| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hexes allow two additional creatures to threaten each opponent, in most cases. This would further degrade the party-vs-single-BBEG situation but make mooks half-again as effective. It's not a seamless change, though it might affect tactics in interesting ways.
I don't really get this. If you have perfectly square buildings maybe, but most building that I see are not nearly so uniform.
Not in the real world, no. Though more often than not they are rectangular, and they tend to be easier to represent on a grid. Which of course means you end up with a lot of 10' x 10' bathrooms and 5' x 5' tables, etc. What I particularly like is that 99% of buildings on Golarion seem to be aligned perfectly along cardinal directions...
It's all about ease-of-use vs. accuracy. Grids are the easiest to use, but the least accurate.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still of the mind that any new edition of Pathfinder will be a (relatively) minor tweak to the current game and that Paizo will put it off as long as possible.
Even a reorganized CRB (ala Beginner's Box) would be a big deal because it will invalidate the page references in every previously published book (and errata that affects pagination is something Paizo has been hesitant to embrace).
Besides, some of the issues with learning the basics of the game are intended to be addressed by the Strategy Guide.
Of course, the Unchained book with its redesigned classes could be something of a stealth edition change itself.
-Skeld
I'm still of the mind that any new edition of Pathfinder will be a (relatively) minor tweak to the current game and that Paizo will put it off as long as possible.
Probably correct. Though I can wish, can't I?
Even a reorganized CRB (ala Beginner's Box) would be a big deal because it will invalidate the page references in every previously published book (and errata that affects pagination is something Paizo has been hesitant to embrace).
Which is a valid point.
Besides, some of the issues with learning the basics of the game are intended to be addressed by the Strategy Guide.
Hmmm....now I kinda wonder why they didn't position the Strategy Guide explicitly as the stepping-stone from BB to Core.
Of course, the Unchained book with its redesigned classes could be something of a stealth edition change itself.
I've thought the same myself, and I'm very curious to see what they deliver.
All of the page references in my 3.5 APs are wrong and I run them in Pathfinder easily enough.
Now, invalidating statblocks is another story entirely. When they went from 3.5 to PF they made a priority of leaving statblocks in tact. They did a pretty good job, I think. 3.5 APs and Modules are, for the most part, usable.
That has to be a priority as long as Pathfinder is built on a foundation of adventure content.
Yeah, I'm torn with it. Hexes are much easier to run IMO, but a bit harder to set up because more buildings are squares than are hexes.Yes. On Earth.
Which isn't mandated as your setting.
While true, it's simply trading out the work of making traditional building concepts work with hexes for being creative and making non-traditional structures that fit on a hex grid.
It's just trading one type of work out for another.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of the page references in my 3.5 APs are wrong and I run them in Pathfinder easily enough.
Maybe, but you're Mythic. ;-)
Page references are inconsequential with a good index.
|
|
I'm still of the mind that any new edition of Pathfinder will be a (relatively) minor tweak to the current game and that Paizo will put it off as long as possible.Probably correct. Though I can wish, can't I?
Of course!
All of the page references in my 3.5 APs are wrong and I run them in Pathfinder easily enough.
Very true. However, I mention it because Paizo staff have mentioned it as something they like to minimize.
-Skeld
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Very true. However, I mention it because Paizo staff have mentioned it as something they like to minimize.
Their mistake was referencing my page rather than by article entry.
From a publishing standpoint I'd like to see a new PHB with a proper index, working skill rules (particularly stealth and perception), all the additional rules hidden away in other books, probably some spells and feats that supersede old material, and no cruft.
Philosophically I think Archetypes need to stop. It's hard to sift through them for some of the older more easily archetyped classes.
Yes!
And NO! I love archetypes- they are PrCs without the super gamebreaking aspect that could occur in 3.5.
Hexes allow two additional creatures to threaten each opponent, in most cases.
Umm, no. Two LESS creatures, since a hex can be threatened from six sides whilst a square eight sides counting corners.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hexes allow two additional creatures to threaten each opponent, in most cases.Umm, no. Two LESS creatures, since a hex can be threatened from six sides whilst a square eight sides counting corners.
Oop, you're right; for some reason I was forgetting about the corners. :P
So reverse what I said: It's still not a seamless change, but it makes a single BBEG more viable while reducing the value of mooks.
Hexes allow two additional creatures to threaten each opponent, in most cases.Umm, no. Two LESS creatures, since a hex can be threatened from six sides whilst a square eight sides counting corners.Oop, you're right; for some reason I was forgetting about the corners. :P
So reverse what I said: It's still not a seamless change, but it makes a single BBEG more viable while reducing the value of mooks.
Which would be a Good Thing, I think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I agree, It's not time for Pathfinder 2.0 but maybe It's time for Pathfinder Revised AKA: Republish the Game Guide and split it in two, player's guide and gm's guide make the player's guide more newplayer-friendly and put all the "harder" stuff in the gm's guide.The fanbase would revolt. Pathfinder isn't really an RPG, it's a character-building game that happens to have an ancillary RPG sloppily duct-taped to one of the sides. Pathfinder fans don't care anywhere near as much about the RPG as the character-building game.
That is probably a little much, but when you get to the table I find that so many games play very similarly - you roll dice, you do actions, the GM responds to player actions. I find that the chargen aspect of any RPG is much more important than the mechanics at the table. So yes, the depth of the character building in Pathrfinder is one of the reasons I'm a fan. I read through D&D 5E and though - nowhere near enough meat to engage me in chargen.
But then my other game is HERO system, so I'm biased that way.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah what imbicatus said. It's only ten classes. And honestly, its not that hard keeping g track of what the players are playing. Fairly simple really.
I hope Pathfinder 2 is nothing like 5th. I'm not impressed by simple RPGS and I'd rather have options. And I hope Pathfinder 2 comes out decades from now.
Yep, I got disgusted with another TTRPG due to their tendency to reboot every couple of years--not interested in spending hundreds of $$$ every 3-5 years just to keep up. I don't want to see a 2nd ed PF until 2020 at the earliest, thank you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1: Combat rounds need to be shorter. The combat system needs fixing so that combats don't take entire sessions. There's too much to keep track of.
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.
3: Feat chains are awful.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
1: Combat rounds need to be shorter. The combat system needs fixing so that combats don't take entire sessions. There's too much to keep track of.
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.
3: Feat chains are awful.
My friend, you don't want another edition, you want another game. Might I suggest Swords & Wizardry or D&D 5e ?
1: Combat rounds need to be shorter. The combat system needs fixing so that combats don't take entire sessions. There's too much to keep track of.
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.
3: Feat chains are awful.
1. I have less problems with how long combat rounds take and more problems with how long people make it. On my turns I have something I want to do, I do it, I count my dice, turn over. Some people wind up making "I full attack" take forever.
2. Personally I don't think so. If it was I'd be playing a different game. HERO system is where I drew the line and went on to Pathfinder.
3. I don't think feat chains are a problem as much as very specific feat chains that do to little.
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.
2. Personally I don't think so. If it was I'd be playing a different game. HERO system is where I drew the line and went on to Pathfinder.
People talk about simplifying character creation... HERO system is what I play with our group. Pathfinder is the simpler game I play solo with the wife. I looked at 5E and responded with "there is nowhere near enough mechanical engagement in chargen/advancement".
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.People talk about simplifying character creation... HERO system is what I play with our group. Pathfinder is the simpler game I play solo with the wife. I looked at 5E and responded with "there is nowhere near enough mechanical engagement in chargen/advancement".
2. Personally I don't think so. If it was I'd be playing a different game. HERO system is where I drew the line and went on to Pathfinder.
When reading 5e, I felt like what happened was that they went through a list of every percieved problem in pathfinder and fixed it to a huge extreme.
Feat chains suck and there are too many feats - Feats are no longer in chains and are optional rules
Spells are too powerful and cantrips suck - Nerf all spells and make cantrips scale
We can't get dex to damage and dex to attack takes a WHOLE feat - You get dex to attack and damage with some weapons for free.
Spells overshadow the fighter - Give Fighter spells
Spell failure in armor has numbers and I don't like those - You can cast spells in armor you're proficient with automatically
I like 5th edition and all, as a simpler, stabler, D&D feel game that I can pull out when I have players that cant be bothered with playing Tax-form-Finder, but good god does it just hand you stuff
2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.People talk about simplifying character creation... HERO system is what I play with our group. Pathfinder is the simpler game I play solo with the wife. I looked at 5E and responded with "there is nowhere near enough mechanical engagement in chargen/advancement".
2. Personally I don't think so. If it was I'd be playing a different game. HERO system is where I drew the line and went on to Pathfinder.When reading 5e, I felt like what happened was that they went through a list of every percieved problem in pathfinder and fixed it to a huge extreme.
Feat chains suck and there are too many feats - Feats are no longer in chains and are optional rules
Spells are too powerful and cantrips suck - Nerf all spells and make cantrips scale
We can't get dex to damage and dex to attack takes a WHOLE feat - You get dex to attack and damage with some weapons for free.
Spells overshadow the fighter - Give Fighter spells
Spell failure in armor has numbers and I don't like those - You can cast spells in armor you're proficient with automatically
I like 5th edition and all, as a simpler, stabler, D&D feel game that I can pull out when I have players that cant be bothered with playing Tax-form-Finder, but good god does it just hand you stuff
I think they were trying to get back to the "whip up some characters and start kicking ass" feel. In my reading of the PHB and Starter Set, I think they did well. Hopefully I'll have a chance to get firsthand play experience soon.
Pretty much. Which is why I have a copy on hand. I just won't be playing it until I'm in a "Whip up some characters and start kicking ass" situation.
I think they were trying to get back to the "whip up some characters and start kicking ass" feel. In my reading of the PHB and Starter Set, I think they did well. Hopefully I'll have a chance to get firsthand play experience soon.2: In general the system is too complex. Creating characters is much too involved.People talk about simplifying character creation... HERO system is what I play with our group. Pathfinder is the simpler game I play solo with the wife. I looked at 5E and responded with "there is nowhere near enough mechanical engagement in chargen/advancement".
2. Personally I don't think so. If it was I'd be playing a different game. HERO system is where I drew the line and went on to Pathfinder.When reading 5e, I felt like what happened was that they went through a list of every percieved problem in pathfinder and fixed it to a huge extreme.
Feat chains suck and there are too many feats - Feats are no longer in chains and are optional rules
Spells are too powerful and cantrips suck - Nerf all spells and make cantrips scale
We can't get dex to damage and dex to attack takes a WHOLE feat - You get dex to attack and damage with some weapons for free.
Spells overshadow the fighter - Give Fighter spells
Spell failure in armor has numbers and I don't like those - You can cast spells in armor you're proficient with automatically
I like 5th edition and all, as a simpler, stabler, D&D feel game that I can pull out when I have players that cant be bothered with playing Tax-form-Finder, but good god does it just hand you stuff
I agree with that completely. It's fun. If someone were to run a game, I'd play. But I really wouldn't buy a lot of books, and I'd never think of it away from the table. I read and tinker with stuff with Pathfinder and HERO a couple hours a day for fun.
Is faster character creation really something that's needed?
I mean, low level characters can be made in 10 minutes or less with PF as it is?
Unless you are filling out a 15th level Wizard or something its relatively easy, choose a handful of feats, follow a few charts, ect. . . are people really that lazy that the concept of having to make a few choices is too "complicated"?
Maybe you won't pick the perfect set of feats, but as long as you find one feat for your character that you find cool/interesting and grab the obvious ones outside alongside it.
I could power out six characters I'd be interested in playing in less than an hour, and can pump out DM NPCs in literal seconds in the middle of game play. . . I just don't understand the assertion that PF is too complicated I guess.
Is faster character creation really something that's needed?
I mean, low level characters can be made in 10 minutes or less with PF as it is?
Unless you are filling out a 15th level Wizard or something its relatively easy, choose a handful of feats, follow a few charts, ect. . . are people really that lazy that the concept of having to make a few choices is too "complicated"?
Maybe you won't pick the perfect set of feats, but as long as you find one feat for your character that you find cool/interesting and grab the obvious ones outside alongside it.
I could power out six characters I'd be interested in playing in less than an hour, and can pump out DM NPCs in literal seconds in the middle of game play. . . I just don't understand the assertion that PF is too complicated I guess.
While it's true I could probably power out a level 1 character in 10 minutes (depending on the class), but I'm not sure I'd be happy with the resulting character. Bog standard elf conjurer wizard could probably be done in 10 minutes, if I put absolutely zero thought into spells, skills, feats, etc. I've been playing 3rd edition for 6 years now, so I (and most posting here) am probably an outlier. Character creation, for people who don't understand the system, can be hard just to explain. I always get a confused look when I explain to a new player that 12 = +1 and 16 = +3.
I don't know, a Paladin could probably be done in 10 minutes by anyone who knows the system. There isn't much going on there.
However, it's incredibly disingenuous to make the claim that Pathfinder is a great system because of all the choices it allows you to make when it comes to customizing your character while simultaneously claiming that character creation is quick and easy.
Is faster character creation really something that's needed?
I mean, low level characters can be made in 10 minutes or less with PF as it is?
It kinda depends.
You can whip up a generic lv1 character in fifteen minutes to a half hour (even fewer if you pick a character from the NPC Codex).
If you're going all-in, though, with Archetypes, Traits, Alt Racial Traits, Favored Classes Abilities, etc., it can take a fair amount of time and research.
If you keep your sources to just the CRB, APG, ARG, UM, UC, and ACG, you'll probably be looking at like a 45 minutes to an hour.
If you let players use ANYTHING (up to and including Mythic Tiers) and go by the D20PFSRD, you'd better devout the better part of a Session just to Character Creation.
Character creation in Pathfinder is as complicated as as many options you wish to use.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is faster character creation really something that's needed?
I mean, low level characters can be made in 10 minutes or less with PF as it is?
Unless you are filling out a 15th level Wizard or something its relatively easy, choose a handful of feats, follow a few charts, ect. . . are people really that lazy that the concept of having to make a few choices is too "complicated"?
Maybe you won't pick the perfect set of feats, but as long as you find one feat for your character that you find cool/interesting and grab the obvious ones outside alongside it.
I could power out six characters I'd be interested in playing in less than an hour, and can pump out DM NPCs in literal seconds in the middle of game play. . . I just don't understand the assertion that PF is too complicated I guess.
Lazy? Really? Come on man. You enjoy spending hours making characters? Good on ya. Not everyone wants to go through that. Some people want to play "let's go adventure" and not "let's go make characters". To think that signifies laziness is just plain stupid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is faster character creation really something that's needed?
I mean, low level characters can be made in 10 minutes or less with PF as it is?
Unless you are filling out a 15th level Wizard or something its relatively easy, choose a handful of feats, follow a few charts, ect. . . are people really that lazy that the concept of having to make a few choices is too "complicated"?
Maybe you won't pick the perfect set of feats, but as long as you find one feat for your character that you find cool/interesting and grab the obvious ones outside alongside it.
I could power out six characters I'd be interested in playing in less than an hour, and can pump out DM NPCs in literal seconds in the middle of game play. . . I just don't understand the assertion that PF is too complicated I guess.
It's not an objective claim, it's just preference.
I don't think pathfinder is too complicated, since some people like complicated systems. I prefer a simpler game though, so in my case faster character creation is desired.
I don't think 5E and PF are true competitors, except in the superficial sense.
Fwiw, I wouldn't plan on having a PF character done in less than half an hour (if I rushed) and more likely an hour. There's just too many options to consider.
It's not "making a few choices" that makes pathfinder complicated, it's the wealth of options you're choosing from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fwiw, I wouldn't plan on having a PF character done in less than half an hour (if I rushed) and more likely an hour. There's just too many options to consider.
Personally, it depends on what I'm looking to build and what level I was planning on starting at. If I'm going out of my way to build a character with options that I'm already somewhat familiar with, I could have a 1st-level build mentally figured out in 10 minutes, with maybe another 20 or 30 to actually write it down on paper.
If I'm working with options I'm not familiar with or specifically trying to build something new or weird, then it would easily take me two or three hours to get stuff together.
But then again, I like building characters and because of the Guidance blog, I regularly build the outline for one new 20-level build a week. The more you work with the rules, the faster you get.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hank Ironhand, Dwarf fighter 1, 20 point buy, LN, deity - Abadar
S18, D12, C16, I10, W12, Ch5 hp 14 (includes favoured class); Init +3
Skills - perception +6, swim +8 (ACP)
Feats - steel soul, power attack
Traits - eyes and ears of the city, reactionary
F +5, R +1, W +1, +4 vs spells, +2 vs poison
Keep all the dwarf racial abilities
Gear - greatsword, scale mail, sling + 10 bullets, dagger, assorted adventuring stuff
AC 17 (touch 11, flat footed 16); speed 20
CMB +5, CMD 16
Melee - greatsword +5, (2d6+6, 19-20); power attack greatsword +4 (2d6+9)
Ranged - sling +2 (1d4+4)
That took approximately 2 minutes (without using any books); admittedly I haven't chosen the rest of his equipment, but if time really is an issue you could cost in advance a "standard equipment" package of a backpack, tinderbox etc. and use it for all your starting characters.
Whether you'd actually want to play "generic dwarf fighter #3" is a different matter, of course.
Fwiw, I wouldn't plan on having a PF character done in less than half an hour (if I rushed) and more likely an hour. There's just too many options to consider.
Personally, it depends on what I'm looking to build and what level I was planning on starting at. If I'm going out of my way to build a character with options that I'm already somewhat familiar with, I could have a 1st-level build mentally figured out in 10 minutes, with maybe another 20 or 30 to actually write it down on paper.
If I'm working with options I'm not familiar with or specifically trying to build something new or weird, then it would easily take me two or three hours to get stuff together.
But then again, I like building characters and because of the Guidance blog, I regularly build the outline for one new 20-level build a week. The more you work with the rules, the faster you get.
Yeah, I have no doubt if I did it more often I'd be quicker at it. It's just not something I want to get better at - I'd rather play a simpler game.
That aside was just explication - nathaneal seemed to think ten minutes was a usual amount of time to make a PF character. From that perspective I'd also be puzzled at people asking for it to be quicker. I think those who find pathfinder too complicated (or too slow) are probably closer to my timeframe than his.
Feats are too much of a time sink.
There are too many and they are too interconnected. Too many of them have requirements. Scratch all feat requirements. Scratch all interdependencies. Remove feat chains.
Hank Ironhand, Dwarf fighter 1, 20 point buy, LN, deity - Abadar
S18, D12, C16, I10, W12, Ch5 hp 14 (includes favoured class); Init +3
Skills - perception +6, swim +8 (ACP)
Feats - steel soul, power attack
Traits - eyes and ears of the city, reactionary
F +5, R +1, W +1, +4 vs spells, +2 vs poison
Keep all the dwarf racial abilities
Gear - greatsword, scale mail, sling + 10 bullets, dagger, assorted adventuring stuff
AC 17 (touch 11, flat footed 16); speed 20
CMB +5, CMD 16
Melee - greatsword +5, (2d6+6, 19-20); power attack greatsword +4 (2d6+9)
Ranged - sling +2 (1d4+4)That took approximately 2 minutes (without using any books); admittedly I haven't chosen the rest of his equipment, but if time really is an issue you could cost in advance a "standard equipment" package of a backpack, tinderbox etc. and use it for all your starting characters.
Whether you'd actually want to play "generic dwarf fighter #3" is a different matter, of course.
I assume you have memorized
1: All feats2: All traits
3: The whole point buy table
4: Weapon stats
Feats are too much of a time sink.
There are too many and they are too interconnected. Too many of them have requirements. Scratch all feat requirements. Scratch all interdependencies. Remove feat chains.
Hank Ironhand, Dwarf fighter 1, 20 point buy, LN, deity - Abadar
S18, D12, C16, I10, W12, Ch5 hp 14 (includes favoured class); Init +3
Skills - perception +6, swim +8 (ACP)
Feats - steel soul, power attack
Traits - eyes and ears of the city, reactionary
F +5, R +1, W +1, +4 vs spells, +2 vs poison
Keep all the dwarf racial abilities
Gear - greatsword, scale mail, sling + 10 bullets, dagger, assorted adventuring stuff
AC 17 (touch 11, flat footed 16); speed 20
CMB +5, CMD 16
Melee - greatsword +5, (2d6+6, 19-20); power attack greatsword +4 (2d6+9)
Ranged - sling +2 (1d4+4)That took approximately 2 minutes (without using any books); admittedly I haven't chosen the rest of his equipment, but if time really is an issue you could cost in advance a "standard equipment" package of a backpack, tinderbox etc. and use it for all your starting characters.
Whether you'd actually want to play "generic dwarf fighter #3" is a different matter, of course.
I assume you have memorized
1: All feats
2: All traits
3: The whole point buy table
4: Weapon stats
To be fair, you don't have to memorize all feats and traits, you just have to remember the really good ones. For me I like the gorum trait where you get +1 to initiative and can draw your weapon as a free action in the surprise round, reactionary, and some of the flat bonuses to saves.
For feats: Power attack, quick draw, combat expertise+maneuver of choice, weapon finesse, etc.
Let's be honest, for most characters, there are large swaths of feats and traits that are utter garbage and can be completely ignored and forgotten.
Its not hard to memorize the good weapons stats?
Especially for those of us who've been playing for the 14 or so years they have remained unchanged?
Greatsword 2d6, Longsword 1d8 (19-20 crit), short sword 1d6 (19-20 crit), mace 1d8 (clerics only lolz), rapier 1d6 18-20 crit, longbow 1d8, shortbow 1d6, warhammer 1d6 x3 crit, greataxe 1d12 x3 crit, battle axe 1d8 x3 crit, scimitar 1d6 18-20, falchion 2d4 18-20, spear 1d6, long spear 1d6 with reach, halberd 1d10, staff 1d6. . .
that's off the top of my head, and to be honest 90% of all characters should be using one of the first three I listed-- its really not hard to remember that Greatsword is 2d6 and Longswrd is d8 19-20 and if at all possible you should use Greatsword or longsword.
Same with armor Hide +4, leather +2, plate mail +8, chain shirt +5 use one of those four if at all possible?
To be fair, you don't have to memorize all feats and traits, you just have to remember the really good ones. For me I like the gorum trait where you get +1 to initiative and can draw your weapon as a free action in the surprise round, reactionary, and some of the flat bonuses to saves.
For feats: Power attack, quick draw, combat expertise+maneuver of choice, weapon finesse, etc.
Let's be honest, for most characters, there are large swaths of feats and traits that are utter garbage and can be completely ignored and forgotten.
That's really built in-- making a martial? Don't bother looking at meta magic feats.
Making a wizard? You can basically skip all the combat feats.
As far as Archetypes-- you don't really have to make that choice at first level since very few of them actually modify things at first level. My current game the fighter waited until he was taking level 3 to decide between polearm master and two weapon fighter archetypes, had no real effect on the game.
I've been thinking about this, and I think sometime late tonight or tomorrow I'm going to start a new thread where I do a character building challenge-- set the books in front of me, and then post a start and see how quickly I can make a character.
But lets be honest here-- pathfinder isn't a heavily time consumptive character creation system.
Compare it to Shadowrun where characters sometimes have as much as 1 MILLION Nuyen (dollars) to spend at character creation
or to a system like Mechwarrior that involves a rolled event life tree to generate traits and skill bonuses that THEN get converted to actual skill bonuses and then have to be further converted to the bonuses you use inside you Mech.
I'd say anyone who has played either of those systems can see its a much simpler process in PF.
Its not hard to memorize the good weapons stats?
Especially for those of us who've been playing for the 14 or so years they have remained unchanged?
Greatsword 2d6, Longsword 1d8 (19-20 crit), short sword 1d6 (19-20 crit), mace 1d8 (clerics only lolz), rapier 1d6 18-20 crit, longbow 1d8, shortbow 1d6, warhammer 1d6 x3 crit, greataxe 1d12 x3 crit, battle axe 1d8 x3 crit, scimitar 1d6 18-20, falchion 2d4 18-20, spear 1d6, long spear 1d6 with reach, halberd 1d10, staff 1d6. . .
that's off the top of my head, and to be honest 90% of all characters should be using one of the first three I listed-- its really not hard to remember that Greatsword is 2d6 and Longswrd is d8 19-20 and if at all possible you should use Greatsword or longsword.
Same with armor Hide +4, leather +2, plate mail +8, chain shirt +5 use one of those four if at all possible?
You're absolutely right, it's not hard to remember all of that. Does that mean everyone now must play the game you like? Are you still really hung up on thinking that people who don't want to go through all of that to make a character are dumb or lazy? I've been playing Pathfinder since the beta rules were released, never once have I had the desire to scour every single book that was published for every single power that a character could have and every single interaction with every single power from every other book. I look at the pfsrd site and think people must be mad to want to go through all that every time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its not hard to memorize the good weapons stats?
Especially for those of us who've been playing for the 14 or so years they have remained unchanged?
Greatsword 2d6, Longsword 1d8 (19-20 crit), short sword 1d6 (19-20 crit), mace 1d8 (clerics only lolz), rapier 1d6 18-20 crit, longbow 1d8, shortbow 1d6, warhammer 1d6 x3 crit, greataxe 1d12 x3 crit, battle axe 1d8 x3 crit, scimitar 1d6 18-20, falchion 2d4 18-20, spear 1d6, long spear 1d6 with reach, halberd 1d10, staff 1d6. . .
that's off the top of my head, and to be honest 90% of all characters should be using one of the first three I listed-- its really not hard to remember that Greatsword is 2d6 and Longswrd is d8 19-20 and if at all possible you should use Greatsword or longsword.
Same with armor Hide +4, leather +2, plate mail +8, chain shirt +5 use one of those four if at all possible?
Chain shirt is +4.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@leo1925-- you're right, Chain shirt is +4, my memory isn't perfect, Chain was AC 5 in AD&D
@Simon Legrande-- I never said everyone must play the game like me. In fact I'm vastly in favor of NOT scouring every book for every interaction-- getting lost in those are how people come up with multiple hours to create characters.
Its people focusing on thinking that they HAVE to that is the problem-- I advocate having an idea what you want your character to be, and choosing one interesting thing you've seen whether its a feat or archetype or PrC (unlikely in PF) and then building the rest around the core idea of what you want your character to be/do at heart.
If you focus on the important few things instead of getting lost in the optimization supermarket character creation is easy.
Unless you are specifically taking weapon focus/specialization your choice of weapons doesn't even matter-- you can change it at anytime during game play for under 20 gold.
For a 1st level character you are only actually making 7 choices--
Race, Class, 1 feat, 2 traits, ability scores, occasionally a handful of 0 and 1st level spells or a bonus feat.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assume you have memorized
1: All feats
2: All traits
3: The whole point buy table
4: Weapon stats
I do happen to know the point buy table, but that is a side effect of using it quite a few times rather than a deliberate decision.
Why on earth would anyone want to memorise all the feats? I get by mainly by knowing a proportion of the good ones.
If I come across an interesting one when browsing through a book, I think about how I could incorporate it into a character.
I don't tend to spend hours looking through the SRD in search of ways to squeeze out the last dregs of DPS for an archer character, for instance, but the option is there for when I feel like that kind of thing.
For traits, if there is a skill I want but don't have it as a class skill, then I take the trait for it. If I'm playing a multi-classed caster, or want to have a signature spell, there are traits for that. If I'm playing a religious character I look at the trait associated with his deity.
Otherwise, I generally take +1 to a save or +2 to Initiative.
With weapons, unless you want a particular weapon for flavour reasons, you can basically pick from a list of about 10 and get along fine.
Greatsword or falchion if you are going 2 handed, longsword or rapier/scimitar for 1 handed (or dwarven waraxe if a dwarf), longbow, shortbow, light crossbow, dagger (in case you need a light weapon), heavy mace if you are restricted to simple weapons. The stats for most of them haven't changed much over the years (although when I started playing there wasn't a greatsword; it was called a 2-handed sword, and did 1d10 damage).
@leo1925-- you're right, Chain shirt is +4, my memory isn't perfect, Chain was AC 5 in AD&D
@Simon Legrande-- I never said everyone must play the game like me. In fact I'm vastly in favor of NOT scouring every book for every interaction-- getting lost in those are how people come up with multiple hours to create characters.
Its people focusing on thinking that they HAVE to that is the problem-- I advocate having an idea what you want your character to be, and choosing one interesting thing you've seen whether its a feat or archetype or PrC (unlikely in PF) and then building the rest around the core idea of what you want your character to be/do at heart.
If you focus on the important few things instead of getting lost in the optimization supermarket character creation is easy.
Unless you are specifically taking weapon focus/specialization your choice of weapons doesn't even matter-- you can change it at anytime during game play for under 20 gold.
For a 1st level character you are only actually making 7 choices--
Race, Class, 1 feat, 2 traits, ability scores, occasionally a handful of 0 and 1st level spells or a bonus feat.
And in order to make the best choices, you have to know all of them. Say you have a great idea and a good back story and now it's time to create your character.
First, choose race. There are 34 races to choose from.
Next, choose class. There are 32 classes to choose from, nevermind how many archetypes.
Next, choose traits. Thankfully there are only 1092 traits to choose from.
Next, choose feats. Even better than traits, there are 1460 feats to choose from.
And so on... To say you only need to know the couple you choose assumes you've taken the time to look at every option and know what they all do. You have to invest some major time in that.
Or, you could say "there's a cool looking feat, I'm gonna build around that" then comes level 5 and you're wondering why you suck compared to everyone else.
If you want to invest hours and hours going through all of the available material to the point where you know which options are good and which are not just so you can get to the point where you can create a character fast, be my guest. That isn't for me, and I suspect many others.
Regarding Pathfinder 2.0 - I've said before and I'll say again, I hope they don't do it. Pathfinder is the way it is and it's perfect for the people who want it. Let other games draw off the people who don't want so much work. For all we know, people getting started on 5e, for example, might find it's too limiting and change over to Pathfinder for all the options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah...I suspect that alot (most?) players don't go through every possible option, but will skim the core book and maybe a new book they've found for feats.
A lot of tables don't necessarily require the degree of optimization that occurs on the board here to function and get through a session.
You can't play a character unless you know the best option every time? I know plenty that just whip up characters, don't obsess about if they missed an extra plus somewhere ... And then have a perfectly satisfying gaming experience.
It depends on how we're defining "best"
Best in terms of overall power? Probably not. I don't think there are two many players who are hurt by not knowing about Sacred Geometry.
Best in terms of realizing a concept? Yes, then it can be a problem.