certain portions of the game, but it also broke many things that had previously functioned well.

Quote:
The problem is, somewhere in the '90s, people stopped wanting to play games and started wanting to have story hour with pointless dice rolling that meant nothing (seriously, if the dice mean anything, characters would die a lot more than they do in modern gaming). AD&D was a game, and you had to actually think about your limitations to survive. Magic users had to be cautious, and even when they were powerful, they weren't the end all be all. Even Tenser had to recruit a...

I hear your complaint about the changing face of gaming culture. I think the popularity of 3.5 and its ever-increasing excesses combined with the spread of the internet at that time crystallized and normalized some of the worst things that had always been part of the culture - powergaming, monty hall-style treasure, rules-lawyering, etc. A lot of the behaviors older gamers used to laugh at are now flaunted openly, with neither irony nor shame.

But people will be people, and gaming culture is in some ways downstream of gaming rules. It's natural that people who grow up playing under decadent rules would become decadents, themselves. Paizo could still take the game in a new and positive direction. I'm optimistic, and think the culture of excess has probably reached its zenith. 5th ed is an obvious attempt to roll back some of the cheese of previous editions and recapture some of the wonder of O/AD&D. Unchained will probably be another step in this direction - a better one, I expect.

Grand Lodge

I haven't been playing nearly as long as a lot of people on these boards, about 10 years is all I have between 3.5 and PF, with some star wars saga mixed in there. I guess spells are all in how you look at them, if you as a player want to just be everything than you need to play in a game where everyone else is like minded.

You can power through all that oppose you and collect your shinnies at the end, similar to video games. If you want to play a story and have some characters with the ability to not just I cast x spell roll xdx dice your dead, than make them more well rounded.

Same for Martial, don't play a fighter with 7 int because you want a 20 str right off the bat. Make him less to start with and build him up.

To each their own, magic can be reigned in with some mundane or just good strategies but power games or min/max people or theory crafters don't want that.

We all have different play styles, if magic doesn't work you than do something about it, if it does leave it be.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zardnaar wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
I've been thinking about a neat little item that could be introduced into the game. I don't have a name for it yet, but it would be a small orb, approximately the size of a marble. And it basically radiates a dead magic zone in a 25 foot radius. The really fun bit is that when you bring two or more of these little orbs together, instead of it being two 25 foot radius spheres of dead magic zone, they merge together and form a single dead magic zone sphere, with twice the radius (ie, 50 ft).

Dead magic zones like 2E FR? I did run an FR adventure not so long ago in 2E and PCs were a little shocked by dead magic zones and shadow magic. We had a wild mage as well. I have added the things from 3E I liked to 2E (no level limits, no racial restrictions tweaked human, ascending AC and BAB) and the game runs so much better.

My perfect D&D would be some sort of 2E and 3.5 hybrid or a fixed 3.5 with modular magic item creation rules so magic items can go under DM control again.

Magic items are perfectly under control in Pathfinder. If that's not so in the game you run, you are the ONLY person to blame.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Locking this one. I think that this has been spiraling into territory that isn't all that productive or helpful, and it might be a good time to just stop.

701 to 714 of 714 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Magic: The Actual Problems All Messageboards