Does system mastery really exist?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 149 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Again and again system mastery is mentioned across these boards. If you have it, you're considered a god among players. If you don't, you might get by, or squashed; whichever the dice may decree.

Is system mastery really a thing though? Or is it just whether or not the player making the builds has access to d20pfsard, the Archives of Nethys, Hero Lab, or some other comprehensive rule sorting tool?

Seems to me, the only thing that differentiates someone with this mystical "system mastery" from someone without, is that the former likely has the tools that allow him to efficiently sort through the thousands of rules options and find the most optimal choices for whatever it is they're tying to do; and the latter does not.

Let's face it, the rules are pretty easy for the most part. There's not much there to master. What debates we do have on these forums about the rules are often over semantics, minutiae, or corner cases. Really, to make great builds, you really just gotta' know what options are out there, and these tools really help you do that.

Agree or disagree? If you think I'm totally off base, feel free to enlighten me with a detailed explanation as to why you think that is.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Again and again system mastery is mentioned across these boards. If you have it, you're considered a god among players. If you don't, you might get by, or squashed; whichever the dice may decree.

Is system mastery really a thing though? you just gotta' know what options are out there

This is largely true and the majority of system mastery, knowing what options are out there and remembering them or knowing how to find them fast enough to be useful. Most without system mastery don't know and don't bother to care to know what the options are and the differences between them. Like how many people make core rogues not realizing that their sneaking suave guy would have been better as a bard?

The other part of system mastery is knowing/realizing how often stuff happens. Like that cleave struggles to have the correct setup to use. How long fights last.

just because the level of difficulty to obtain higher system mastery is low, doesn't mean that everyone does it.


another thing that might indicate system mastery is having GM'd for a significant time and/or knowing if there's a FAQ on that thing, or possibly knowing roughly how this thing works without having to look up too much


Chess Pwn wrote:
The other part of system mastery is knowing/realizing how often stuff happens. Like that cleave struggles to have the correct setup to use. How long fights last.

This seems like a big part, and could maybe be more experience than mastery. Just knowing stuff like AC scaling slower than attack bonuses, hit points scaling faster than damage, and what saves different enemies have.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think it's the "system" we're mastering so much as the options and interactions that are relevant to the character you're playing. Certainly "knowing which feats are good and which are not" and "knowing what spells are good, and which are not" are helpful to a great number of characters, and particularly given that what makes a choice good or bad a lot of the times is how it compares to all the other choices you can make here, of which there may be hundreds.

I don't think we're really mastering the system a la "I know how the grapple rules work!". I think we're mostly talking about building and playing characters when we talk about system mastery. Something like "a fighter takes barroom brawler, then abundant tactics, and leaves an Advanced Weapon Training feat slot open so they can select 'Advanced Weapon Training' with Barroom Brawler, selecting the item mastery option, allowing the fighter to be able to cast Fly or Dimension Door or Dispel Magic a few times a day" is the sort of thing that either takes a little bit of thinking for most people to figure out, unless you read it somewhere.

Even stuff like "the Magus uses Arcane Mark with Spell Combat in order to make an extra attack" is the sort of thing that the rulebook doesn't exactly spell out explicitly.

I mean, personally I have a pretty good handle on the system, since I GM more often than I play I have to. But to be honest? I really have no idea how to play a Wizard. If I have an NPC that's a Wizard, I don't have to choose the best spells or feats, since the NPC isn't supposed to be the best wizard possible, just a wizard so I can select things largely at random or whatever's in character. I've never played a Wizard in Pathfinder, I didn't in 3.5, and I didn't in 3.0 either. If I wanted to play a Wizard, I could go read a bunch of spells and some guides, but I would need to pick things up that I'm not all that familiar with.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, it's a thing, but it's not the only thing. At its heart, I think system mastery is more about efficiency than anything else. Lack of experience or mastery can be overcome with time and research (which, in turn, build system mastery).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Knowing what options are out there and understanding how to evaluate the different choices (pretty basic math, but something some people lack) is what system mastery is.

With time, any reasonably intelligent person can become reasonably proficient. A lot of players don't have either that time or that desire, and just want to have a good time playing a character that they think is fun, which is perfectly fine and valid, but the two different types of players will not make characters that are anywhere near equal, and a GM that has both in a group will have to adjust in some way.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Again and again system mastery is mentioned across these boards. If you have it, you're considered a god among players. If you don't, you might get by, or squashed; whichever the dice may decree.

Is system mastery really a thing though?

Yes.

There are lots of options available.

Some are good options, some are less-good options, and some are considered outright traps. Knowledge of which ones are good and which are traps is a major part of system mastery.

Another major part of system mastery is knowing how the twisty bits fit together. For example, the ability to penetrate spell resistance is key to a blaster-caster, but substantially less so for a conjurer. This make spell-penetration related feats and abilities vary in "goodness" depending upon the build -- again, this is a part of system mastery.

You mentioned d20pfsrd.com and similar resources, but they don't tell you which feats are useful -- if you really want to read your way to system mastery, you'd be better off looking at the various character optimizations guides. But even those need to be taken with a grain of salt, as a True System Master [tm] understands how the general advice in those guides applies (or does not apply) in specific cases.

So, yes, you're off-base.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
d'Eon wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
The other part of system mastery is knowing/realizing how often stuff happens. Like that cleave struggles to have the correct setup to use. How long fights last.
This seems like a big part, and could maybe be more experience than mastery.

Experience is a source of mastery, but is not mastery itself. Nor, famously, is it the only source of mastery; if Master Qui-Gonn explains the problem with Cleave to me, I don't need to see it in action, yes? (Hence the proverb that experience is the fool's teacher, the wise don't need it.)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Defining system mastery. Fun!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Identifying the quality of options, and employing them optimally" is generally the definition of System Mastery I hear in my head.

To be fair though, I hear a lot of things in my head.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Raise an appendage if you've ever retired a character because it was built when you didn't understand how to build it.

Raises a hand.

One of my local PFS Venture-Captains has a sorceror waiting for a rebuild boon because of how bad it is. Subsequent characters were generally good, but it was one of his first and it was definitely an unoptimized "let's have multiple blasts of the same element with nothing to support that" sort of characters. I have copiously used the level 1 rebuild rules to scrap characters and have multiple PFS characters on the sidelines because they're bad, some of them unplayably so. It's kind of a fact of life, really.

This is the evidence that system mastery exists - as mastery of the system improved, so did our ability to create characters that were well-adapted to the play environment. System mastery is not limited to understanding the rules of building a character, but also the metarules of the system - that fire-based casters need to have answers to fire immune enemies and how to do that, how to effectively buff party members, what feats provide greater return than others, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Serisan wrote:

Raise an appendage if you've ever retired a character because it was built when you didn't understand how to build it.

Raises a hand.

Raises a tentacle. Silly humanoids.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

System mastery is what makes and fuels designers

It is pretty obvious to me that it exists, that there are levels of system mastery, that some people have a gift for it and that it takes lot of practice to improve

And that those with really high system mastery are actually quite rare

I do not think it has anything to do with access to the resources and much more to do with understanding the subtleties and interactions of the underlying design principles


The thing I have discovered about system mastery, is that system mastery also is quite dependent on having a GM that only uses rules as written and doesn't homebrew anything, and doesn't change the game to make things more workable for players, character classes, or for arcane and unknowable reasons.

As an example, the whole "wizards break the game" deal based on system mastery and an understanding of how wizards work falls apart more often than not in the face of an actual game with real players and an even slightly intelligent and somewhat experienced GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Eh, other than the GM saying, All the spells don't work, you can't stop a wizard from breaking the game that wants to. A knowledgeable caster with all the spells and how they work will bypass all sorts of maps you've drawn.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

System mastery is absolutely a thing.

  • A player with low system mastery will dig into those resources and produce a 10th level fighter who is incredibly optimized for repositioning, completely failing to recognize that the reposition maneuver is close to worthless no matter how much you invest in it.
  • A player with low system mastery will produce a character with weapon focus in 5 different weapons because they "want to be versatile".
  • A player with low system mastery will create sorcerers that only have ice magic spells, barbarians that two-weapon fight with battleaxes, Paladins with 8 CHA, Rogues with CHA as their highest stat, Rangers that use exclusively crossbows, Fighters with tower shields that they think will be "tanks", Wizards whose actions in combat are cast true strike round one and attack with greatsword round 2 and repeat, bards who 2-hand their instrument and have no plan to either fight or cast spells in combat, etc.
  • A player with low system mastery sees vital strike, reads the description, and somehow comes to the conclusion that it will double his damage per round.
  • A player with low system mastery might put all their skill points in Knowledge Geography and Appraise, not knowing how massively underused these skills tend to be.

    And countless other examples. Some are math issues, where the player doesn't yet appreciate what is good or bad by the math of the game (I've had a player argue fiercely that power attack is far worse than weapon focus, for example). Some are underlying assumptions not spelled out in any rules source, like which skills are rolled more often and which are largely neglected.


  • Setting "build-mastery" aside, and looking rules-in-play mastery—I see lots of differences in mastery among players. The differences between various individuals' mastery of rules in play can be a large or small factor depending on how the game's being run.

    For example, suppose a player repeatedly moves their mini around their allies, instead of through their allies' spaces (forgetting the rule that you can move through). This costs them extra movement, potentially missing the occasional round(s) of action as a result. Or suppose a player knows, or doesn't know, when they'll provoke AoOs due to movement.

    It makes a big difference if the gm or other players point this out, and whether the player has an opportunity to adjust after a rule is pointed out. If nobody was watching the player's movement closely, or keeping silent, they'd be performing subpar. If a player moves around an ally, and then can't make it to the enemy to attack, if no one speaks up and says, "you can go through your allies' spaces, which in this case would allow you to reach and attack the enemy, are you sure you want to move that way?" — then the player's lack of mastery has a big effect on performance, but if they're prodded, then not so much.

    Same thing for AoOs — if you don't know that you'll provoke when leaving a square, and you do leave the square, at one table, this could mean whack!, while at another table you might be asked, "are you sure you want to leave that square, you'll provoke."

    The Exchange

    Also system availability (via websites mentioned and maybe some not mentioned) is still not the same as system mastery. System availability is that all the items available for any player can be found online. System mastery is knowing specifically that there is an item that does X Y and Z, and my character specifically needs all three of those at a high level, so I need to make sure I keep looking until I find that specific item and get it for my character.

    Now any player with infinite time can certainly achieve system mastery due to system availability, but really, how many of us have that kind of time?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Cellion wrote:


  • A player with low system mastery will create ... Rogues with CHA as their highest stat,
  • A player with system mastery will create a CHA based Rogue that is effective both in and out of combat.

    Simply because he can.


    Part of it is access to the data. Part of it is remembering about the existence of options that can work with what you're trying to do. Part of it is search-fu to find the options you remembered and commentary on how to use different builds.

    But beyond that, there's the ability to see connections between abilities before you see them in play. This is important because you only have so many options and making the wrong ones costs you. (unless you have a GM that is a real softy on retraining)

    There's also big-picture awareness. Often we know about many options, but it's a choice on what to put where. Do you go for Deadly Aim, far Shot, or Rapid Shot first? Do you invest in a feat tree that will take five levels to pay off or pick three smaller separate boosts?

    Archetypes are a big test of mastery. You have to balance the features you get with the features you give up. This often comes down to the specific goals you have for your character. For example, I've seen alchemists that rely on Mutagen all day every day. And I've seen alchemists where that's the first thing they'd give away because they are all about the bombs.

    System mastery also deals with ways to mitigate weaknesses. When your primary tactics don't work, what else can you do? Do you invest anything into this or simply hope your teammates will pull you through?

    I've seen the difference firsthand in my games. One character that became both the primary ranged damage dealer and a social character that didn't need to touch dice against most foes. Another character invested four feats into a combat tactic that came up twice in 20 levels. Despite being warned of the costs.

    Mnemaxa wrote:
    The thing I have discovered about system mastery, is that system mastery also is quite dependent on having a GM that only uses rules as written and doesn't homebrew anything, and doesn't change the game to make things more workable for players, character classes, or for arcane and unknowable reasons.

    It can work if they homebrew as long as they are consistent and fair with it. Otherwise the characters live in a world where reality varies based on the whim of the gods. Other people's characters, that is.

    Serisan wrote:

    Raise an appendage if you've ever retired a character because it was built when you didn't understand how to build it.

    Raises a hand.

    I've done that, but I've retired more characters because I ended up optimizing a bit too much and that was making the game less fun.

    Glorf Fei-Hung wrote:

    Also system availability (via websites mentioned and maybe some not mentioned) is still not the same as system mastery. System availability is that all the items available for any player can be found online. System mastery is knowing specifically that there is an item that does X Y and Z, and my character specifically needs all three of those at a high level, so I need to make sure I keep looking until I find that specific item and get it for my character.

    Now any player with infinite time can certainly achieve system mastery due to system availability, but really, how many of us have that kind of time?

    Oh, I don't think this is true. I've played with some people who need to feel out how a set of mechanics works for a while before they can work it well. I've known others who can immediately grasp that x, y, z, q, and π together makes Voltron and form blazing sword. What's fun is when the first player is absent and the second player runs his character and pulls out amazing combos.

    Silver Crusade

    Ravingdork wrote:


    Agree or disagree? If you think I'm totally off base, feel free to enlighten me with a detailed explanation as to why you think that is.

    Of course it exists. We can argue the extent if you wish but of COURSE it exists.

    If you want proof just hand the same pregen to two different players and watch how effective that character will be. Don't even allow the player to swap out spells and sell equipment.

    In one players hands, the pregen will be taking 10, aiding another, using spells very effectively and judiciously, etc.

    The other player will be charging with the wizard, bringing out the big guns for little problems, etc.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Orfamay Quest wrote:
    Serisan wrote:

    Raise an appendage if you've ever retired a character because it was built when you didn't understand how to build it.

    Raises a hand.

    Raises a tentacle. Silly humanoids.

    I WAS APPENDAGE INCLUSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE!

    Grand Lodge

    Not sure if someone has mentioned yet or not but Hero Lab (was mentioned in the initial post) does not tell you which options are the best for your PC. It only tells you which options are available to you... the advantage of course is that once you pick the option, the results are calculated on the spot and the character sheet is built for you. That is hardly mastering the system as a player; if anything it allows you to be lazy.

    As an example, a couple of weeks ago, I built a few PC's with my players for our new Serpent's Skull game using Hero Lab and the sheer volume of options was overwhelming to them... "what do you mean I have 489 traits to choose from????" Having all the options available was daunting and discouraging and I had to step in to make suggestions on what they should take.


    Dhrakken wrote:

    Not sure if someone has mentioned yet or not but Hero Lab (was mentioned in the initial post) does not tell you which options are the best for your PC. It only tells you which options are available to you... the advantage of course is that once you pick the option, the results are calculated on the spot and the character sheet is built for you. That is hardly mastering the system as a player; if anything it allows you to be lazy.

    As an example, a couple of weeks ago, I built a few PC's with my players for our new Serpent's Skull game using Hero Lab and the sheer volume of options was overwhelming to them... "what do you mean I have 489 traits to choose from????" Having all the options available was daunting and discouraging and I had to step in to make suggestions on what they should take.

    My wife gets that feeling looking at the CRB. She's gamed historically, but she won't do Pathfinder because of feeling overwhelmed once she gets to the Feats chapter. It's not a unique issue to HeroLab and you can use HeroLab to sort and filter much easier than either dead tree or PDF books. It's not perfect by any stretch, but there's something to be said about not having to look at Improved Critical's text when you don't quality for it.

    Grand Lodge

    Serisan wrote:
    My wife gets that feeling looking at the CRB. She's gamed historically, but she won't do Pathfinder because of feeling overwhelmed once she gets to the Feats chapter. It's not a unique issue to HeroLab and you can use HeroLab to sort and filter much easier than either dead tree or PDF books. It's not perfect by any stretch, but there's something to be said about not having to look at Improved Critical's text when you don't quality for it.

    Granted, but unless you look at the improved critical feat to see what you need to qualify for it, you'll never know. Heck, it won't even show up for you if you only have the tool show you valid items that you qualify for at any given time. I do this by default just to trim down the list. That's one thing I wish the tool did better; better management of feats and feat trees.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Ravingdork wrote:

    Again and again system mastery is mentioned across these boards. If you have it, you're considered a god among players. If you don't, you might get by, or squashed; whichever the dice may decree.

    Is system mastery really a thing though? Or is it just whether or not the player making the builds has access to d20pfsard, the Archives of Nethys, Hero Lab, or some other comprehensive rule sorting tool?

    Seems to me, the only thing that differentiates someone with this mystical "system mastery" from someone without, is that the former likely has the tools that allow him to efficiently sort through the thousands of rules options and find the most optimal choices for whatever it is they're tying to do; and the latter does not.

    Let's face it, the rules are pretty easy for the most part. There's not much there to master. What debates we do have on these forums about the rules are often over semantics, minutiae, or corner cases. Really, to make great builds, you really just gotta' know what options are out there, and these tools really help you do that.

    Agree or disagree? If you think I'm totally off base, feel free to enlighten me with a detailed explanation as to why you think that is.

    I definitely don't have it, however I agree with you that it's not difficult. It's just uninteresting (to me) so I choose not to obtain it.

    My professional life is full of numerical analysis and finding optimal solutions to complicated situations with varying constraints. When I create a character I don't like to do any of that stuff.

    I roll my stats (in order, generally) see what character is suggested to me and then begin choosing class, race, feats, archetypes, etcetera based on the theme I'm going for (generally based on considering each in isolation and never factoring in future choices or "feat trees" and such). I never plan out a character but rather make all my choices each level as I go.

    I can't possibly be creating "effective" characters using that methodology, but that's not terribly important to me (and the rest of my group is fine with that approach, thankfully).


    I think saying you have system mastery is really saying that you enjoy playing high powered games with minmaxed characters. That's not a bad thing, if everyone at the table enjoys it. It's less of a state of knowledge and more a statement of style of game.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    System mastery: understanding how the system works in sufficient detail that you can create a PC that: 1) matches your basic character concept; 2) can contribute meaningfully to the party, and 3) stands a decent chance of surviving.


    Dhrakken wrote:


    Granted, but unless you look at the improved critical feat to see what you need to qualify for it, you'll never know. Heck, it won't even show up for you if you only have the tool show you valid items that you qualify for at any given time. I do this by default just to trim down the list. That's one thing I wish the tool did better; better management of feats and feat trees.

    True, Hero lab is a good reference, but it's still up to the player to figure out what to combine.


    Tinalles wrote:
    System mastery: understanding how the system works in sufficient detail that you can create a PC that: 1) matches your basic character concept; 2) can contribute meaningfully to the party, and 3) stands a decent chance of surviving.

    Of course 2) and 3) depend strongly on both how much your fellow players optimize and how hard your GM runs the game.

    The same character played the same way might easily survive one game and dominate that party, but have trouble contributing meaningfully and die quickly at another table.

    Liberty's Edge

    Goddity wrote:
    I think saying you have system mastery is really saying that you enjoy playing high powered games with minmaxed characters. That's not a bad thing, if everyone at the table enjoys it. It's less of a state of knowledge and more a statement of style of game.

    I disagree. While system mastery can allow for high powered games, it would also give you a good sense of what a reasonable power expectation is for the standard expectations of the game. So you can build characters along themes that aren't necessarily highly optimized, without being an anchor to the party.


    I feel like a deciding factor of system mystery is bothering to master the system. Or to put it another way, do the research, for example I feel pretty confident building a blaster sorc or a witch or a kineticist or generic lxhemisr, I don't really know where to start with a vigilante.


    It is certainly a thing. Someone with poor understanding of the options can end up weaker than my character in the same specialty, while I'm also a bit better at side things.

    It's not hard to get ok to good at it, but not everyone does so, and also? We're on the Pathfinder forums, everyone here is on the higher side of the bellcurve.

    Check the most frustratingly weak character thread-
    http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uazv?Most-frustratingly-weak-characters-youve- ever

    Or heck, let's face it, some options are *traps*. The Brute Archetype for Vigilantes is a really poor way to make a Hulk and it's the Archetype that superficially looks like how you're supposed to make a Hulk. Even most newbies have enough System Mastery to notice that, but it's not a given even if it's completely obvious to us.

    And conversely, some options are just *great*. The 'Realistic Likeness' feat of Kitsune can allow a low-charisma character be useful in social and sneaky situations with no other investments.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    System mastery is just understanding the system you are working with. It's not limited to game systems. Medical practice, warehousing, even Microsoft Office all have mastery. It's why we trust someone with 20 years of experience and a body of work to do a good job. They have mastery of their field.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    I wonder what a lxhemisr is

    EDIT: hey look someone linked y thread wooo
    Does tha,t mean I have paizo forums system mastery?

    EDIT EDIT: I'm drunk


    Deighton Thrane wrote:
    Goddity wrote:
    I think saying you have system mastery is really saying that you enjoy playing high powered games with minmaxed characters. That's not a bad thing, if everyone at the table enjoys it. It's less of a state of knowledge and more a statement of style of game.
    I disagree. While system mastery can allow for high powered games, it would also give you a good sense of what a reasonable power expectation is for the standard expectations of the game. So you can build characters along themes that aren't necessarily highly optimized, without being an anchor to the party.

    I really agree with this. I have gotten to the point that my characters can outdamage everyone else in my group by a large margin and have to figure out how to make my guys more versatile rather than powerful.

    Silver Crusade

    Deighton Thrane wrote:
    Goddity wrote:
    I think saying you have system mastery is really saying that you enjoy playing high powered games with minmaxed characters. That's not a bad thing, if everyone at the table enjoys it. It's less of a state of knowledge and more a statement of style of game.
    I disagree. While system mastery can allow for high powered games, it would also give you a good sense of what a reasonable power expectation is for the standard expectations of the game. So you can build characters along themes that aren't necessarily highly optimized, without being an anchor to the party.

    Yeah, I'd argue system mastery is more important in making themes work than building the maximum utmost character. I mean, you can use mastery to do that, but if you want a barbarian that is specced for max damage, or a optimal grappler, or the ideal zen archer, you can just look up a build and copy it.


    The amount of options in this game is staggering. Unless you are a genius, you won't know the best option for everything. That's why reading the boards helps system mastery a lot.

    I found out about manifold stare by reading a mesmerist build chesspawn was making and incorporated that into the character I was planning for Giant Slayer.

    I find most guides to be mostly useless.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Ravingdork wrote:
    Agree or disagree? If you think I'm totally off base, feel free to enlighten me with a detailed explanation as to why you think that is.

    I disagree. When one has access to a large reference resource, it's easy to forget that having information isn't the same as having knowledge. There are an incredibly large number of options to create characters, which means that the good options - the weird thing that would make this particular build idea really sparkle - is hidden in a giant pile of other similar things. Which means the player doesn't know it's there, until they trawl through the entire list of options, and even then they need to note the significance, and remember it using their meat-brain.

    One significant advantage of the library resource is that people with access can learn the knowledge without further assistance. But they still need to do that to be good.

    For example, two days ago I did not know the Orator feat existed. Now I do. And because I do, every Int-based character I create going forward is going to be written with the question "would the Orator feat be practical here?", which will lead overall to me having more powerful (and more fun) characters. The Student of Philosophy trait is something I've known about for longer. But I'd built and played an int-based Cha-dumping character before I found out despite spending a lot of time reading options, and I really wish I'd known because it would have been so useful and now I don't have a feat spare for extra traits.

    I spent some time yesterday trawling through looking for traits granting perception and various knowledges as class skills. And I found several useful options, but it took a lot of time. And, I only thought to look because I know that traits can do that, which is itself a (fairly elementary) bit of system mastery.

    So the archives are great and useful and probably necessary, given the nature of the game. But I think they're more useful as tools to allow learning system mastery than they are as replacements for it.


    I had a deliberately under optimized wild empathy focused druid stomp bonekeep flap because of good spell selection

    So yes.

    But there are limits to it though

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    Steve Geddes is my spirit animal (having never met, I assume he's some sort of floofy, iridescent purple, badger-like creature).

    System Mastery, as it exists in Pathfinder, is just the name given to the large amount of time and effort some people have invested into understanding all th available options.

    I basically do system analysis and math all day long at work. I don't feel like doing a bunch of extra math in my free time, so I've personally decided to blow off system mastery and invest my time and effort other places. I play Pathfinder without worrying about what's optimal.

    -Skeld


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

    I know a player that only makes Fighter PCs, usually forgets to add his BAB and strength bonuses, and rarely remembers what his feats actually are. He has three decades of experience with RPGs.

    Yes, there is such a thing as system mastery. Some players never explore their options. Most slowly learn things as time goes by. Some can quickly glance at their resources and build a PC to extremes because of fast analysis, imagination, and usually a good mathematics background.


    Deighton Thrane wrote:
    Goddity wrote:
    I think saying you have system mastery is really saying that you enjoy playing high powered games with minmaxed characters. That's not a bad thing, if everyone at the table enjoys it. It's less of a state of knowledge and more a statement of style of game.
    I disagree. While system mastery can allow for high powered games, it would also give you a good sense of what a reasonable power expectation is for the standard expectations of the game. So you can build characters along themes that aren't necessarily highly optimized, without being an anchor to the party.

    Quite. System mastery is what lets me look at the rest of the group and decide, "this quirky low-power character will still get to contribute," or "hm, this full caster won't dominate, I can go nuts without having to worry about overshadowing everyone else."

    Or "ok, most others are doing X, but I think my better rules mastery means I can go for a class 'weaker' than theirs and use a good build to even things up."

    Dark Archive

    I see roughly 3 distinct components to system mastery. 1 availability and knowledge of options. Or pure theorycrafting if you prefer. The second element really is in game experience to understand how that theorycrafting really plays out. In its simplest form this is recognizing things like archery is 'better' then melee because you don't have to move so you get to full attack more often. The last part is tactical mastery, how do you make your options work for you.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Dhrakken wrote:

    ...a couple of weeks ago, I built a few PC's with my players for our new Serpent's Skull game using Hero Lab and the sheer volume of options was overwhelming to them... "what do you mean I have 489 traits to choose from????" Having all the options available was daunting and discouraging and I had to step in to make suggestions on what they should take.

    I have encountered this numerous times while trying to introduce new people to the game.

    Usually, I just end up telling them not to feel too overwhelmed by all of the options, and that if they wish, they can tell me what they're looking for in a character in their own words. Then I help them track down good options that help them accomplish their concept's goals.


    Ravingdork wrote:


    I have encountered this numerous times while trying to introduce new people to the game.

    Usually, I just end up telling them not to feel too overwhelmed by all of the options, and that if they wish, they can tell me what they're looking for in a character in their own words. Then I help them track down good options that help them accomplish their concept's goals.

    Hell, I try to get my players to do that more while we're playing and not just in character generation.


    Skeld wrote:
    Steve Geddes is my spirit animal (having never met, I assume he's some sort of floofy, iridescent purple, badger-like creature).

    I can neither confirm nor deny the accuracy of that description (since I have no idea what floofy means).


    Ravingdork wrote:

    Is system mastery really a thing though? Or is it just whether or not the player making the builds has access to d20pfsard, the Archives of Nethys, Hero Lab, or some other comprehensive rule sorting tool?

    Seems to me, the only thing that differentiates someone with this mystical "system mastery" from someone without, is that the former likely has the tools that allow him to efficiently sort through the thousands of rules options and find the most optimal choices for whatever it is they're tying to do; and the latter does not.

    I think this theory falls apart pretty quickly. There are a lot of players who don't have access to the toys, that are still quite masterful in the system.

    Having the rules is one thing... knowing how to make them work for you is an entirely different thing.

    Ravingdork wrote:


    Let's face it, the rules are pretty easy for the most part. There's not much there to master. What debates we do have on these forums about the rules are often over semantics, minutiae, or corner cases. Really, to make great builds, you really just gotta' know what options are out there, and these tools really help you do that.

    Agree or disagree? If you think I'm totally off base, feel free to enlighten me with a detailed explanation as to why you think that is.

    Disagree with this too. Pathfinder is almost the most difficult system to learn I've seen, and I've played a LOT of systems. Off the top of my head, I'd say the Indiana Jones Masterbook system and The DC Heroes from Mayfair were the only systems I had more trouble with. Even World of Darkness wasn't as complicated... though the actual rules books were an absolute disaster to read through with 'crunch' scattered to the four winds throughout.

    The core rulebook for Pathfinder is almost 600 pages long. 2E was closer to 250. I think that alone speaks volumes. The old TSR Marvel game I started with, had their player book was only 100 pages to get started. 5E is also just a fraction of the book that Pathfinder is...

    Pathfinder set out to be rules intensive which automatically makes it difficult to master.


    It's not only the core rulebook. There are around a 100 player companions and another 100 campaign settings and another 100 adventure paths and maybe 25 core rule books.

    I have skimmed almost every book, but many details elude me.

    1 to 50 of 149 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Does system mastery really exist? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.