Joseph Silver's page

That's quite true. However, many (luckily not all) of the CharOp people are equally guilty of the Trollman Fallacy: that talking like Comic Book Guy on the Simpsons somehow imbues the speaker with superior intellect and mathematical infallability.

The boards have two components: game content and comradery. One is not inherently more important than the other. If the more obnoxious CharOp immigrants would be willing to assimilate into their new culture a bit, and maybe post as if they're speaking to friendly acquaintances (rather than as if they're speaking to mindless 3-year-olds), they would find a MUCH warmer welcome. As it is, the ones who are refusing to adapt are giving the whole group a bad name.

So now we're the trolls? I don't see any of the posters on my side of the argument resorting to name calling or baseless generalizations.

And what's this about assimilating into the new culture? Are you implying that your way of playing is inherently superior to ours because you've been on these boards longer? Does forum seniority make your opinions worth more than ours?

Seriously, what's with the "us vs. them" mentality? We're all here because we volunteered to playtest Pathfinder. In our case, we're actively trying to take the game to its limits to see which stuff need to be fixed.

Roleplaying restrictions are not a good way of implementing game balance. Roleplaying restrictions do not work against what I call the "Superplayer", one who can roleplay and min/max very well.

I think of the Pathfinder beta as something akin to video game betas. Those who actively try to break the game will be of more use to the developers because they are the ones who find most of the things that need to be fixed.

Would you rather have playtesters who try to find as many bugs as possible in your game, or ones who only try to play the game the way it was intended (i.e. not trying to actively break it)?

None of us CharOp folks would actively try to ruin someone's game with tier 1 powerbuilds, unless of course said CharOp folk is a jerk (like all groups, we have our black sheep).

I guess this thread has gone way off-topic with all the flaming. I guess I'll just post my findings in General Discussion instead of waiting for a new board to be created.

So why was she laid off in the first place?

Tempest Stormwind and Oberoni would have a field day in these boards. A lot of the anti-CharOp people here are guilty of the Stormwind Fallacy and the Oberoni Fallacy.

I've never had problems with intolerance in the various CharOp boards I've been on. Most of the intolerance I've experienced came from the roleplaying boards, at least once the vocal minority realizes that I do not see the game the way they see it.

Not having a place where all the exploits are displayed for all will not make them go away. It will just make them harder to spot. Us CharOp regulars don't need our own CharOp board to be effective optimizers. The ones who benefit the most from a CharOp board are your everyday DMs and players who want to see which is broken and which is not.

What I'm really worried about is CoDzilla. CoDzilla requires no multiclassing or anything outside core to be effective, unlike the abovementioned powerbuild which most DMs are unlikely to allow.

Perhaps we should devote one thread for each of the eleven core base classes in Pathfinder?

I'm not really opposed to number crunching, I'm pretty quick at math myself. I guess I'm more put off by the type of personality that it attracts.

I mean, there is a difference between taking the best options for your PC, and intentionally making a PC nigh-unbeatable in any situation.

:)

So are you resorting to baseless generalizations now? Do you really think that us CharOp folks can be pigeonholed into one type of personality?

None of the characters I play are tier 1 CharOp monsters. I participate in the forum because I want to know which is broken and which isn't. Most of the stuff we come up with are thought exercises that take the rules to their logical extremes. Optimizers are no more disruptive than drama queen roleplayers who hog all the spotlight.

The advice that I tell my players is:

"D&D is not serious business. Don't overthink it, don't fret too much about it, and remember to have fun playing it."

I basically roleplay barbarians as berserkers instead of actually barbarians. I mean, not all historical barbarians use their barbarian rage to wreak havoc.

The Mongols, with their superb tactics, don't really fit into the "mad foam rager" archetype that the barbarian leans towards. I see the Mongols more as rangers than actual barbarians, even though they do qualify as cultural barbarians.

Like the first reply said, it's going to serve as a lightning rod for balance issues.

Also, it seems that a lot of people here believe in the Stormwind Fallacy. Roleplaying and optimization are not mutually exclusive. Most of the CharOp regulars in the Wizards boards are also very good roleplayers.

If we're going to be playtesting this game, we're going to need people who know how to break it so we can fix it.

To the CharOp board's credit, Wizards has issued errata for several of the exploits found, including the Orcus Slayer and the Mage Hand wall.

Although for some reason they still haven't errata'd Seal of Binding (one of the most broken powers in the game).

Edit: Fake Healer, the point of a CharOp board would be to help the developers figure out which rules need to be changed. We're like the cast of that Discovery Channel show, "It Takes a Thief".

The cast of that show is made up of reformed thieves who break into their guest's home so that the vulnerabilities in their security can be fixed.

Besides, min/maxing is fun!

Seriously.

Us CharOp regulars in the 4E forums do a very good job of finding "bugs" in the system. In our quest to build the most powerful characters, we expose the hard-to-find loopholes and flaws in the rules that the playtesters missed.

So how about it, almighty moderators? Can we have a CharOp forum for Pathfinder?

I like 4E. I like how it consolidated 3.5's numerous subsystems into one consistent system for all classes, and I like its elegant simplicity.

I also like Pathfinder. I like how it added new options to otherwise bland classes like the fighter and the sorcerer. I also like how it is backwards-compatible with my 3.5 books.

What I don't like is the general notion in these boards that you have to choose between one or the other, but not both. They are not mutually exclusive. Preaching against 4E or Pathfinder does not make you more of a loyal fan to either game.

So let's all calm down and remember that D&D is NOT serious business. Don't overthink it, don't fret too much about it, and remember to have fun playing it.

Edit: Ooooooh! This is interesting. I recognize several posters here from the 4E forums. And it sounds like they actually like both games.

Hello, my name is Joseph Silver, and I play D&D through MapTool. I thought I'd give Pathfinder a try. Is there anyone running Pathfinder through MapTool here?

I want to help playtest the system, so I'd appreciate having as few house rules as possible.