Cleric's page

"gunpowder"
Why not? Their power does not compare to magic. And there are places where magic does not work. It is however unfortunate that they have not created rules that actually do the firearms justice.

"Golarion in campaign chronicles setting: too fragmented, too many things and themes."
True the world is currently too small for so many huge variances of culture and tradition.

"Worst of all: the names. They sound awful for europeans."
No they don't. They may sound awful for americans.

"I would prefer are more Tolkien-like-style."
And some (I) wouldn't. I admit that I don't like Tolkien's work.

"the statue of liberty on page 200 seems a bit misplaced for europeans."
That is something an american would say. I don't care about the french tin-gilly that americans almost worship.

"Dont make the same mistake like WoC."
Marketing is important. If they declare that their campaign is nothing new and provides little value then nobody is going to buy it. So far they have not made anything that has disappointed me.

The +1 Skill point seems like a good idea.
Humans with +2 skill points per level sound neat, but should it remain once the character multiclasses or takes a prestige class?
+11.1% xp may have be a huge bonus in other games but not in D&D.

if you flurry of blows with a kama what minuses are you at if you don't have two weapon fighting?

You take normal two-weapon fighting and flurry's penalties.

Maybe translate it, it is a awesome name. But I agree that D&D and spin-offs themselves have mostly very cheesy or lame names.

I once had a similar problem. Namely our group's front-liner Knight, with a sworn oath, had a choice to use Coup de Grace against an enemy. Well, the DM did not allow it back then but after we finished the game we agreed to a houserule. Namely in these situations good sentient creatures and those who have taken a paladin's or knight's oath must always give the enemy a chance to surrender. If the enemy makes a hostile action then there is no penalty on killing him in any way, his offers to surrender may also be rejected.
Putting a sword at the throat of a sleeping enemy was ok. But the enemy must be aware and able to understand that he has a chance to surrender.

But this was a homebrew world and this seemed to work very well, until an assassin got free of his chains and murdered two players and me.

I for one feel that Paizo has done incredible work with clerics. 3.5 gave you a worthless to awesome domain power and bonus limited spell slots. A fairly effective but a very crude and overly simplified system in my opinion. Have you ever roleplayed extra spell slots?

Typically, rangers are inclined to solitude, particularly from commoners

A companion is a staple of the ranger class. But I have to somewhat agree with you. The PRPGa3 ranger is much more of a hunter than a ranger. Most people would like to have a option to play a D&D-ish ranger. I'm certain your DM would allow you to take a feat instead of it and not worry about a overpowered player.

Looks like the evolution of the D&D based ranger mimics life. It has become a pure warrior with wilderness expertise suited for raids, ambushes and strike-attacks. Just remove the companion and use the non-caster variant.

I wrote a decent rant about it but don't think it could be used in a constructive manner.
Anyway, you seem to be missing a point. This is not supposed to be a powerful effect or anything like that. As they kicked out Cure, Minor from the freebie 0-league you will either have an option of spending a 1st or higher level spell just to stabilize your poor fighter or spending 25gps to buy items that can do the same, once.
Instead you get a lousy Power which you can abuse to death in many different ways. The undead scare being the most obvious one.
Which leads me back to my rant that pointed out that you do not take Healing domain for a powerhouse. At best it serves as duck tape, keeping your weak team somehow working.

It still turned out as a negative post with no real reason but clerics are my soft spot. And I'm anti-healing.

Either something's wrong with the edit button, or I screwed up (99%). Anyway it created another post so it's off-topic and I apologize.
Now, second reply.
Not to say Animal Fury is bad but I think it has a limited use. I prefer Strength Surge. The whole d6 bite thing makes me wonder how this can be. Humans other that Steven Tyler are not able to bite for 1d6 damage, in rage or otherwise. I see it as a unnecessary power in both use and flavor.

No, you can do most of those things only with homebrewed rules. Not to be negative, the first thing I "fixed" was the monk's flurry.
All the basic Ki powers use swift actions so you can only use one per round. The extra attack is nice but should not be used as the monk is considered a soft target. Also, it can only be used with flurry, so at that level the attack comes with a -10% hit chance. A full defense gives you nothing more than just defense so it can be hardly considered as powerful. Take the +4 dodge bonus and run. A 20ft burst of speed is nice but how much will you actually be using it?
Considering everything the Ki powers are actually fairly pathetic. Possibly the best way to use the points is use it on Abundant Step, Wholeness of Body and of course Empty Body, if you manage to survive that long.

Ki Feats are not a bad idea but I would prefer them to add new uses for the Ki pool, be it activated or passive abilities. The Ki pool is a good mechanic as I do not like to think that Life-force is limitless.

The player could use a piece of paper to record the use of rage and powers on a round per round basis.
A good idea is to keep a reference sheet of the Powers and their cost so the player won't be guessing.

I have been a fan of psionics since I first laid my eyes on it. The point based system usually feels a bit more realistic to me. So maybe that is why I like the barbarian as it is.

Yes I think it would be "more" in line with the barbarian's concept. But I see no reason why to increase the damage to a d8. +d6 physical damage itself is more than enough. There are resistances and immunities to every type of damage so switching it should rarely change the damage value.

My solution was to simply ignore this power and suggest players to choose something else as there are better powers than this. Animal Fury for example which also I regard as a lousy choice.

To the original thread question. To clarify as I did not read anything else.
You mentioned Demons.

Demons have very feeble loyalty to their superiors, the easiest way for them to raise in ranks is for their superior to get killed. Strength or rather power is the only keeping them under control.
Dealing with demons is not as complicated as people think. Sure they are pretty frightening both in power and unpredictability but striking deals with them may be even easier than most devils.

You just need to show them that you are the most powerful thing this side of the valley and they will follow you. But be on the alert as some lesser demons will probably try to get a piece of you when you show any sign weakness.
Other possible Alliances are of course with other gods, both Demon and Devil deities might be interested in a new addition to their portfolio as well as minions.

Either way you still need to be able to do considerable damage to Demogorgon if you want to form an Alliance. They need proof that you are able to do this.
But once you kill one god...

For the Paladin's code, heck killing demons using other demons means a lot of demon casualties. It's actually a lot better than using the 'good guys'. Also it will create some chaos on the side of Evil.
The only possible negative effect with this method is one devil/demon lord becoming a little too powerful.

Rules are made simple for the sake of better gameplay. Armor class does not represent the difficulty to hit but the difficulty to injure an enemy.
Even in unaltered form armor class provides damage reduction. A leather armor with +2 AC is roughly the same as 10%/magic. This seems pathetic at first but once enemies start dealing heavy damage it becomes a very cheap way to reduce damage. Leather armor costs in tens but DR items in thousands of gold coins.

The fact that DMs only declare the hit or miss of attack cannot be blamed on the rules. At decisive or dramatic battles I use an AC chart for the players and monsters.

Like this
Size - Natural Armor - DR - Armor - Deflect - Shield - Dodge/dex
10 10 10 12 12 13 16

You start from the left and determine what exactly protected you from the attack. 16-14 misses,13 is shielded, 12-11 is a weak blow deflected by your armor, 10 and lower means you are fighting a 76 year old blind beggar wielding a cabbage.

A quick fix would be to use Pathfinder RPG rules and allow fighters to take Armor Training and Armor Mastery (Unarmored). Monks may complain.

Another way is to use 4th edition rules to determine AC but grant the level dependent bonus only if the character is unarmored or change it into an armor bonus so it wouldn't stack with the armor.

Anyhow, why would anyone go fighting without proper protection? Swashbucklers wear light armor, Ninjas use concealment and Pirates are Sea Hobos.