Good lord Cartigan - do you even like this game?
It seems like the majority of your posts tend to be either insulting (to other people, Paizo or Pathfinder itself), negative, rude and/or condescending.
I'm sorry but ... man! Are you like this in real life around real people?
Obviously no one should EVER point out issues with the game. Let's all sit around and praise Paizo for walking among us peasants and allowing us to play this game they created from the burning remnants of 3.5.
And you are riding my ass about being condescending? Perhaps you missed the "Go play 4e if you want a competent tank!" post? Really? I should have to play a different game system just to get a class that actually does what it is supposed to do?
Paizo was in the unique position to really fix 3.5 and from what I am seeing, they just aren't really doing it.
|
It seems like the majority of your posts tend to be either insulting (to other people, Paizo or Pathfinder itself), negative, rude and/or condescending.
I have to say, I tend to agree with this. It's one thing to point out things you disagree with, it's another thing to do it in a way that implies anyone who disagrees with you is clueless or stupid. Whether you mean it that way or not, that's how a lot of your posts come across when I read them.
Obviously no one should EVER point out issues with the game. Let's all sit around and praise Paizo for walking among us peasants and allowing us to play this game they created from the burning remnants of 3.5.
You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Or, it's perfectly valid to point out issues, there's simply a better way to do it.
If your goal is to have an impact on the kinds of choices Paizo is making, then start by being less antagonistic. If your goal isn't to impact the kinds of choices they're making, then you're only here to complain, and the rest of us can't be blamed for calling a troll a troll.
I don't suffer from any delusion that Paizo is going to change the way they are doing things based on how I criticize their conversion. And are you people pretending I am the only one here with criticisms? No. I'm not. And no one else is getting Paizo to fix anything either. Sitting around being high and mighty does not contribute to this in the slightest.
PS. Being critical and belligerent does not a troll make. Go look it up.
|
|
PS. Being critical and belligerent does not a troll make. Go look it up.
All I'm saying is that approaching a conversation like yours is the only correct opinion is not likely to get you a lot of positive feedback.
Now for something on-topic: I love that Traits are now official, I love the Hero Points system (which is added to my game effective immediately), and am interested in checking out the new Combat Maneuvers if the DM in my other game plans to allow them. I'm playing a human barbarian and have taken the Knockback rage power, and am planning on picking up a few of the other "Improved" combat maneuver feats (mainly Grapple and Sunder).
The PrCs look interesting, but I'm actually much more interested in the Core Class archetypes. Hoping to see some archetypes for the other Base Classes at some point!
I don't suffer from any delusion that Paizo is going to change the way they are doing things based on how I criticize their conversion. And are you people pretending I am the only one here with criticisms? No. I'm not. And no one else is getting Paizo to fix anything either. Sitting around being high and mighty does not contribute to this in the slightest.
PS. Being critical and belligerent does not a troll make. Go look it up.
No, they probably won't change it, and its fine if you don't like it. Feel free to criticize, but how about doing so in a constructive manner. Tabletop RPG's are unique in the amount of homebrew you can do. Remake it to your exact specifications if you don't like it, use what you want and discard the rest. Hell, take the 4e ideas that work and incorporate them somehow, your in the driver seat, but accept that not everyone thinks the class is a waste and that other peoples opinions are NOT wrong
And as for only fooling an opponent once with more reach than normal, how about more than 1 AoO, first bad guy falls for the trick, second one thinks he's ok, then bam!
I can't wait to have a stalwart defender cohort to protect my alchemist while she buffs and bombs. And when i do play my next dwarf it will probably be a stalwart defender just for the fun and challenge of screwing up the DM's combat tactics.
It seems like the majority of your posts tend to be either insulting (to other people, Paizo or Pathfinder itself), negative, rude and/or condescending.I have to say, I tend to agree with this. It's one thing to point out things you disagree with, it's another thing to do it in a way that implies anyone who disagrees with you is clueless or stupid. Whether you mean it that way or not, that's how a lot of your posts come across when I read them.
Group Hug!?!?!?!?! I think its needed lol
I don't suffer from any delusion that Paizo is going to change the way they are doing things based on how I criticize their conversion. And are you people pretending I am the only one here with criticisms? No. I'm not. And no one else is getting Paizo to fix anything either.
Paizo has a remarkable presence on these boards. Time and again, they've asked here "Is this something you'd be interested in?" They've also previewed their products for extensive playtesting. So, while the APG is done and off to the printers and will not be changed, evidence does suggest that Vic, Lisa, Jason, etc. are interested in listening to the overall tone and content of feedback on the boards.
Taken as a gestalt, these conversations DO play a part in how they plan and design for the future.
That said, right now you are an outlier that they can safely dismiss as rabid. If you want to have an impact and add something constructive, just change your language.
Paizo has a remarkable presence on these boards. Time and again, they've asked here "Is this something you'd be interested in?"
And they also rarely issue errata pointed out time and again.
They've also previewed their products for extensive playtesting.
To little if not no effect if the end result is all but unrelated to the original offering.
That said, right now you are an outlier that they can safely dismiss as rabid. If you want to have an impact and add something constructive, just change your language.
I don't really care what you consider constructive. And they don't appear to care what people have to say about their product. The Defender only being available to Dwarves was NOT the class' problem. It was that it was a statue whose only real use was in tight hallways - even equipped with a spiked chain. I both find it hard to believe and unsurprising that they could reproduce the class while ignoring what WotC tried to do with the Knight as a defensive tank class.
Good Lord, dude, don't play the PrC if you don't like it. You're going to give yourself a stomach ulcer.
I don't intend to play it because of the inherent problems. That's why I didn't play it in Age of Worms. But saying "don't play it" misses the point and lets everyone off the hook.
Cartigan, every time you post God kills a kitten.
Think of the kittens, please.
I think they would be good with hot sauce.
Love the 90' threatened area, anyone else have visions of a cleric buffing and healing this guy while the magic users rain death upon the foes who suddenly seem to be inept at getting past 1 single opponent :)
|
I'd have thought that if an enemy takes 1 to 2 rounds maneuvering around a immobile defender and not doing something else, then the defender has done their job. Of course, since the defender could move they may be able to nullify the enemy's access to squishier party members for a longer period of time.
Not to mention if the lighter armored party members are circling around on the opposite side of the defender from the enemy...
I'd have thought that if an enemy takes 1 to 2 rounds maneuvering around a immobile defender and not doing something else, then the defender has done their job. Of course, since the defender could move they may be able to nullify the enemy's access to squishier party members for a longer period of time.
lets dance around the field/caver/giant room sorry you cant get to my friends, feel free to closer so i can show you just how sharp my weapons really are.
Can you trip with a thrown weapon? That would also help cover a wider area.
And the gods have mercy on the poor bastard who tries to bull rush the stalwart defender, especially if he's a dwarf, lol.
You seem to assume that the stalwart defender is a statue and Never moves to counter his foe and that your allies Always wait for the enemy to get to them.
BTW a good counter argument is not "wrong" follewed by some kind of failed logical attack on one of their points. If you want to win an argument or at least make a decent point, explain why you think the statement is wrong so we can understand what about this class doeen't do the job.
Guys, arguing over something like this without complete information doesn't do anyone any good. When we all have the book in front of us, we can argue more productively till our hearts are content. Maybe we'll even realize that the answer isn't black or white, yes or no, succeed or fail. But that's probably me being optimistic. So can we get back on track? I'd really prefer to avoid seeing this thread locked.
Does he lose his bow proficiency from his fighter levels?
Because, if he doesn't, I would think he would just pull out a bow and shoot them.
I'm sure there is some logical fallacy or mis-worded phrase in that idea somewhere which you will now trip me up on. Please commence.
remember its a STATUE. it doesn't move or attack or trip things or bull rush, or disarm or sunder. Not to mention I assume your allies behind you would be unleashing all their vaunted ranged attacks on the enemy foes that are at range.
Of course if he wasn't a statue he could move into melee with the enemy.
Does he lose his bow proficiency from his fighter levels?
Because, if he doesn't, I would think he would just pull out a bow and shoot them.
I'm sure there is some logical fallacy or mis-worded phrase in that idea somewhere which you will now trip me up on. Please commence.
At which point you, again, have wasted levels in Statue instead of Fighter.
You seem to assume that the stalwart defender is a statue and Never moves to counter his foe
Did they change the main class feature from Defensive Stance to something else and additionally change how it worked?
Does he lose his bow proficiency from his fighter levels?
Because, if he doesn't, I would think he would just pull out a bow and shoot them.
I'm sure there is some logical fallacy or mis-worded phrase in that idea somewhere which you will now trip me up on. Please commence.
At which point you, again, have wasted levels in Statue instead of Fighter.
You seem to assume that the stalwart defender is a statue and Never moves to counter his foe
Did they change the main class feature from Defensive Stance to something else and additionally change how it worked? [/QUOTE
1st off, have you even seen the entire class yet???
Second of all, even if its the same, you dont have to be in an unmoving stance 24/7. Just because its optimal for a theif to sneak attack doesnt me he always will get that chance, same for a fighter who wnats to full attack or a wizard who wants to use a certain spell but the enemy is immune/resilient to it. No situation works 100% off the time, and that seems to be what you want, a fool proof way that never fails.
3rd a stalwart defender using a bow as a back up option is not a waste of time, its just not your first choice, maybe not even your second choice, but it is an option. Not every turn has to be optimal nor shoudl it be, otherwise whats the point???
Maybe we'll even realize that the answer isn't black or white, yes or no, succeed or fail. But that's probably me being optimistic.It is - but you're absolutely right. So...
Holy Vindicator is AMAZING. Wait till you see. Probably the coolest PrC I've seen in 5 years.
Master Chymst..... making me love the alchemist even more, not to mention all the other cool stuff they added. Soo many options and so versatile my head spins.
Since reading the Gnomes of Golarion I wish I had chosen a gnome for my alchemist for pure insanity fun.
I removed some posts. Flame war over.
Since this obviously needs to be said:
Combat Patrol does NOT help the Defender unless Defensive Stance has been changed. Or unless you read the entirely too ambiguous wording however you want.
Dear Paizo Writers, take a tech writing class or lean over and ask some one "What does this mean to you?"
Can anyone else see just about every PC thief in kingmaker becoming a master Spy? It seems an excellent fit. In our game we're only second level so its a bit of a wait till I get to try any of these out, till then i'll bring to life dozens of characters that may never seen the tabletop.
I'm really interested to see the Rage Prophet.
I'm really interested to see the Rage Prophet.
Don't piss off the blind man, he might get angry!!!
Ok,
Over all I think the APG is terrific. I love the new classes (with one glaring exception), and I think the new race/class options give a much needed flexibility to the players. I am a little annoyed (very mildly) on the equipment section, but that's because I just bought Adventurer's Armory and it's mostly duplicated in the APG.
Except for the Summoner nerf, I really like the entire book. I think there are some things in it that will never get used (teamwork feats are too situational in my opinion unless you and your friend are building RP based builds that are super buddies or twins, or if you are an inquisitor obviously).
Well done Paizo, well done (except for the Summoner thing). :)
Ok,
Over all I think the APG is terrific. I love the new classes (with one glaring exception), and I think the new race/class options give a much needed flexibility to the players. I am a little annoyed (very mildly) on the equipment section, but that's because I just bought Adventurer's Armory and it's mostly duplicated in the APG.Except for the Summoner nerf, I really like the entire book. I think there are some things in it that will never get used (teamwork feats are too situational in my opinion unless you and your friend are building RP based builds that are super buddies or twins, or if you are an inquisitor obviously).
Well done Paizo, well done (except for the Summoner thing). :)
I agree with you on teamwork feats but love the idea of twins or best buds developing "special skills" when fighting with each other that can be perceived as knowing what the other will do almost before they do type thing.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Ok,
Over all I think the APG is terrific. I love the new classes (with one glaring exception), and I think the new race/class options give a much needed flexibility to the players. I am a little annoyed (very mildly) on the equipment section, but that's because I just bought Adventurer's Armory and it's mostly duplicated in the APG.Except for the Summoner nerf, I really like the entire book. I think there are some things in it that will never get used (teamwork feats are too situational in my opinion unless you and your friend are building RP based builds that are super buddies or twins, or if you are an inquisitor obviously).
Well done Paizo, well done (except for the Summoner thing). :)
There is an inquisitor among my Kingmaker PCs, and his use of Teamwork feats has inspired some of the other players to think about taking teamwork feats (esp. the flanking for extra damage one).
As I said, I like the teamwork feats as an option, I just don't see them getting much use from players. As pointed out above, GM's on the other hand...
I have this image of a horde of goblins with little spears, all trained in flanking teamwork feats. :)