paizo.com Recent Posts by Marcus Robert Hosler
paizo.com Recent Posts by Marcus Robert Hosler
2024-01-05T18:06:12Z
2024-01-05T18:06:12Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Yet Another Please Fix Alchemist Post
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43wa9?Yet-Another-Please-Fix-Alchemist-Post#17
2023-10-27T17:11:19Z
2023-10-27T17:04:40Z
<p>Master weapon proficiency and free-action alchemical-item drawing may be enough for me to want to play the class again. </p>
<p>If I could:</p>
<p>Move up
<br />
Heal ally
<br />
Attack once</p>
<p>As a turn, then that makes what the alchemist is doing more appealing. Because the current turn of</p>
<p>Move up
<br />
Draw elixir
<br />
Heal ally a little bit</p>
<p>Is just not a great turn.</p>
Master weapon proficiency and free-action alchemical-item drawing may be enough for me to want to play the class again.
If I could:
Move up
Heal ally
Attack once
As a turn, then that makes what the alchemist is doing more appealing. Because the current turn of
Move up
Draw elixir
Heal ally a little bit
Is just not a great turn.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2023-10-27T17:04:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Yet Another Please Fix Alchemist Post
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43wa9?Yet-Another-Please-Fix-Alchemist-Post#12
2023-10-28T09:59:10Z
2023-10-27T13:09:24Z
<p>I personally found the alchemist miserable to play. I tried leaning into the versatility and "having a tool" for every situation and it just fell flat. GM let me respec to arcane sorcerer and that's going much better. </p>
<p>I think you can play/make something workable and I know how I would approach it now if I was forced to play one again, but I wouldn't choose to play one. Alchemy is neat enough that I would throw some dedication feats to it.</p>
<p>My issues were poor accuracy, difficult resource limited lower levels and little to look forward to at higher levels. I wasn't particularly good with using my alchemical items. The malus on most of my buffs meant my allies did not like being buffed by me even though they went along with it and the action economy to do things in combat is brutal. I did better with a full formula book and spamming quick alchemy, but I had nothing for the boss that adventure and my contributions were only mediocre instead of terrible when I was "doing good".</p>
<p>Resources scaling with level and all being max power appears to be a difficult balance point. Quick alchemy seems to also be a difficult balance point. I don't have a great solution for the alchemist, but I don't like it.</p>
I personally found the alchemist miserable to play. I tried leaning into the versatility and "having a tool" for every situation and it just fell flat. GM let me respec to arcane sorcerer and that's going much better.
I think you can play/make something workable and I know how I would approach it now if I was forced to play one again, but I wouldn't choose to play one. Alchemy is neat enough that I would throw some dedication feats to it.
My issues were poor accuracy, difficult resource...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2023-10-27T13:09:24Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#28
2018-08-03T03:33:39Z
2018-08-02T20:20:39Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">RafaelBraga wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I was thinking to give it a try until...</p>
<p>Man... read the magic weapon enchament rules... YOU NEED a +1 weapon to even remain competitive... i couldnt believe when i first read... +4 weapons rolling 4 extra damage dice!!!</p>
<p>So, youre Str20 level 12 fighter, champion of your local arena... your damage is 1d10+5 (3d10+5 with power attack)... you come across a level 4 fighter wielding a +4 weapon... it does 5d10 BASE DAMAGE!</p>
<p>Huhauauaha... i cant imagine the reaction when the people that wanted to "abolish the mandatory six" read of it... its 4ed armor... but worse.</p>
<p>If it was +4d10 on a crit, i would be perfectly ok... showing how the weapon can deliever really fatal blows... but on ALL ATTACKS... man, this is beyond bad design to me :/
<br />
</blockquote><p>And here I am liking that special abilities and boring numbers are on different slots, allowing us to actually get interesting abilities on stuff before maxing out the boring numbers.
<p>And in this edition, your fighter can easily craft the items himself with little investment.</p>
RafaelBraga wrote:I was thinking to give it a try until...
Man... read the magic weapon enchament rules... YOU NEED a +1 weapon to even remain competitive... i couldnt believe when i first read... +4 weapons rolling 4 extra damage dice!!!
So, youre Str20 level 12 fighter, champion of your local arena... your damage is 1d10+5 (3d10+5 with power attack)... you come across a level 4 fighter wielding a +4 weapon... it does 5d10 BASE DAMAGE!
Huhauauaha... i cant imagine the reaction when the...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T20:20:39Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: First Knee-Jerk Reaction
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9mv&page=2?First-KneeJerk-Reaction#69
2018-08-03T03:19:17Z
2018-08-02T20:10:22Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Fallyrion DunegriƩn wrote:</div><blockquote>This is not bad because it chanced from 1E. It's bad because it has nothing in commun with 1E except for names. This will never be a game I'll recognize as Pathfinder. </blockquote><p>1. Classes
</p>
2. HP
<br />
3. You can out level foes
<br />
4. Vancain magic
<br />
5. You can craft magic items
<br />
6. Utility magic is massive and world shaking
<br />
7. All the critical combat stats are the same you just calculate them differently
<br />
8. You get a skill point in every skill every level but that isn't good enough anymore
<br />
9. Feats everywhere</p>
<p>Nah man, it's basically just Pathfinder, just built a little differently. Maybe if someone only ever plays D&D and D&D-likes, this game seems "too different".</p>
Fallyrion DunegriƩn wrote:This is not bad because it chanced from 1E. It's bad because it has nothing in commun with 1E except for names. This will never be a game I'll recognize as Pathfinder.
1. Classes
2. HP
3. You can out level foes
4. Vancain magic
5. You can craft magic items
6. Utility magic is massive and world shaking
7. All the critical combat stats are the same you just calculate them differently
8. You get a skill point in every skill every level but that isn't good enough...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T20:10:22Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#25
2018-08-02T23:15:51Z
2018-08-02T19:33:29Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ronin_Knight wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
0_0 </p>
<p>2e does not look simple at all, even when compared to 1e.</p>
<p>Having a decent layout and tightening the math so that making a trash character is harder is not the same thing as making a system simple. </blockquote>OK I can agree the current layout is unpleasant on the eyes, at the least, and needs to be reworked but as for it not being simple that might be true at the moment, but the stated goal of the system was to a be a simpler more beginner friendly game andwith some minor changes it will be at the level of 5E or there abouts. </blockquote><p>Beginner friendly just means that a random collection of options would still be viable.
<p>What isn't beginner friendly is if two people of the same class run into a situation where one can destroy a basic creature that the other one can't even touch because they didn't know the hidden rules of viable mathematical character building.</p>
<p>For example, a 1e fighter that didn't know about gloves of dueling and all the armor and weapon mastery options was basically playing an NPC class in comparison.</p>
Ronin_Knight wrote:MR. H wrote:
0_0 2e does not look simple at all, even when compared to 1e.
Having a decent layout and tightening the math so that making a trash character is harder is not the same thing as making a system simple.
OK I can agree the current layout is unpleasant on the eyes, at the least, and needs to be reworked but as for it not being simple that might be true at the moment, but the stated goal of the system was to a be a simpler more beginner friendly game andwith some...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T19:33:29Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#21
2018-08-03T06:40:42Z
2018-08-02T19:08:55Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ronin_Knight wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Renchard wrote:</div><blockquote>Compared to other rulebooks I've been looking at, like WFPR4e and Savage Worlds, it looks pretty darn similar. </blockquote><p>Yes it's similar in that it's on the D20 chassis, other than that it has more in common with 4E or 5E than it does with Pathfinder or 3.X, it like those systems treats customisation and variation like vile expletives.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mbertorch wrote:</div><blockquote> Having played 5E a lot lately, and Pathfinder longer ago, I see a lot of PF1 in PF2. BUT, since you're approaching it from a different angle, I can see why it may look different to you. Which is okay. I hope it is able to thwart your current feelings, though! </blockquote>Unfortunately this seems unlikely as one of the primary traits they've promoting is the simplification of the system, and seeing as about 50% of the audience seem happy with that Paizo will probably go with that over the people like me who would see the majority of the current test document gutted. As those in favour of simplification mean less changes to the current iteration and a better chance at the coveted 'mass market appeal' despite the simple mass-market field being solidly in WotC's grasp. </blockquote><p>0_0
<p>2e does not look simple at all, even when compared to 1e.</p>
<p>Having a decent layout and tightening the math so that making a trash character is harder is not the same thing as making a system simple.</p>
Ronin_Knight wrote:Renchard wrote:Compared to other rulebooks I've been looking at, like WFPR4e and Savage Worlds, it looks pretty darn similar.
Yes it's similar in that it's on the D20 chassis, other than that it has more in common with 4E or 5E than it does with Pathfinder or 3.X, it like those systems treats customisation and variation like vile expletives. Mbertorch wrote:Having played 5E a lot lately, and Pathfinder longer ago, I see a lot of PF1 in PF2. BUT, since you're approaching it...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T19:08:55Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Initial Thoughts
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9me&page=2?Initial-Thoughts#73
2018-08-02T18:31:37Z
2018-08-02T18:27:19Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">WatersLethe wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote><p>With the feat to use your own stats instead of the forms, your Icewolf could actually be viable at higher levels.
</p>
</blockquote>I was looking for that. What is it called? I can't find it. </blockquote><p>Sorry, page 388 Druid's vestments
<p>It's a magic item not a feat (Yay?). 1000g, item level 10.</p>
WatersLethe wrote:MR. H wrote:With the feat to use your own stats instead of the forms, your Icewolf could actually be viable at higher levels.
I was looking for that. What is it called? I can't find it. Sorry, page 388 Druid's vestments It's a magic item not a feat (Yay?). 1000g, item level 10.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T18:27:19Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Initial Thoughts
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9me&page=2?Initial-Thoughts#67
2018-08-02T18:08:33Z
2018-08-02T18:08:33Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Corwin Icewolf wrote:</div><blockquote>I'm pretty disappointed that druids can no longer hang around in animal form all day. Even a wild druid would be pushing it to get more than 15 minutes. It seems every system is against me playing the druid character whose name I tend to use online the way I envision him. Sigh.</blockquote><p>Man they really buried this ability cause I missed it too until I went crt-F through the document.
<p>At level 10, you can take control form, which lets you spend a spell and a wild shape use to turn into a form for an hour (of one spell level lower than max)</p>
<p>With the feat to use your own stats instead of the forms, your Icewolf could actually be viable at higher levels.</p>
<p>So you are looking at 2+Str mod hours at level 10 (and eating that many spells to do it). Not exactly All day (sadly), but better than minutes</p>
Corwin Icewolf wrote:I'm pretty disappointed that druids can no longer hang around in animal form all day. Even a wild druid would be pushing it to get more than 15 minutes. It seems every system is against me playing the druid character whose name I tend to use online the way I envision him. Sigh.
Man they really buried this ability cause I missed it too until I went crt-F through the document. At level 10, you can take control form, which lets you spend a spell and a wild shape use to turn...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T18:08:33Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#14
2018-08-02T17:49:13Z
2018-08-02T17:49:13Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ronin_Knight wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Mbertorch wrote:</div><blockquote> Disagree. Feels like a beta(playtest) to me, but yeah, obviously. Can't wait to try it tonight. GMing it for my 5E group. They're pumped too. Probably my new system, just going off a cursory read-through. </blockquote>Yes and I'm sure it will do great with a 5E group, for people who wanted something that even vaguely resembled Pathfinder as we know it you have to admit there isn't much similar to the 1e incarnation </blockquote><p>My group primarily plays Savage Worlds and we are having our first 4e campaign in the works.
<p>From my perspective, 2e is basically pathfinder and I would still place it in the 3.X vein of RPGs. (though probably 3.9 by now)</p>
Ronin_Knight wrote:Mbertorch wrote: Disagree. Feels like a beta(playtest) to me, but yeah, obviously. Can't wait to try it tonight. GMing it for my 5E group. They're pumped too. Probably my new system, just going off a cursory read-through.
Yes and I'm sure it will do great with a 5E group, for people who wanted something that even vaguely resembled Pathfinder as we know it you have to admit there isn't much similar to the 1e incarnation My group primarily plays Savage Worlds and we are...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T17:49:13Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#5
2018-08-03T06:04:43Z
2018-08-02T17:20:05Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Orville Redenbacher wrote:</div><blockquote> Y u no play 5E? </blockquote><p>I don't like it.
<p>And I don't like it because I feel like the GM (or myself as the GM) has to write large chunk of rules AND the game is poorly balanced.</p>
<p>Like man, I can swallow simplicity and gutting mechanics if it works well and 5e has never worked well in our groups.</p>
Orville Redenbacher wrote:Y u no play 5E?
I don't like it. And I don't like it because I feel like the GM (or myself as the GM) has to write large chunk of rules AND the game is poorly balanced.
Like man, I can swallow simplicity and gutting mechanics if it works well and 5e has never worked well in our groups.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T17:20:05Z
Forums: Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion: Why PF2e isn't as bad as you thought it would be?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9ny?Why-PF2e-isnt-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be#1
2018-08-02T16:56:58Z
2018-08-02T16:56:58Z
<p>Every preview increased my sense of dread. By the time the playtest dropped, I had nearly zero energy to look through it aside from getting a few more things to make jokes about to my friends.</p>
<p>After glancing through some things, not too bad. Skills do things now, magic arms and armor have been reworked so interesting abilities are a thing you actually get now before maxing out the boring number bonuses. Druid wild shape can't be used as utility until level 10 (which is way better than never). It appears that Racial, skill, and general feats help more out of combat while your class gives most of what you are doing in combat.</p>
<p>Magic is still really strong (Full caster > Everything else), you can't actually fix that and be in genre. More-so, the cool magic is Pathfinder/D&D's appeal to me over other games I like. Being a martial seems to suck less now, and they were pretty tolerable in 1e (compared to 3.5). Sure things got "nerfed", but a lot of things got "nerfed" to compensate that your skills actually do things now.</p>
<p>Summons and Magic Item crafting look fine (yeah Item level being a thing is "meta" but it's a contrivance I can get behind to contain the math). </p>
<p>And yes, I am getting a 4e vibe, but 4e did have a good layout (and complicated games need to deliver information efficiently). The big difference from the 4e set up is that abilities are cumulative, where in 4e you replace powers as you level (oh and have about a 3rd of the feats).</p>
<p>So yeah, seems fine. I'm still not SUPER jazzed about it, but it's not like I would refuse to play it (like I refuse to play 5e).</p>
Every preview increased my sense of dread. By the time the playtest dropped, I had nearly zero energy to look through it aside from getting a few more things to make jokes about to my friends.
After glancing through some things, not too bad. Skills do things now, magic arms and armor have been reworked so interesting abilities are a thing you actually get now before maxing out the boring number bonuses. Druid wild shape can't be used as utility until level 10 (which is way better than...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-08-02T16:56:58Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: 2nd edition woes
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v8uh&page=3?2nd-edition-woes#144
2018-07-28T21:27:14Z
2018-07-28T18:57:33Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Captain Morgan wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yeeeaaah, the bigger problem is prepping content for our homebrew campaigns.</p>
<p>PCs do so much with very complicated and entirely separate rules and it's just very difficult as a GM to know what to expect without mastering the game. That's the big problem for most of my friends.</p>
<p>I'm a rules guy though. So that isn't my problem. My problem comes from the sheer clunk and my absolute demand for NPC/PC parity (I'm not even OK with Starfinder given how the math of AC and to-hit inverts from PC to NPC). 1e has parity but it also has clunk. No amount of engine or automation is going to fix the "I need to know what these 20 spells and feats do at the same time". I can do it, but it drains me to be spending so much effort on it.</p>
<p>Sure 2e is putting everything into feats and spells and the lack of other categories is going to prevent lots of general rules arguments on forums. But everyone still does dozens of things and things they do are less memorable. Way too many of these abilities are full of numbers I'm going to have to look up every time to even know if I want to use it.</p>
<p>I'm all for tons of abilities and deep mechanics, but the mechanics need to justify their weight enough so that I'm interested enough in them to easily want to memorize the rules. This is far more important to me than "balance".
<br />
</blockquote>I'm not completely sure I understand where you are coming from on this, but if it is about it being hard to DM monsters and NPCs with all kinds of abilities, than the good news is that is being cut waaaay down. Stat blocks will be much simpler to use. </blockquote><p>But if monsters aren't following the same rules as PCs, then I don't care. I can't really stand 5e monsters and blog about subjective skill DCs for 2e probably means I'll never want to run it. I hate seeing the majority of what creatures can do be hidden in the "creatures can do what I feel they can" sub system.
<p>Also you can have plenty of abilities, but they need to each mean something and be meaningfully different from one another.</p>
Captain Morgan wrote:MR. H wrote:Yeeeaaah, the bigger problem is prepping content for our homebrew campaigns.
PCs do so much with very complicated and entirely separate rules and it's just very difficult as a GM to know what to expect without mastering the game. That's the big problem for most of my friends.
I'm a rules guy though. So that isn't my problem. My problem comes from the sheer clunk and my absolute demand for NPC/PC parity (I'm not even OK with Starfinder given how the math of...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-07-28T18:57:33Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: 2nd edition woes
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v8uh&page=3?2nd-edition-woes#142
2018-07-28T16:30:55Z
2018-07-28T16:20:48Z
<p>Yeeeaaah, the bigger problem is prepping content for our homebrew campaigns.</p>
<p>PCs do so much with very complicated and entirely separate rules and it's just very difficult as a GM to know what to expect without mastering the game. That's the big problem for most of my friends.</p>
<p>I'm a rules guy though. So that isn't my problem. My problem comes from the sheer clunk and my absolute demand for NPC/PC parity (I'm not even OK with Starfinder given how the math of AC and to-hit inverts from PC to NPC). 1e has parity but it also has clunk. No amount of engine or automation is going to fix the "I need to know what these 20 spells and feats do at the same time". I can do it, but it drains me to be spending so much effort on it.</p>
<p>Sure 2e is putting everything into feats and spells and the lack of other categories is going to prevent lots of general rules arguments on forums. But everyone still does dozens of things and things they do are less memorable. Way too many of these abilities are full of numbers I'm going to have to look up every time to even know if I want to use it.</p>
<p>I'm all for tons of abilities and deep mechanics, but the mechanics need to justify their weight enough so that I'm interested enough in them to easily want to memorize the rules. This is far more important to me than "balance".</p>
Yeeeaaah, the bigger problem is prepping content for our homebrew campaigns.
PCs do so much with very complicated and entirely separate rules and it's just very difficult as a GM to know what to expect without mastering the game. That's the big problem for most of my friends.
I'm a rules guy though. So that isn't my problem. My problem comes from the sheer clunk and my absolute demand for NPC/PC parity (I'm not even OK with Starfinder given how the math of AC and to-hit inverts from PC to...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-07-28T16:20:48Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: 2nd edition woes
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v8uh&page=3?2nd-edition-woes#128
2018-07-28T01:48:54Z
2018-07-25T18:05:13Z
<p>I'm sad not because Pathfinder is changing, but because it looks like Pathfinder won't win me back.</p>
<p>Our group likes playing Pathfinder, but no one wants to run it. But the information we are getting about 2e just doesn't gel with any us and some of the stuff I'm seeing only makes the game seem even harder to run while being less fun to play.</p>
<p>We're hoping that all the info only looks bad and that the new system is going to be great. But man do I not have the energy to do a deep dive on this like I did Starfinder. 2e is going to only have a superficial look through to grab my attention, which can be wrong. I didn't buy the book with the Warlock in it because the bolts weren't touch AC, even though they become touch AC eventually. I still never bought that book. I gave it a 30 second look at Gencon and that one class feature decided my purchase.</p>
<p>I'm probably going glance through the skill system of 2e and decide whether or not I care about the system. Then I'll move on to magic item crafting.</p>
I'm sad not because Pathfinder is changing, but because it looks like Pathfinder won't win me back.
Our group likes playing Pathfinder, but no one wants to run it. But the information we are getting about 2e just doesn't gel with any us and some of the stuff I'm seeing only makes the game seem even harder to run while being less fun to play.
We're hoping that all the info only looks bad and that the new system is going to be great. But man do I not have the energy to do a deep dive on this...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-07-25T18:05:13Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I'm really liking the Adaptive Shifter
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v84s?Im-really-liking-the-Adaptive-Shifter#15
2018-07-04T17:55:22Z
2018-07-04T17:55:22Z
<p>Oh I didn't notice the reduced duration on wild shape to cap out at 10 hours.</p>
<p>That's bad. The Druid is still a better wildshaper which is just unacceptable.</p>
Oh I didn't notice the reduced duration on wild shape to cap out at 10 hours.
That's bad. The Druid is still a better wildshaper which is just unacceptable.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-07-04T17:55:22Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: If you recommend playing a Wizard to a player who wants to play Batman, you have no business making recommendations.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v802&page=2?If-you-recommend-playing-a-Wizard-to-a-player#52
2018-07-05T01:24:31Z
2018-07-04T17:52:22Z
<p>The important part of the Batman is perfectly captured by the wizard class.</p>
<p>1. Exponential increase in strength with prep time.</p>
<p>2. Nearly unlimited money.</p>
<p>3. Smarter than everyone else in the party.</p>
<p>And hey, a level 8 wizard would beat Bruce Lee in a fist fight.</p>
The important part of the Batman is perfectly captured by the wizard class.
1. Exponential increase in strength with prep time.
2. Nearly unlimited money.
3. Smarter than everyone else in the party.
And hey, a level 8 wizard would beat Bruce Lee in a fist fight.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-07-04T17:52:22Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Planning Ahead for Houseruling Out Resonance
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v7ug?Planning-Ahead-for-Houseruling-Out-Resonance#26
2018-06-29T14:25:06Z
2018-06-29T13:54:34Z
<p>I have a pretty in-depth way to run a Pathfinder game without resonance:</p>
<p>Play 1e</p>
I have a pretty in-depth way to run a Pathfinder game without resonance:
Play 1e
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-06-29T13:54:34Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Barbarian Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkui&page=2?Barbarian-Class-Preview#75
2018-06-11T22:07:10Z
2018-06-11T22:07:10Z
<p>Popping in and out of rage every fight doesn't make sense to me.</p>
Popping in and out of rage every fight doesn't make sense to me.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-06-11T22:07:10Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Pathfinder 2.0 is NOT Inevitable
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2s6yq&page=11?Pathfinder-20-is-NOT-Inevitable#550
2018-05-21T00:19:11Z
2018-05-20T18:02:25Z
<p>Hey look at it this way, if 2e flops, they will go back to making 1e material.</p>
Hey look at it this way, if 2e flops, they will go back to making 1e material.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-05-20T18:02:25Z
Re: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: Need Advice: Playing while Blind.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v5hs?Need-Advice-Playing-while-Blind#17
2018-05-23T21:16:32Z
2018-05-20T17:58:46Z
<p>One thing you can do is label the battle mat rows and columns and have everyone call out where they are moving and from where.</p>
<p>"Ragnar moves from B9 to C7"</p>
One thing you can do is label the battle mat rows and columns and have everyone call out where they are moving and from where.
"Ragnar moves from B9 to C7"
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-05-20T17:58:46Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Rename the whole system!
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v510&page=3?Rename-the-whole-system#101
2018-05-17T23:15:56Z
2018-05-17T23:15:56Z
<p>GURPS Fantasy Classes</p>
GURPS Fantasy Classes
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-05-17T23:15:56Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paladin Code Debugging
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v4vu?Paladin-Code-Debugging#10
2018-05-09T14:43:28Z
2018-05-09T00:18:51Z
<p>They tried to fix the code, but the key difference between 3.5 and Pathfinder is that in the "Ex-paladins" text, 3.5 says you have to grossly violate your code while PF says any violation causes you to fall.</p>
They tried to fix the code, but the key difference between 3.5 and Pathfinder is that in the "Ex-paladins" text, 3.5 says you have to grossly violate your code while PF says any violation causes you to fall.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-05-09T00:18:51Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Cleric Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkqb&page=9?Cleric-Class-Preview#414
2018-04-24T16:54:34Z
2018-04-24T13:10:58Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> Hmm, rebalancing the number of spell slots I see. </blockquote><p>3 spells per level, stronger cantrips, inflated HP.
<p>The recipe for the kind of 5e combats I don't like, without encounter powers from 4e to help prevent at-will spam.</p>
TriOmegaZero wrote:Hmm, rebalancing the number of spell slots I see.
3 spells per level, stronger cantrips, inflated HP. The recipe for the kind of 5e combats I don't like, without encounter powers from 4e to help prevent at-will spam.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-24T13:10:58Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Secrets of Alchemy
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkq6&page=7?Secrets-of-Alchemy#332
2018-04-23T15:52:47Z
2018-04-22T14:31:49Z
<p>Elixir ideas: Elixir of recovery. If you drink this elixir before 8 hours of sleep, you wake up the next day with all HP healed.</p>
<p>Elixir of cat eye. You gain superior dark vision for 8 hours but are dazzled in bright light.</p>
<p>Elixir of toxicity. You better resist poisons and unarmed or natural attacks against you poison the attacker, but all healing effects roll minimum healing against you.</p>
<p>Elixir of fight. For 8 hours your arms turn into wings and give you a flight speed, but they cannot be used to hold objects.</p>
Elixir ideas: Elixir of recovery. If you drink this elixir before 8 hours of sleep, you wake up the next day with all HP healed.
Elixir of cat eye. You gain superior dark vision for 8 hours but are dazzled in bright light.
Elixir of toxicity. You better resist poisons and unarmed or natural attacks against you poison the attacker, but all healing effects roll minimum healing against you.
Elixir of fight. For 8 hours your arms turn into wings and give you a flight speed, but they cannot be...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-22T14:31:49Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: The Magus NEEDS to be in the Core
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v2c9&page=2?The-Magus-NEEDS-to-be-in-the-Core#97
2018-04-20T17:30:53Z
2018-04-20T17:30:53Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Xenocrat wrote:</div><blockquote> Counterpoint: It doesn't. Only Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, and Wizard really need to be in core. </blockquote><p>Don't forget Dwarf, Halfling, and Elf!
Xenocrat wrote:Counterpoint: It doesn't. Only Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, and Wizard really need to be in core.
Don't forget Dwarf, Halfling, and Elf!
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-20T17:30:53Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Things We Are Liking So Far
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v1q4&page=2?Things-We-Are-Liking-So-Far#61
2018-04-22T09:30:23Z
2018-04-14T14:30:07Z
<p>I like that the playtest rules will be free so that no matter my lack of enthusiasm or interest, I'll give the game a look anyways.</p>
I like that the playtest rules will be free so that no matter my lack of enthusiasm or interest, I'll give the game a look anyways.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-14T14:30:07Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Will 2E end character customization?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v227?Will-2E-end-character-customization#35
2018-04-15T05:39:33Z
2018-04-13T16:55:53Z
<p>Oh 2e will have plenty of "customization" but the question is if I will care.</p>
<p>There is a big difference between choices, meaningful choices, and interesting choices.</p>
<p>So far, I've not been sold on the hype.</p>
Oh 2e will have plenty of "customization" but the question is if I will care.
There is a big difference between choices, meaningful choices, and interesting choices.
So far, I've not been sold on the hype.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-13T16:55:53Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Alchemist Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkp5&page=4?Alchemist-Class-Preview#161
2018-04-11T20:11:56Z
2018-04-09T23:17:28Z
<p>So it does less than a 1e Alchemist?</p>
<p>At least that is the impression given off by the preview. I would have to see more new stuff than I am told core abilities that got delayed/became optional to actually get excited about this class.</p>
<p>You didn't even confirm if it has spell casting or what kind (1/2, full, act). At least by knowing that I could get a round idea at how many tools it has.</p>
So it does less than a 1e Alchemist?
At least that is the impression given off by the preview. I would have to see more new stuff than I am told core abilities that got delayed/became optional to actually get excited about this class.
You didn't even confirm if it has spell casting or what kind (1/2, full, act). At least by knowing that I could get a round idea at how many tools it has.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-09T23:17:28Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Should There Even Be Classes?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v1ja?Should-There-Even-Be-Classes#24
2018-04-08T13:57:23Z
2018-04-08T13:57:23Z
<p>A classless sub system would be great. Like a class that got some general feats first and then any other class feat at -4 levels or something. Like an Adventure class, not as strong but more freeformed.</p>
<p>A comprehensive class builder would also be useful in large groups like mine where people don't like repeating classes.</p>
<p>But I think PF should keep classes. Some in my group love classes and complain about the lack of classes on other games.</p>
A classless sub system would be great. Like a class that got some general feats first and then any other class feat at -4 levels or something. Like an Adventure class, not as strong but more freeformed.
A comprehensive class builder would also be useful in large groups like mine where people don't like repeating classes.
But I think PF should keep classes. Some in my group love classes and complain about the lack of classes on other games.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-08T13:57:23Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Thank you Paizo developers, for replacing race with ancestry
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v1cf&page=2?Thank-you-Paizo-developers-for-replacing-race#97
2018-04-05T22:04:25Z
2018-04-05T22:03:43Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Unicore wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Sara Marie wrote:</div><blockquote> <span class=messageboard-ooc>Removed some more posts and replies. When the conversation here on the forums regarding race/ancestry shifts to discussing if its "too PC", "too politically correct" or "caving to identity politics" posts inevitably stray towards discussing how the majority of gamers don't have a problem with the term "race" and therefore it should be kept as is. The implication of this argument, sometimes merely hinted at, sometimes stated outright, is that the majority of gamers are white and if they don't have a problem with it then it shouldn't be a problem. This creates a hostile environment for gamers who are not white. It dismisses them as irrelevant to the community and the conversations about gaming and allowing those conversations to stand on our forums creates an unwelcoming environment; a place on the internet where their feelings are dismissed rather than accepted. </span> </blockquote><p>What?
<p>White people have more problems with the term race than any other group.</p>
<p>Also this post can come off as "anyone who has a problem with the term ancestry is racist" or at least that is what is being merely hinted at or outright stated by certain posters. </blockquote><p>The purpose of this thread was to thank the developers for addressing the narrative and mechanical issue that "race" as a loaded and misrepresentative term played in the first edition of pathfinder with a system that looks to be much simpler, open and encouraging of more of what makes pathfinder great, the ability to play the broadest range of characters imaginable in fun ways that fit into the impressive world building that the developers have done. Neither race nor species feels mechanically necessary in a high fantasy setting where magic, and not science, is the primary causality of everything that exists.
<p>I don't understand why acknowledging that the idea of a broad and diverse "ancestry" is what makes the humans of Golarion so much more compelling than humans in other fantasy settings and wanting to see that more... </blockquote><p>I would clarify. I don't have any problems with the term ancestry. I see no sound logical reason to support or detract the term. In my opinion, arguments about word definitions are fun but pointless. Whatever word they use means whatever it means as a game term. I couldn't care less what term they use here.
Unicore wrote:MR. H wrote: Sara Marie wrote: Removed some more posts and replies. When the conversation here on the forums regarding race/ancestry shifts to discussing if its "too PC", "too politically correct" or "caving to identity politics" posts inevitably stray towards discussing how the majority of gamers don't have a problem with the term "race" and therefore it should be kept as is. The implication of this argument, sometimes merely hinted at, sometimes stated outright, is that the...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-05T22:03:43Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Just how much is Paizo willing to listen?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v18a&page=3?Just-how-much-is-Paizo-willing-to-listen#107
2018-04-06T02:42:30Z
2018-04-05T17:10:31Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bardic Dave wrote:</div><blockquote><p> One of the most interesting design insights that came during D&D 5E's development was that a given concept or mechanic had to meet a 70% favourable public feedback threshold to make the cut. Just under 70% and they would rework the idea and release another version for playtesting. Significantly less than 70%, and the idea would either get completely scrapped or sent back to the drawing board for a total redesign.</p>
<p>This is perhaps a gross exaggeration, but one could make the claim that 5E was an RPG designed by committee/focus group. Whether or not you like 5E might inform whether or not you think this is a good approach to game design. </blockquote><p>Good design is not a democracy.
Bardic Dave wrote:One of the most interesting design insights that came during D&D 5E's development was that a given concept or mechanic had to meet a 70% favourable public feedback threshold to make the cut. Just under 70% and they would rework the idea and release another version for playtesting. Significantly less than 70%, and the idea would either get completely scrapped or sent back to the drawing board for a total redesign.
This is perhaps a gross exaggeration, but one could make the...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-05T17:10:31Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Thank you Paizo developers, for replacing race with ancestry
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v1cf&page=2?Thank-you-Paizo-developers-for-replacing-race#66
2018-04-05T18:55:09Z
2018-04-05T17:04:00Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Sara Marie wrote:</div><blockquote> <span class=messageboard-ooc>If you want to discuss how the shift from using "race" to "ancestry" is too politically correct or caving to identity politics you'll need to take it off of paizo.com. We will not be hosting discussion of that on our forums. Those conversations almost immediately stray into debating or arguing in a way that does not promote a welcoming environment on our forums. </span> </blockquote><p>I mean this should really show everyone that Paizo doesn't care if this term hurts your feelings.
<p>It's probably safe to assume it wasn't changed for that reason either.</p>
Sara Marie wrote:If you want to discuss how the shift from using "race" to "ancestry" is too politically correct or caving to identity politics you'll need to take it off of paizo.com. We will not be hosting discussion of that on our forums. Those conversations almost immediately stray into debating or arguing in a way that does not promote a welcoming environment on our forums.
I mean this should really show everyone that Paizo doesn't care if this term hurts your feelings. It's probably...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-05T17:04:00Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Are we getting more Shifter fixes soon?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v19t?Are-we-getting-more-Shifter-fixes-soon#18
2018-04-20T19:11:38Z
2018-04-05T16:37:35Z
<p>The shifter is why my group has zero hype for 2e.</p>
<p>You can't drop the ball that badly as a company and expect people to assume your new edition is going to be good.</p>
The shifter is why my group has zero hype for 2e.
You can't drop the ball that badly as a company and expect people to assume your new edition is going to be good.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-05T16:37:35Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: I just had the horrible realization ...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v1a2&page=2?I-just-had-the-horrible-realization#71
2018-04-08T06:00:47Z
2018-04-04T23:14:11Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Midnight Anarch wrote:</div><blockquote><p> PF2's goblins are the newest incarnation of Drizzt Do'Urdens at the table. You know what I'm talking about here.</p>
<p>It's not so much that goblins-as-core may give license to gray-area players, which is a minor but real consideration. It's that Paizo is ruining the lore and core appeal that made Pathfinder goblins attractive to players in the first place. And just like stupid drow, they did it to tap into some "mass marketing" appeal of them as a playable race. </p>
<p>Seems like a bad idea that Paizo, for some reason, positively adores. </blockquote><p>I've always hated Paizo goblins for being memes.
<p>This face lift makes them and Golarion more interesting</p>
Midnight Anarch wrote:PF2's goblins are the newest incarnation of Drizzt Do'Urdens at the table. You know what I'm talking about here.
It's not so much that goblins-as-core may give license to gray-area players, which is a minor but real consideration. It's that Paizo is ruining the lore and core appeal that made Pathfinder goblins attractive to players in the first place. And just like stupid drow, they did it to tap into some "mass marketing" appeal of them as a playable race.
Seems like...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-04T23:14:11Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Goblins!
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkog&page=5?Goblins#243
2018-05-05T22:06:40Z
2018-04-03T01:34:00Z
<p>Actually the best thing I've seen so far for 2e. The ancestry feats are cool (like making junk versions of objects) and the fluff is fun.</p>
<p>Idc that "it's different". Different that yields neat things is something I can work with.</p>
Actually the best thing I've seen so far for 2e. The ancestry feats are cool (like making junk versions of objects) and the fluff is fun.
Idc that "it's different". Different that yields neat things is something I can work with.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-04-03T01:34:00Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Rogue Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkn4&page=10?Rogue-Class-Preview#474
2018-03-30T17:38:11Z
2018-03-29T19:26:12Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">GentleGiant wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Panel from Gary Con with Jason Buhlman and Stephen Radney-Macfarland:
</p>
"We've looked at ways to ensure that spellcasters still have cool, fun, useful things to do on their turn, right? I think one of our guiding principles; When it's your turn, the spotlight should be on you and you should do something cool. Right, that's kind of the general guideline. But, once your turn is over, the spotlight should not somehow still be on you. And sometimes with spellcasters that could be the case. Their effects could be hindering and messing with so many parts of the combat that it was like - some of the other characters would be like: "Well, I was there too, I guess. But you blew this spell and ...".
<br />
And I'm not saying that that can't still happen, because it certainly can, but I think we've now given every character fun ways that they can interact with ... the combat, the story, with the set-up, that you won't feel like: "Wow, I didn't participate in that at all". And I mean, if you just want to cut it down to brass tacks, we certainly made sure that a lot of the damage, you know, swings and flows between different character types, at different moments of play. Right, so, you now, the Rogue is certainly going to find points in time when their damage bursts are high and they're going to do a lot of damage. The Wizard still, obviously, has spells that are gonna deal a lo ... a fair amout of damage to a lot of targets. Erm, that's kind of one of their schticks, right? Whereas the Fighter is just gonna be like: "That guy! I'm gonna go mess that guy up!" Right? And that's their thing and we want them to be good at 'their thing'".
<br />
"Not only mess them up, but lock them down"
<br />
"Yeah, and lock 'em down and prevent them going and messing with anybody else. Those sort of things are important to how we want the game experience to work. So, you know, when it comes to the kind of difference between martial characters and spell casting characters, there's still going to be some differences, they're going to play in different ways,... </blockquote><p>It's a trivial thing to prevent casters from stomping all over the niches of others, it's an entirely different matter to preserve fun casters and make the noncasters relevant.
<p>I don't like the focus on damage and DPS in their response. That's basic stuff. Damage is boring. Damage is banal. It's what everyone can do. It had nothing to do with C/M. Damage has never been the problem. A wizard doing more melee damage than a fighter is a result of the problem not the problem itself.</p>
GentleGiant wrote:Panel from Gary Con with Jason Buhlman and Stephen Radney-Macfarland:
"We've looked at ways to ensure that spellcasters still have cool, fun, useful things to do on their turn, right? I think one of our guiding principles; When it's your turn, the spotlight should be on you and you should do something cool. Right, that's kind of the general guideline. But, once your turn is over, the spotlight should not somehow still be on you. And sometimes with spellcasters that could be...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-29T19:26:12Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Rogue Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkn4&page=10?Rogue-Class-Preview#464
2018-03-29T15:59:14Z
2018-03-29T15:58:47Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">MMCJawa wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I feel like the new Rogue must be in a decent place if the choice of use of the term "Thievery" is the biggest cause of debate right now on this thread... </p>
<p>:) </blockquote><p>The entirety of the presented rogue's usefulness depends on the skill system that we really don't know about yet.
<p>Will having tons of proficiencies and skill feats matter? We don't know.</p>
<p>The rest of the kit presented seems based around damage which isn't all that important for what a rogue needs to do to feel like a rogue.</p>
MMCJawa wrote:I feel like the new Rogue must be in a decent place if the choice of use of the term "Thievery" is the biggest cause of debate right now on this thread...
:)
The entirety of the presented rogue's usefulness depends on the skill system that we really don't know about yet. Will having tons of proficiencies and skill feats matter? We don't know.
The rest of the kit presented seems based around damage which isn't all that important for what a rogue needs to do to feel like a rogue.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-29T15:58:47Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Please don't change the death rules.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v0qd?Please-dont-change-the-death-rules#3
2018-03-29T00:44:31Z
2018-03-28T19:57:14Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">SorrySleeping wrote:</div><blockquote>1) Please don't joke about killing yourself.</blockquote><p>2nd this.
<p>I don't particularly like "5e dying but more complicated" death system either, but I'm not too hung up about it.</p>
SorrySleeping wrote:1) Please don't joke about killing yourself.
2nd this. I don't particularly like "5e dying but more complicated" death system either, but I'm not too hung up about it.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-28T19:57:14Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: The blog posts are way too generic!
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v0j8&page=2?The-blog-posts-are-way-too-generic#61
2018-03-30T19:08:56Z
2018-03-28T18:10:05Z
<p>I just don't get the wait. We could all have alpha rules now while the real playtest is still getting changed.</p>
<p>Paizo could have thousands of people pouring over their current rules and pointing out unexpected combos or expressing confusion about wording. </p>
<p>Right now it feels like I'm being marketed too not that I'm being invited for feedback and it doesn't make me feel good about 2e.</p>
I just don't get the wait. We could all have alpha rules now while the real playtest is still getting changed.
Paizo could have thousands of people pouring over their current rules and pointing out unexpected combos or expressing confusion about wording.
Right now it feels like I'm being marketed too not that I'm being invited for feedback and it doesn't make me feel good about 2e.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-28T18:10:05Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Rogue Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkn4&page=8?Rogue-Class-Preview#373
2018-03-28T15:06:48Z
2018-03-28T15:06:48Z
<p>The central problem with the rogue in the 3.x design space has always been the weakness of skills.</p>
<p>It seems to me that the rogue is leaning heavily on the new skill system to be interesting and do cool things because most of the class stuff previewed just isn't interesting.</p>
The central problem with the rogue in the 3.x design space has always been the weakness of skills.
It seems to me that the rogue is leaning heavily on the new skill system to be interesting and do cool things because most of the class stuff previewed just isn't interesting.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-28T15:06:48Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Why a new system (2.0) is being created?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uy4p&page=7?Why-a-new-system-is-being-created#308
2018-03-26T12:44:23Z
2018-03-26T12:44:23Z
<p>People are talking about 5e like system mastery can't make you tons better than everyone else at the table. Or that it can't be powergamed.</p>
<p>That is my biggest problem with 5e, for all is it's simplification, restriction of Character concepts and narrative pacing, it's still very easy to break the game. I personally find 5e to be far more fragile than PF ever was.</p>
People are talking about 5e like system mastery can't make you tons better than everyone else at the table. Or that it can't be powergamed.
That is my biggest problem with 5e, for all is it's simplification, restriction of Character concepts and narrative pacing, it's still very easy to break the game. I personally find 5e to be far more fragile than PF ever was.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-26T12:44:23Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Can we not have trap options, please?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uz63?Can-we-not-have-trap-options-please#45
2018-03-29T15:24:12Z
2018-03-25T21:50:56Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Gorbacz wrote:</div><blockquote> I hope Paizo finally bans Power Attack, because every time my Wizard takes it I end up hitting with my dagger so rarely that it barely counts. </blockquote><p>This is an example of why there will always be traps options in a diverse system.
<p>I would rather there be "trap" options than to limit concepts.</p>
Gorbacz wrote:I hope Paizo finally bans Power Attack, because every time my Wizard takes it I end up hitting with my dagger so rarely that it barely counts.
This is an example of why there will always be traps options in a diverse system. I would rather there be "trap" options than to limit concepts.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-25T21:50:56Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Fighter Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm9&page=17?Fighter-Class-Preview#836
2018-03-23T11:44:49Z
2018-03-23T11:44:49Z
<p>Anyone else notice that shifting your grip seemed to be an action?</p>
Anyone else notice that shifting your grip seemed to be an action?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-23T11:44:49Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Caster-Martial Disparity in 2e
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uzzb?CasterMartial-Disparity-in-2e#28
2018-03-21T21:27:14Z
2018-03-21T21:27:14Z
<p>If having magic is as cool as not having magic, then why would anyone bother learning magic?</p>
<p>MMO's had to address this and they did it with roles and niche protection.</p>
<p>But what about TTRPGs? Do they go the MMO route with niches and limited utility magic? Or do they find some other way to keep mundanes relevant. Do we add narrative risk to magic. In Hellfrost every spell has a chance to permanently reduce your magical power, so people don't spam magic, even out of combat. With the way the system is set up, players never really run the risk of losing magic power forever unless they are spamming magic and run out of re-roll tokens.</p>
If having magic is as cool as not having magic, then why would anyone bother learning magic?
MMO's had to address this and they did it with roles and niche protection.
But what about TTRPGs? Do they go the MMO route with niches and limited utility magic? Or do they find some other way to keep mundanes relevant. Do we add narrative risk to magic. In Hellfrost every spell has a chance to permanently reduce your magical power, so people don't spam magic, even out of combat. With the way the...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-21T21:27:14Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Fighter Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm9&page=14?Fighter-Class-Preview#659
2018-03-21T12:22:49Z
2018-03-21T12:22:49Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Hythlodeus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">gustavo iglesias wrote:</div><blockquote> The fighter do not have the option to, say, lead armies, forge empires, or become a legend. </blockquote>so role playing is not an option, I see. I'd argue that a good Leadership score might give you an army to lead, that the Kingdom building rules will help you forge empires and that you might become a legend if you actually do something legendary so, the options are there if you are looking for them </blockquote><p>But it doesn't do anything. Those armies are not all that useful and a kingdom would give you posterity at best, furthermore these things are not even fighter exclusive options. A caster would generally make for a better King than a fighter.
<p>Martials can be carefully built to be adequate at higher levels (more useful than binding an outsider to pay them in a share of the treasure), but it is very difficult.</p>
Hythlodeus wrote:gustavo iglesias wrote: The fighter do not have the option to, say, lead armies, forge empires, or become a legend.
so role playing is not an option, I see. I'd argue that a good Leadership score might give you an army to lead, that the Kingdom building rules will help you forge empires and that you might become a legend if you actually do something legendary so, the options are there if you are looking for them But it doesn't do anything. Those armies are not all that...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-21T12:22:49Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Pathfinder 2 - Spiritual Successor to D&D 4th Edition
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uzmh&page=2?Pathfinder-2-Spiritual-Successor-to-DD-4th#93
2018-03-20T16:45:04Z
2018-03-20T15:04:40Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">PossibleCabbage wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote><p>4e has rules.</p>
<p>5e has difficulty DCs. It does not tell you what DC climbing a tree is. It is up to the DM to determine if the tree is of "medium" difficulty to climb.</p>
<p>5e gives no context to this difficulty. "Medium" for the person attempting? Medium for their level? Or just "Medium" in a game/world sense. Regardless, difficulty is not defined in physical in-universe or even in-game terms. It is purely a DM gut check. Your DM's feelings comprises the entirety of Skill DCs outside of opposed rolls.</p>
<p>So I don't understand comparing the 5e skill system to anything. It's function depends entirely on the DM. </blockquote><p>I'll be honest, I think that's a distinction without a difference. If I, as the GM, want a tree to be harder to climb, I will describe it in a way that indicates it's harder to climb (It's a baobab not an oak, it's rotten in places, it's haunted, etc.) What determines the difficulty of climbing the tree is still "how hard I feel it should be to climb" which will always be the case because the tree does not exist until the GM puts it there and the players don't know anything about the tree save for what the GM tells them.
<p>I mean, it would be weirder if all oak trees were exactly as hard to climb as all other oak trees. I mean, if someone asks "how hard would it be to climb that tree" I guarantee my initial response would be "not very" or "a little tough" or something else qualitative not "the DC is x". </blockquote><p>When I GM, things just are. My setting of difficulty happens before the session.
<p>So if the players want to interact with an object that I didn't plan around, I prefer the rules providing a DC not my gut.</p>
<p>I prefer when the players surprise me. If I'm always making up DCs on the fly, I'm always controlling the players, which bores me.</p>
<p>So I don't place "medium trees", I place a tree and the DC can be determined by the descriptions in the climb skill table.</p>
PossibleCabbage wrote:MR. H wrote:4e has rules.
5e has difficulty DCs. It does not tell you what DC climbing a tree is. It is up to the DM to determine if the tree is of "medium" difficulty to climb.
5e gives no context to this difficulty. "Medium" for the person attempting? Medium for their level? Or just "Medium" in a game/world sense. Regardless, difficulty is not defined in physical in-universe or even in-game terms. It is purely a DM gut check. Your DM's feelings comprises the entirety...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-20T15:04:40Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Fighter Class Preview
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm9&page=9?Fighter-Class-Preview#445
2018-03-20T12:23:44Z
2018-03-20T12:23:44Z
<p>The math is bugging me. An extra d12 averages 6.5 while power attack gave an extra 18 damage by the end.</p>
<p>All concerns about accuracy are moot, you game the system to work around the accuracy penalties.</p>
The math is bugging me. An extra d12 averages 6.5 while power attack gave an extra 18 damage by the end.
All concerns about accuracy are moot, you game the system to work around the accuracy penalties.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-20T12:23:44Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Pathfinder 2 - Spiritual Successor to D&D 4th Edition
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uzmh&page=2?Pathfinder-2-Spiritual-Successor-to-DD-4th#80
2018-03-19T02:04:17Z
2018-03-18T20:32:47Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">glass wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Lucas Yew wrote:</div><blockquote> As long as it does not have floating, treadmill DCs, which make the campaign world UNSTABLE and LACK VERISIMILITUDE, it will be fine. Both 4E and 5E (to a certain extent) suffer from this, making in-game stats have unstable values in interacting with the world.</blockquote><p>I am not a 5e expert, but I am pretty sure it does not have that problem. I am something of 1 4e expert, and it definitely doesn't.
<p>An oak tree is still an oak tree in 4e too.</p>
<p>_
<br />
glass.
<br />
</blockquote><p>4e has rules.
<p>5e has difficulty DCs. It does not tell you what DC climbing a tree is. It is up to the DM to determine if the tree is of "medium" difficulty to climb.</p>
<p>5e gives no context to this difficulty. "Medium" for the person attempting? Medium for their level? Or just "Medium" in a game/world sense. Regardless, difficulty is not defined in physical in-universe or even in-game terms. It is purely a DM gut check. Your DM's feelings comprises the entirety of Skill DCs outside of opposed rolls.</p>
<p>So I don't understand comparing the 5e skill system to anything. It's function depends entirely on the DM.</p>
glass wrote:Lucas Yew wrote: As long as it does not have floating, treadmill DCs, which make the campaign world UNSTABLE and LACK VERISIMILITUDE, it will be fine. Both 4E and 5E (to a certain extent) suffer from this, making in-game stats have unstable values in interacting with the world.
I am not a 5e expert, but I am pretty sure it does not have that problem. I am something of 1 4e expert, and it definitely doesn't. An oak tree is still an oak tree in 4e too.
_
glass.
4e has rules. 5e...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-18T20:32:47Z
Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Reimagining the skill check.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uznn?Reimagining-the-skill-check#1
2018-03-18T16:13:17Z
2018-03-18T16:13:17Z
<p>What if you only roll for skills when you are in a contest with another creature?</p>
<p>What if your "rank" of untrained, trained, expert, master, and legendary decided things that you can do and only moderately helped out with a skill contest?</p>
<p>3.X have us this idea that everything you can do with a skill should be decided by a roll or taking 10. But with the d20 as the base randomizer this can lead to unwieldy systems, tons of mods, and just wonky stuff overall. For example opening lock DCs have to assume everyone can take 20. You need at least a DC of 21 or higher to prevent anyone from being able to pick a lock.</p>
<p>Now let's say expert thievery let's you pick expert locks, but picking pockets is still an opposed roll. How do people feel about a system like that?</p>
What if you only roll for skills when you are in a contest with another creature?
What if your "rank" of untrained, trained, expert, master, and legendary decided things that you can do and only moderately helped out with a skill contest?
3.X have us this idea that everything you can do with a skill should be decided by a roll or taking 10. But with the d20 as the base randomizer this can lead to unwieldy systems, tons of mods, and just wonky stuff overall. For example opening lock DCs have...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-18T16:13:17Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Pathfinder 2 - Spiritual Successor to D&D 4th Edition
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uzmh?Pathfinder-2-Spiritual-Successor-to-DD-4th#3
2018-04-26T00:14:00Z
2018-03-18T01:41:44Z
<p>Our group is going to start a 4e campaign for the first time soon. The system looks neat. No one want to run a PF 1e campaign and a lot of us don't like playing 5e.</p>
Our group is going to start a 4e campaign for the first time soon. The system looks neat. No one want to run a PF 1e campaign and a lot of us don't like playing 5e.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-18T01:41:44Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Converting to 1st Edition
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uy5t?Converting-to-1st-Edition#32
2018-03-17T23:19:05Z
2018-03-17T23:16:54Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Hythlodeus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> The minimum I want out of 2nd ed. is that the APs are easy to convert back into 1st, at least easier than Starfinder, where converting is a big pain as it is. I might enjoy the new setting specific books, after all it is still Golarion, but I really hope I can enjoy playing the Adventures you will writer after August 2019 too.</p>
<p>Don't just screw us over, who came in the 3.5 diaspora to you. Let us keep the system we chose 18 years or so ago and make it easy for us to still enjoy your wonderfully crafted APs even though we won't follow you to your new, sexy streamlined rules. </p>
<p>That's my only wish for 2nd ed. Don't make converting it back too hard </blockquote><p>The minimum you want out of 2nd ed is the ability to not use it?
<p>You aren't the target market. Paizo only has incentive to make converting PF 1e material to 2e easy and balanced to flesh out the content of 2e.</p>
<p>Understand your request is equivalent to asking Paizo to keep supporting 1e not a request about 2e. You are only phrasing the request to include the words "2e" but in truth you don't want anything from 2e, you want more 1e.</p>
<p>You'll probably just have to wait for another publisher to make another 3.5/Pathfinder fork. Or buy 3rd party content made for 1e.</p>
Hythlodeus wrote:The minimum I want out of 2nd ed. is that the APs are easy to convert back into 1st, at least easier than Starfinder, where converting is a big pain as it is. I might enjoy the new setting specific books, after all it is still Golarion, but I really hope I can enjoy playing the Adventures you will writer after August 2019 too.
Don't just screw us over, who came in the 3.5 diaspora to you. Let us keep the system we chose 18 years or so ago and make it easy for us to still...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-17T23:16:54Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Are You Proficient?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm3&page=11?Are-You-Proficient#542
2018-03-18T04:40:06Z
2018-03-17T14:00:33Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">gustavo iglesias wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">MR. H wrote:</div><blockquote> If most of what skills are comes from ranks rather than the number added to the d20 (aka needing to be trained or super trained to even attempt certain things) then why bother adding level to the roll at all? </blockquote><p>Because plenty of basic stuff has static DCs, and adventurers should get better at doing that basic stuff.
<p>Climbing a tree might be a mildly difficult thing for an untrained lvl 1 wizard, but it's not for a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h54kqvovC_w" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> high level one.</a> </blockquote><p>The buy-in with HP is that a wizard gets better at taking a punch, but why would murdering goblins intrinsically make him a better climber?
<p>Like it or not, this system naturally makes the game narrower in scope and reduces customization. Oh sure, you can add more decisions than 1e, but if I can't make level 20 Fighter than is worse at lying compared to a level 1 Bard, then the game no longer covers something I could have done in 1e.</p>
<p>And No, "RPing" not being able to do certain things doesn't count. That's a player version of rule 0 used to patch a game or use a game for something beyond it's intention.</p>
gustavo iglesias wrote:MR. H wrote: If most of what skills are comes from ranks rather than the number added to the d20 (aka needing to be trained or super trained to even attempt certain things) then why bother adding level to the roll at all?
Because plenty of basic stuff has static DCs, and adventurers should get better at doing that basic stuff. Climbing a tree might be a mildly difficult thing for an untrained lvl 1 wizard, but it's not for a high level one. The buy-in with HP is that...
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-17T14:00:33Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Are You Proficient?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm3&page=11?Are-You-Proficient#533
2018-03-17T13:48:27Z
2018-03-17T13:42:50Z
<p>If most of what skills are comes from ranks rather than the number added to the d20 (aka needing to be trained or super trained to even attempt certain things) then why bother adding level to the roll at all?</p>
If most of what skills are comes from ranks rather than the number added to the d20 (aka needing to be trained or super trained to even attempt certain things) then why bother adding level to the roll at all?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-17T13:42:50Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Are You Proficient?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm3&page=9?Are-You-Proficient#419
2018-03-19T17:13:32Z
2018-03-17T04:14:32Z
<p>I would think Pathfinder would avoid anything resembling 4e EVEN IF they could make the mechanics good.</p>
<p>Like this system could be God's gift to RPGs, but the Pathfinder fan-base is about as rabidly anti-4e as any fan-base could be.</p>
I would think Pathfinder would avoid anything resembling 4e EVEN IF they could make the mechanics good.
Like this system could be God's gift to RPGs, but the Pathfinder fan-base is about as rabidly anti-4e as any fan-base could be.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-17T04:14:32Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Paizo Blog: Are You Proficient?
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm3&page=5?Are-You-Proficient#244
2018-03-17T01:02:07Z
2018-03-17T00:25:16Z
<p>•raises eyebrow</p>
<p>This is just a rework of the 4e system. Not really a complaint, our group is about to start a 4e campaign.</p>
<p>But it seems really weird for Pathfinder to steal anything from 4e.</p>
*raises eyebrow
This is just a rework of the 4e system. Not really a complaint, our group is about to start a 4e campaign.
But it seems really weird for Pathfinder to steal anything from 4e.
MR. H (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-17T00:25:16Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: Why are Wands of CLW such a problem?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uzfs?Why-are-Wands-of-CLW-such-a-problem#30
2018-06-30T20:01:44Z
2018-03-16T12:17:28Z
<p>Who is ready for the new meta? Summoning wands to Summon monsters to use level 1 CLW wands.</p>
Who is ready for the new meta? Summoning wands to Summon monsters to use level 1 CLW wands.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-16T12:17:28Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: why alignment (for characters) needs to go
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uysk&page=3?why-alignment-needs-to-go#139
2018-03-14T18:40:46Z
2018-03-14T18:26:50Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tectorman wrote:</div><blockquote>So itās okay to run roughshod over someone elseās sensibilities as long as itās not explicit? </blockquote><p>Yes.
<p>Sensibilities are just that. Sensibilities. If someone was religiously against magic and people playing wizards or the DM pretending to cast spells as a bad guy upsets that person, then they can just deal with it.</p>
<p>Same if you have a problem with objective morality in a setting. That's a "you problem".</p>
Tectorman wrote:So itās okay to run roughshod over someone elseās sensibilities as long as itās not explicit?
Yes. Sensibilities are just that. Sensibilities. If someone was religiously against magic and people playing wizards or the DM pretending to cast spells as a bad guy upsets that person, then they can just deal with it.
Same if you have a problem with objective morality in a setting. That's a "you problem".
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-14T18:26:50Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: why alignment (for characters) needs to go
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uysk&page=3?why-alignment-needs-to-go#113
2018-03-13T17:52:34Z
2018-03-13T16:24:06Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tectorman wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> This is worse argument I've ever seen as to why alignment should be gotten rid of.</p>
<p>It can cause hurt feelings? Are we being serious here? Everything can cause hurt feelings! </p>
<p>The alignment system doesn't make sense. It's a roleplaying tool. But it hurting feelings is no where near the top reason to not have it. Pffffff </blockquote><p>Avoiding hurt feelings is why Horror Adventures has that section about consent. There are themes that can potentially take a player to one of their darkest most personal places, making them feel endangered or attacked by having those things brutally forced in their faces with no regard for their feelings.
<p>Hurt feelings are why you donāt just start an adventure with all the characters in a dungeon having been brutally tortured/raped without getting the playersā explicit consent ahead of time.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">PossibleCabbage wrote:</div><blockquote> It's really kind of jarring to me how people can read that section of Horror Adventures about consent and jump right to the conclusion that "the most upsetting thing that can happen to me in a game is being told 'no' or that the thing I did was not acceptable." Like <b>that</b> is what upsets you? </blockquote>That section in Horror Adventures is there because the themes that that section has all those warnings about are the sort can potentially be very traumatic and deeply personal. A personās views about what good and evil are and how they fundamentally work are not at the same level of traumatization, but they are just as personal and just as sacrosanct. A player shouldnāt have to expect that he or she might have child rape sprung on them in the game. Okay, so why is taking their sense of morality and expecting them to just abandon it any better? Thatās why āalignment (or at absolute minimum, any mechanics associated with it) stays out of the game by default unless and until everyone at the table explicitly gives their okayā should have been in the CRB. </blockquote><p>There is a vast gulf of difference between hurt feelings and taking care when explicit content is involved.
<p>And when it comes to the issue of someone's feelings being hurt based on a disagreement about objective morality, then GOOD. People should have their morality challenged and be required to defend it. Is that fun at the game table? Well it should be. Moral crisis and conflict is about as pure as roleplaying gets.</p>
Tectorman wrote:Rhedyn wrote:This is worse argument I've ever seen as to why alignment should be gotten rid of.
It can cause hurt feelings? Are we being serious here? Everything can cause hurt feelings!
The alignment system doesn't make sense. It's a roleplaying tool. But it hurting feelings is no where near the top reason to not have it. Pffffff
Avoiding hurt feelings is why Horror Adventures has that section about consent. There are themes that can potentially take a player to one of...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-13T16:24:06Z
Re: Forums: Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion: why alignment (for characters) needs to go
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uysk&page=2?why-alignment-needs-to-go#77
2018-03-20T16:37:34Z
2018-03-11T16:31:33Z
<p>This is worse argument I've ever seen as to why alignment should be gotten rid of.</p>
<p>It can cause hurt feelings? Are we being serious here? Everything can cause hurt feelings! </p>
<p>The alignment system doesn't make sense. It's a roleplaying tool. But it hurting feelings is no where near the top reason to not have it. Pffffff</p>
This is worse argument I've ever seen as to why alignment should be gotten rid of.
It can cause hurt feelings? Are we being serious here? Everything can cause hurt feelings!
The alignment system doesn't make sense. It's a roleplaying tool. But it hurting feelings is no where near the top reason to not have it. Pffffff
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-11T16:31:33Z
Re: Forums: Advice: Should this Paladin have fallen?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uy09&page=2?Should-this-Paladin-have-fallen#53
2018-03-06T15:11:52Z
2018-03-06T15:11:52Z
<p>Story incomplete.</p>
<p>What did he do with the cleric after this revelation?</p>
<p>Merely saving someone from an unlawful Lynch mob and patching them up is not a code violation.</p>
<p>Leaving the cleric free to wreak havoc would be a violation and illegally executing him is also a violation and illegal imprisonment is also a violation.</p>
Story incomplete.
What did he do with the cleric after this revelation?
Merely saving someone from an unlawful Lynch mob and patching them up is not a code violation.
Leaving the cleric free to wreak havoc would be a violation and illegally executing him is also a violation and illegal imprisonment is also a violation.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-03-06T15:11:52Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Addressing the "Is it as broken as the wizard Fallacy"
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uto0&page=4?Addressing-the-Is-it-as-broken-as-the-wizard#184
2018-01-16T13:15:42Z
2018-01-16T13:15:42Z
<p>If wizards weren't overpowered, my sorcerer might start getting criticized.</p>
If wizards weren't overpowered, my sorcerer might start getting criticized.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2018-01-16T13:15:42Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why are wizards considered overpowered?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2usee&page=8?Why-are-wizards-considered-overpowered#383
2017-12-31T04:22:36Z
2017-12-29T00:38:08Z
<p>Ranger bad?</p>
<p>Hahahahaha no.</p>
Ranger bad?
Hahahahaha no.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-29T00:38:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Kris Kringle stats?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2usov?Kris-Kringle-stats#7
2017-12-29T03:35:19Z
2017-12-28T21:56:02Z
<p>Level 13 wizard with Simulacrum. Major image raindeer. Make flying sleigh. Fabricate toys. Planar binding fey elves or Geas actual elves.</p>
<p>Make Simulacrum of self enough times to visit every house in one night. Spend a month or two of down time making the the toys.</p>
<p>Spend the rest of the time having your snowcones use scrying orbs you made to "watch you while your sleeping" and determine who is "bad or good".</p>
<p>Finance venture with coal mines worked by bound elementals or undead.</p>
Level 13 wizard with Simulacrum. Major image raindeer. Make flying sleigh. Fabricate toys. Planar binding fey elves or Geas actual elves.
Make Simulacrum of self enough times to visit every house in one night. Spend a month or two of down time making the the toys.
Spend the rest of the time having your snowcones use scrying orbs you made to "watch you while your sleeping" and determine who is "bad or good".
Finance venture with coal mines worked by bound elementals or undead.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-28T21:56:02Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: RIP magical child archetype
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ur3c&page=2?RIP-magical-child-archetype#74
2017-12-24T18:17:34Z
2017-12-24T18:13:56Z
<p>I don't see why contradictions in Ultimate Wilderness would effect how other rules work.</p>
<p>Your base familiar form is Mauler, the rest are improved forms that aren't. The class archetype actually prevents you from removing that familiar archetype upon gaining shapechange. Your forms are only ones you previously had, which includes the Mauler base form. UW "clarification" actually breaks the archetype and causes an error once you get an improved form because you aren't allowed to remove the archetype AND UW says you aren't allowed to have it. Nothing prevents you from taking a familiar archetype initially.</p>
<p>I'm not really surprised that UW's overall lazy writing, and shoddy design breaks the game in attempts to nerf things for PFS. If this is the kind of work we can expect for the future of PF, we might as well say this game is dead already.</p>
I don't see why contradictions in Ultimate Wilderness would effect how other rules work.
Your base familiar form is Mauler, the rest are improved forms that aren't. The class archetype actually prevents you from removing that familiar archetype upon gaining shapechange. Your forms are only ones you previously had, which includes the Mauler base form. UW "clarification" actually breaks the archetype and causes an error once you get an improved form because you aren't allowed to remove the...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-24T18:13:56Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=29?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1422
2017-12-20T17:56:50Z
2017-12-19T00:50:57Z
<p>I think the shifter class exist only to make people like the shifter archetypes other classes get more.</p>
I think the shifter class exist only to make people like the shifter archetypes other classes get more.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-19T00:50:57Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=29?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1413
2017-12-19T04:30:04Z
2017-12-18T23:32:50Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">nighttree wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote>I would also prefer to see no more time wasted on the shifter. Have it go the words of power route. </blockquote><p>Sadly, that's exactly what it's looking like will happen.
</p>
</blockquote><p>I'm excited for the release of the Polymorphist in Ultimate Magic 2: "We can only make things with spells interesting"
nighttree wrote:Rhedyn wrote:I would also prefer to see no more time wasted on the shifter. Have it go the words of power route.
Sadly, that's exactly what it's looking like will happen.
I'm excited for the release of the Polymorphist in Ultimate Magic 2: "We can only make things with spells interesting"
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-18T23:32:50Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=29?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1407
2017-12-22T19:44:11Z
2017-12-18T22:40:17Z
<p>Dragon Disciple with Prestigious spellcaster is a marvelous experience.</p>
<p>I would also prefer to see no more time wasted on the shifter. Have it go the words of power route.</p>
Dragon Disciple with Prestigious spellcaster is a marvelous experience.
I would also prefer to see no more time wasted on the shifter. Have it go the words of power route.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-18T22:40:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Classes that are still needed
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2s03z&page=8?Classes-that-are-still-needed#391
2017-12-17T17:45:42Z
2017-12-17T17:45:42Z
<p>Things we still need</p>
<p>1. A dedicated full BAB shifter class that is good and versatile at shifting.</p>
<p>2. An Artificer that generates most of it's utility and combat potential from the creation and use of magic items.</p>
<p>3. A dedicated summoner that only uses summoning as per summon monster or summon nature's Ally.</p>
<p>4. A pure skill Monkey that uses skills both in and out of combat. A mundane controller.</p>
<p>5. A monster Hunter that kills monsters to take special abilities from them via making equipment out of their parts.</p>
<p>6. A simplified magic class.</p>
Things we still need
1. A dedicated full BAB shifter class that is good and versatile at shifting.
2. An Artificer that generates most of it's utility and combat potential from the creation and use of magic items.
3. A dedicated summoner that only uses summoning as per summon monster or summon nature's Ally.
4. A pure skill Monkey that uses skills both in and out of combat. A mundane controller.
5. A monster Hunter that kills monsters to take special abilities from them via making...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-17T17:45:42Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=27?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1340
2017-12-15T19:15:43Z
2017-12-15T13:26:09Z
<p>I still haven't bought a Paizo product since the crane wing nerf. (it's not always in my mind, but now I just associate negative feelings to buying something from Paizo)</p>
<p>Paizo's veers too much into making underpowered garbage to avoid overpowered stuff. Unless it's for casters. Prestigious Spellcaster came out last year and opens up tons of character builds.</p>
<p>Way too much unfun material in PF that serves no purpose other than being a trap (see shifter).</p>
I still haven't bought a Paizo product since the crane wing nerf. (it's not always in my mind, but now I just associate negative feelings to buying something from Paizo)
Paizo's veers too much into making underpowered garbage to avoid overpowered stuff. Unless it's for casters. Prestigious Spellcaster came out last year and opens up tons of character builds.
Way too much unfun material in PF that serves no purpose other than being a trap (see shifter).
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-15T13:26:09Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=27?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1314
2017-12-15T02:46:51Z
2017-12-15T01:16:19Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">PossibleCabbage wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I feel like people are way too down on Ultimate Wilderness just because of the Shifter though. Like the Shifter has a whole host of problems, which may not be fixable, but the rest of the book is full of good stuff that I fear people are overlooking because so much emphasis pre-release was on the new class.</p>
<p>Like there are way more words spent on the forums on the Oozemorph than there are that Cavalier archetype that rides a dinosaur (which is eligible for the draconic template, so you can have a firebreathing dinosaur) and that feels wrong. Like on one hand we have a class that's going to need a bunch of clarifications from somebody before it's playable, and on the other hand we have a firebreathing dinosaur. </blockquote><p>You know another book that only has one new class in it? Ultimate Magic with the Magus, Paizo's greatest contribution to the 3.x design space.
<p>Expectations were high that paizo would be able to nail a much desired character concept because they have done so in the past. Yet what we get is basically worse than any other PC class in the game. And only arguably better than some NPC classes.</p>
<p>Paizo messed up pretty badly to let the shifter be released in this current state. It's a huge hit to their reputation.</p>
PossibleCabbage wrote:I feel like people are way too down on Ultimate Wilderness just because of the Shifter though. Like the Shifter has a whole host of problems, which may not be fixable, but the rest of the book is full of good stuff that I fear people are overlooking because so much emphasis pre-release was on the new class.
Like there are way more words spent on the forums on the Oozemorph than there are that Cavalier archetype that rides a dinosaur (which is eligible for the draconic...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-15T01:16:19Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=26?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1295
2017-12-14T19:23:32Z
2017-12-14T19:23:32Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Talonhawke wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Chess Pwn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Talonhawke wrote:</div><blockquote> My question after finally looking over is how does the shifter compare in the long run to the warpriest archetype that gets claws and 1/2 as many wildshapes but gets the improved forms as best i can tell? </blockquote>Probably something similar to how a warrior compares to a fighter. Like you can see it has the same idea, one just has higher numbers. </blockquote>Yeah but who is who? </blockquote><p>All the shifting archetypes are better at shifting than the shifter.
<p>Any class > shifter.</p>
<p>So yeah Warpriest is just better too.</p>
Talonhawke wrote:Chess Pwn wrote: Talonhawke wrote: My question after finally looking over is how does the shifter compare in the long run to the warpriest archetype that gets claws and 1/2 as many wildshapes but gets the improved forms as best i can tell?
Probably something similar to how a warrior compares to a fighter. Like you can see it has the same idea, one just has higher numbers. Yeah but who is who? All the shifting archetypes are better at shifting than the shifter. Any class >...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-14T19:23:32Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=19?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#920
2017-12-13T18:07:37Z
2017-12-13T13:20:42Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">AaronUnicorn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote>In a rules light system sure. But this is Pathfinder. We don't have thousands of pages of rules so we can judge them individually and rewrite a game larger than the Bible. </blockquote><p>No, but we do have Rule Zero. For a reason.
<p>If there's a rule that is making something unfun? It shouldn't be used, and I will always argue that following RAI over RAW is vitally important for the enjoyment of the game.</p>
<p>Which, hey, I realize that doesn't work for everyone. That's fine. I won't play with those people. It's a big hobby, and there's room for lots of different playstyles.</p>
<p>But I will also still walk away thinking to myself "That's a lousy GM." </blockquote><p>and I would say that you didn't have to play a class with broken rules.
<p>Expecting houserules or specific interpretations is being a disruptive player. Which is probably why they were playing a paladin in the first place...</p>
AaronUnicorn wrote:Rhedyn wrote:In a rules light system sure. But this is Pathfinder. We don't have thousands of pages of rules so we can judge them individually and rewrite a game larger than the Bible.
No, but we do have Rule Zero. For a reason. If there's a rule that is making something unfun? It shouldn't be used, and I will always argue that following RAI over RAW is vitally important for the enjoyment of the game.
Which, hey, I realize that doesn't work for everyone. That's fine. I...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T13:20:42Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Addicted to "Detect Evil"
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2urix&page=2?Addicted-to-Detect-Evil#60
2017-12-13T13:17:58Z
2017-12-13T13:17:58Z
<p>Smiting evil is always good in this game. But the paladin falls at the GM's whims. The code is vague and any violation of it removes the paladin's class features.</p>
<p>As a GM, you dictate the paladin's actions. If she is disrupting the campaign, that's your fault. She's playing the one class you have complete intended control over.</p>
Smiting evil is always good in this game. But the paladin falls at the GM's whims. The code is vague and any violation of it removes the paladin's class features.
As a GM, you dictate the paladin's actions. If she is disrupting the campaign, that's your fault. She's playing the one class you have complete intended control over.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T13:17:58Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=19?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#918
2017-12-13T16:08:06Z
2017-12-13T13:07:47Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">AaronUnicorn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote>Bad vs Good GMing does not come from a GMs ability to write rules a good way. If the code is ambiguous and expects the GM to fill in the specifics and fall for any violation, your experience with the code and falling mechanics is reflecting of your GM's developer abilities not what they can do as a GM. </blockquote><p>Uhm, yeah, it kind of does.
<p>I expect my GM to be the kind of person who is striving to make the game enjoyable for everyone. I don't expect my GM to be a robot who just looks at a rulebook and says "Well, that's what the rules say, so that's what's happening.</p>
<p>I can play a computer game for that.</p>
<p>A GM's ability to analyze rules and decide which ones to use and which ones to throw out and when to do so is absolutely a part of what makes them a good GM or not. </blockquote><p>In a rules light system sure. But this is Pathfinder. We don't have thousands of pages of rules so we can judge them individually and rewrite a game larger than the Bible.
AaronUnicorn wrote:Rhedyn wrote:Bad vs Good GMing does not come from a GMs ability to write rules a good way. If the code is ambiguous and expects the GM to fill in the specifics and fall for any violation, your experience with the code and falling mechanics is reflecting of your GM's developer abilities not what they can do as a GM.
Uhm, yeah, it kind of does. I expect my GM to be the kind of person who is striving to make the game enjoyable for everyone. I don't expect my GM to be a robot...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T13:07:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=19?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#903
2017-12-13T00:45:01Z
2017-12-13T00:45:01Z
<p>Warpriest class - "If a warpriest <b>isn't devoted to a particular deity</b>, he selects two blessings to represent his spiritual inclinations and abilities, subject to GM discretion."</p>
Warpriest class - "If a warpriest isn't devoted to a particular deity, he selects two blessings to represent his spiritual inclinations and abilities, subject to GM discretion."
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:45:01Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#900
2017-12-13T00:36:19Z
2017-12-13T00:36:19Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> Again, im capable of playing in campaigns where ALL the core rulebook classes can be represented without ill feeling or disruption to the campaign. Can you say the same? </blockquote>Note "playing" not GMing. because you have twisted the GMs arm to let you do what you want. </blockquote>No because my gm isn't Dwight from the office. </blockquote><p>IDK Dwight does get bullied a lot.
Ryan Freire wrote:Rhedyn wrote: Ryan Freire wrote: Again, im capable of playing in campaigns where ALL the core rulebook classes can be represented without ill feeling or disruption to the campaign. Can you say the same?
Note "playing" not GMing. because you have twisted the GMs arm to let you do what you want. No because my gm isn't Dwight from the office. IDK Dwight does get bullied a lot.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:36:19Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#898
2017-12-13T16:05:37Z
2017-12-13T00:31:40Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> Again, im capable of playing in campaigns where ALL the core rulebook classes can be represented without ill feeling or disruption to the campaign. Can you say the same? </blockquote><p>Note "playing" not GMing. because you have twisted the GMs arm to let you do what you want.
Ryan Freire wrote:Again, im capable of playing in campaigns where ALL the core rulebook classes can be represented without ill feeling or disruption to the campaign. Can you say the same?
Note "playing" not GMing. because you have twisted the GMs arm to let you do what you want.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:31:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#894
2017-12-13T16:05:06Z
2017-12-13T00:21:30Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> It's not the only interpretation.</p>
<p>You just have no right to complain when it is the interpretation.</p>
<p>That's whining/immature/bad playing that is terrible to have at any table. </blockquote>People are welcome to bad interpretations of the rules thats true. They probably shouldn't get defensive when those bad interpretations are translated as "bad gming" because thats also true. </blockquote><p>Then People shouldn't get defensive then when such accusations of "bad gming" are translated as "bad playing"
Ryan Freire wrote:Rhedyn wrote:It's not the only interpretation.
You just have no right to complain when it is the interpretation.
That's whining/immature/bad playing that is terrible to have at any table.
People are welcome to bad interpretations of the rules thats true. They probably shouldn't get defensive when those bad interpretations are translated as "bad gming" because thats also true. Then People shouldn't get defensive then when such accusations of "bad gming" are translated as...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:21:30Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#891
2017-12-13T01:12:35Z
2017-12-13T00:09:19Z
<p>It's not the only interpretation.</p>
<p>You just have no right to complain when it is the interpretation.</p>
<p>That's whining/immature/bad playing that is terrible to have at any table.</p>
It's not the only interpretation.
You just have no right to complain when it is the interpretation.
That's whining/immature/bad playing that is terrible to have at any table.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:09:19Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#889
2017-12-13T17:53:39Z
2017-12-13T00:05:34Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> This is a gross misrepresentation of my position. One might think calling kafkatrapping the class and warning free falls being ascribed to a bad gm touched a nerve. </blockquote><p>I've played with munchkin paladins.
<p>I would never let that code touch my table. Someone tried to bring that code for Savage Words as their miracle background sins. I told them they would auto-fall, so he rewrote it and we all had a good laugh at how stupid "act with honor" is as a restriction.</p>
Ryan Freire wrote:This is a gross misrepresentation of my position. One might think calling kafkatrapping the class and warning free falls being ascribed to a bad gm touched a nerve.
I've played with munchkin paladins. I would never let that code touch my table. Someone tried to bring that code for Savage Words as their miracle background sins. I told them they would auto-fall, so he rewrote it and we all had a good laugh at how stupid "act with honor" is as a restriction.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-13T00:05:34Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#887
2017-12-13T16:04:17Z
2017-12-12T23:58:29Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote> I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules. </blockquote>I think its been pretty well established that You and I have wildly different views on what makes a GM bad. The difference is I have the ability to play in campaigns that use the entire core class lineup, continue for years and end at or near 20th level without issue, whereas the philosophy of so many others that they're certain is right has them on forums decrying how badly broken X or Y is and how unplayable a core class is despite the weight of public experience claiming otherwise. </blockquote><p>"Simulacrum is in the CRB. If I can't make a genie of one and get unlimited free wishes, you're a bad GM!"
<p>"Wizard is a core class and high level spells have been in the game for decades. If you can't condone my specific abuses and limit my power in any way. You sir are bad at GMing. To hell with anyone else at the table!"</p>
Ryan Freire wrote:Rhedyn wrote: I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules.
I think its been pretty well established that You and I have wildly different views on what makes a GM bad. The difference is I have the ability to play in campaigns that use the entire core class lineup, continue for years and end at or near 20th level without issue, whereas the philosophy of so many others that they're certain is right has...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T23:58:29Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#885
2017-12-13T17:54:18Z
2017-12-12T23:55:08Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BigNorseWolf wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote> I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules. </blockquote>You have an odd definition of following the rules. One that is not whining to call someone out on. </blockquote><p>It is whining.
<p>Basic reading comprehension let's a player know that their class features are active at the GM's whims. A mature player either accepts that or plays a different class. </p>
<p>An immature player ignores the resections the rules place on them because "this isn't faaaairrr" and will pout/rage at "bad GMing" because this game has rules and restrictions.</p>
<p>That is someone I wouldn't want to play with let alone GM for.</p>
BigNorseWolf wrote:Rhedyn wrote: I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules.
You have an odd definition of following the rules. One that is not whining to call someone out on. It is whining. Basic reading comprehension let's a player know that their class features are active at the GM's whims. A mature player either accepts that or plays a different class.
An immature player ignores the resections the rules place on...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T23:55:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#881
2017-12-12T23:47:14Z
2017-12-12T23:47:14Z
<p>I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules.</p>
I would really hope I never play with such a bad player that they whine and call the GM bad for following the rules.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T23:47:14Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=18?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#856
2017-12-13T15:59:42Z
2017-12-12T19:56:21Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote><p> The same half dozen players keep making "paladin falls" threads and dragging them up in other threads and i'm supposed to buy that it makes it a huge problem. </p>
<p>Never mind that it always turns into those half dozen against basically everyone else on the board. </p>
<p>I'm sorry so many of you have bad gms with an antagonistic relationship with their table, but their lack of ability isn't an issue with a class most of the posters here haven't seemed to have a problem with. </blockquote><p>You are the kind of player that blames the GM for poorly written rules.
<p>If the code is vague, any interpretation is fair and any violation removes your class features. If that isn't fun. Then you blame the rules not the GM.</p>
<p>Expecting the GM to be more than just fair in their running of the game is being an entitled player.</p>
<p>Bad vs Good GMing does not come from a GMs ability to write rules a good way. If the code is ambiguous and expects the GM to fill in the specifics and fall for any violation, your experience with the code and falling mechanics is reflecting of your GM's developer abilities not what they can do as a GM.</p>
<p>You are blaming the wrong people for fair rulings not being fun.</p>
Ryan Freire wrote:The same half dozen players keep making "paladin falls" threads and dragging them up in other threads and i'm supposed to buy that it makes it a huge problem.
Never mind that it always turns into those half dozen against basically everyone else on the board.
I'm sorry so many of you have bad gms with an antagonistic relationship with their table, but their lack of ability isn't an issue with a class most of the posters here haven't seemed to have a problem with.
You are...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T19:56:21Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Best Transformer (Non Druid)
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2s040?Best-Transformer#14
2017-12-12T17:16:27Z
2017-12-12T17:16:27Z
<p>Wizard VMC Battle Oracle to single class qualify for Eldritch Knight. With Prestigious Spellcaster feat to lose 0 caster levels and gain effective 3/4ths BaB with the best buffs and polymorph forms.</p>
Wizard VMC Battle Oracle to single class qualify for Eldritch Knight. With Prestigious Spellcaster feat to lose 0 caster levels and gain effective 3/4ths BaB with the best buffs and polymorph forms.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T17:16:27Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#842
2017-12-13T15:57:13Z
2017-12-12T17:13:13Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Matthew Downie wrote:</div><blockquote><p> You admit it's an "ambiguous code". </p>
<p>Most GMs, given ambiguity, will try to choose an interpretation that makes the game more fun for their players. </blockquote><p>It's not the nice GMs I have a problem with.
<p>It's entitled players that are calling others bad GMs if they don't get beneficial houserules.</p>
Matthew Downie wrote:You admit it's an "ambiguous code".
Most GMs, given ambiguity, will try to choose an interpretation that makes the game more fun for their players.
It's not the nice GMs I have a problem with. It's entitled players that are calling others bad GMs if they don't get beneficial houserules.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T17:13:13Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#840
2017-12-12T17:17:34Z
2017-12-12T16:43:22Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">master_marshmallow wrote:</div><blockquote> Find a better argument. </blockquote><p>Find a better class
<p>Or stop whining if a GM won't houserule restrictions on your abilities away.</p>
master_marshmallow wrote:Find a better argument.
Find a better class Or stop whining if a GM won't houserule restrictions on your abilities away.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T16:43:22Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#835
2017-12-13T15:56:11Z
2017-12-12T15:02:27Z
<p>The rules are very clear. Paladin class features are up to GM whims. Any other expectation is just being a munchkin.</p>
<p>ANY minor violation of an ambiguous code removes your class features and this was a deliberate change from previous editions. You want all the power of a paladin with none of the intended responsibility. You can't expect the GM to house rule in your favor. That's being a bad player. Which is evident by all the people here calling GMs bad if they don't change the game rules to cater to their vaguely good power fantasy.</p>
The rules are very clear. Paladin class features are up to GM whims. Any other expectation is just being a munchkin.
ANY minor violation of an ambiguous code removes your class features and this was a deliberate change from previous editions. You want all the power of a paladin with none of the intended responsibility. You can't expect the GM to house rule in your favor. That's being a bad player. Which is evident by all the people here calling GMs bad if they don't change the game rules to...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T15:02:27Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#832
2017-12-12T14:46:11Z
2017-12-12T14:46:11Z
<p>If you don't want to randomly lose class features both Cavalier and Warpriest exist.</p>
If you don't want to randomly lose class features both Cavalier and Warpriest exist.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T14:46:11Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#829
2017-12-13T15:55:11Z
2017-12-12T13:42:21Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">PossibleCabbage wrote:</div><blockquote> I feel like contextually "grossly violate" and "violate" are more or less synonymous. After all, you wouldn't use "violate" for a minor breach or infraction. If you're reaching for "violate" you're talking about something that is not within the realm of ordinary behavior, something easily anticipated, or something for which one cannot easily make amends. </blockquote><p>Negligence is an accident. Gross Negligence is a felony.
<p>Words matter. And we can only assume that falling constantly is the intent given just how much stronger a paladin is then fighters and rangers in the CRB.</p>
<p>If Paizo didn't want it to work differently than 3.5, they wouldn't have changed the wording.</p>
PossibleCabbage wrote:I feel like contextually "grossly violate" and "violate" are more or less synonymous. After all, you wouldn't use "violate" for a minor breach or infraction. If you're reaching for "violate" you're talking about something that is not within the realm of ordinary behavior, something easily anticipated, or something for which one cannot easily make amends.
Negligence is an accident. Gross Negligence is a felony. Words matter. And we can only assume that falling constantly...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T13:42:21Z
Re: Forums: Advice: More Taste Less Filling: The shifter Any good or not?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uq38&page=26?More-Taste-Less-Filling-The-shifter-Any-good#1269
2017-12-23T19:46:07Z
2017-12-12T13:10:51Z
<p>CRB, Bestiary, Ultimate Wilderness, Ultimate Equipment, Ultimate Campaign, Advance Race Guide = 6 books you need to complete with the warrior NPC class as a shifter </p>
<p>VS</p>
<p>CRB, Bestiary = 2 books you need to be one of the most powerful druids in the game.</p>
<p>Yeah shifter is real noob friendly /s</p>
CRB, Bestiary, Ultimate Wilderness, Ultimate Equipment, Ultimate Campaign, Advance Race Guide = 6 books you need to complete with the warrior NPC class as a shifter
VS
CRB, Bestiary = 2 books you need to be one of the most powerful druids in the game.
Yeah shifter is real noob friendly /s
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T13:10:51Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=17?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#804
2017-12-12T09:16:38Z
2017-12-12T03:06:42Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the fact that you admit you turned the class into NPC only because you couldn't gm for it kind of backs up what i'm saying. Looks like we have a series of people who aren't capable of GMing for a base book class that's been around for decades.</p>
<p>Like i said...bad gming. </blockquote><p>Bad gming is letting a player play a Paladin without re-writing that tosh code.
<p>Claiming it's bad GMing to find the Paladin's code unworkable is a failure in literacy. </blockquote><p>And yet countless GMs have managed to do so. This is a forumgoer problem, not a problem with the average pathfinder player.
<p>You don't get to claim you're a good gm if you can't make a decades old core book class work in your campaigns. People do it every day, you just cant be an antagonist gm. </blockquote><p>Decades?
<p>The 3.5 code was playable. It's PF that messed it up.</p>
<p>3.5 — "A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who <b>grossly</b> violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities"</p>
<p>PF — "A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or <b>who violates the code</b> of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features"</p>
Ryan Freire wrote:Rhedyn wrote: Ryan Freire wrote:I think the fact that you admit you turned the class into NPC only because you couldn't gm for it kind of backs up what i'm saying. Looks like we have a series of people who aren't capable of GMing for a base book class that's been around for decades.
Like i said...bad gming.
Bad gming is letting a player play a Paladin without re-writing that tosh code. Claiming it's bad GMing to find the Paladin's code unworkable is a failure in literacy....
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T03:06:42Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why all the Paladin hate?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uppr&page=16?Why-all-the-Paladin-hate#800
2017-12-12T11:56:04Z
2017-12-12T02:55:40Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the fact that you admit you turned the class into NPC only because you couldn't gm for it kind of backs up what i'm saying. Looks like we have a series of people who aren't capable of GMing for a base book class that's been around for decades.</p>
<p>Like i said...bad gming. </blockquote><p>Bad gming is letting a player play a Paladin without re-writing that tosh code.
<p>Claiming it's bad GMing to find the Paladin's code unworkable is a failure in literacy.</p>
Ryan Freire wrote:I think the fact that you admit you turned the class into NPC only because you couldn't gm for it kind of backs up what i'm saying. Looks like we have a series of people who aren't capable of GMing for a base book class that's been around for decades.
Like i said...bad gming.
Bad gming is letting a player play a Paladin without re-writing that tosh code. Claiming it's bad GMing to find the Paladin's code unworkable is a failure in literacy.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-12T02:55:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Your Tumor Can No Longer Protect You
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uqyx&page=3?Your-Tumor-Can-No-Longer-Protect-You#124
2017-12-07T20:20:21Z
2017-12-07T20:20:21Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">supervillan wrote:</div><blockquote> Not everyone in PFS is clamouring for nerfs. I for one cannot understand why we are seeing so many nerfs these days, and I do not like it one little bit. </blockquote><p>5e is popular.
<p>5e characters are very simple but vastly overpowered.</p>
<p>Nerf all cool martial options to make them more like 5e.</p>
supervillan wrote:Not everyone in PFS is clamouring for nerfs. I for one cannot understand why we are seeing so many nerfs these days, and I do not like it one little bit.
5e is popular. 5e characters are very simple but vastly overpowered.
Nerf all cool martial options to make them more like 5e.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-07T20:20:21Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Your Tumor Can No Longer Protect You
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uqyx&page=3?Your-Tumor-Can-No-Longer-Protect-You#121
2017-12-07T19:28:36Z
2017-12-07T19:17:06Z
<p>Oh people care because of PFS. I know in our group, you can use whatever Paizo thing you want, so a repeated worse version is ignored.</p>
<p>But most of our PF games rush to level 7 then slow down until the GM wants to rush to 20.</p>
<p>PFS isn't really Pathfinder any more than something like Kirthfinder with all of its house rules.</p>
Oh people care because of PFS. I know in our group, you can use whatever Paizo thing you want, so a repeated worse version is ignored.
But most of our PF games rush to level 7 then slow down until the GM wants to rush to 20.
PFS isn't really Pathfinder any more than something like Kirthfinder with all of its house rules.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-07T19:17:06Z
Re: Forums: Advice: The Shifter: making lemonade out of lemons
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uqhz?The-Shifter-making-lemonade-out-of-lemons#12
2017-12-07T19:08:57Z
2017-12-07T18:09:34Z
<p>Shifter 1/Druid 19</p>
<p>Best shifter build. More flexible shifting, better shifting at higher levels. Lots of ribbon abilities like animal companion and full 9th level casting to make up the 5 bab loss.</p>
<p>Or</p>
<p>Shifter 1/Beastkin Barbarian 19</p>
<p>Gets basically everything the shifter would normally get except wild shape is measured in rounds per level not hours. On the bright side you can pick your form for each combat rather than being stuck in forms. Much more versatile. Oh and you eventually get huge sized animals.</p>
Shifter 1/Druid 19
Best shifter build. More flexible shifting, better shifting at higher levels. Lots of ribbon abilities like animal companion and full 9th level casting to make up the 5 bab loss.
Or
Shifter 1/Beastkin Barbarian 19
Gets basically everything the shifter would normally get except wild shape is measured in rounds per level not hours. On the bright side you can pick your form for each combat rather than being stuck in forms. Much more versatile. Oh and you eventually get...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-07T18:09:34Z
Forums: Advice: Can I be a full casting Fighter?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2url8?Can-I-be-a-full-casting-Fighter#1
2017-12-06T18:33:12Z
2017-12-06T18:06:11Z
<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>
<p>So inexplicable luck let's you and a +8 to one roll per day. This, with skill focus, trait, a circlet of persuasion, +4 Cha item, and full level 10 ranks yields +33 UMD check once per day or a 7th spell level scroll. +25 UMD on all roles allows for 3rd spell level scroll use.</p>
<p>Improvisation at low levels is suppose to give some low level skill monkeying and the rest of the build is to just keep the combat numbers big.</p>
<p>What do you think?</p>
[Spoiler omitted]
So inexplicable luck let's you and a +8 to one roll per day. This, with skill focus, trait, a circlet of persuasion, +4 Cha item, and full level 10 ranks yields +33 UMD check once per day or a 7th spell level scroll. +25 UMD on all roles allows for 3rd spell level scroll use.
Improvisation at low levels is suppose to give some low level skill monkeying and the rest of the build is to just keep the combat numbers big.
What do you think?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-06T18:06:11Z
Re: Forums: Advice: Shifter guide?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2urko?Shifter-guide#12
2019-02-26T15:46:30Z
2017-12-06T16:01:14Z
<p>A comprehensive shifting guide would include all the shifting archetypes other classes have that are better shifters.</p>
<p>There is no playing this tier 6 NPC class Shifter well. You might as well make a warrior optimization guide.</p>
A comprehensive shifting guide would include all the shifting archetypes other classes have that are better shifters.
There is no playing this tier 6 NPC class Shifter well. You might as well make a warrior optimization guide.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-06T16:01:14Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Getting Wildshape as a Ranger?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uqr8?Getting-Wildshape-as-a-Ranger#12
2017-12-06T13:26:29Z
2017-12-06T13:26:29Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Shaman wrote:</div><blockquote> So, only the druid VMC if we go by official sources. Okay, thanks. Pity, I was hoping there would be something in the Ultimate Wilderness book, but IĀ“m not quite looking for a shifter. </blockquote><p>Don't worry, the shifter isn't a shifter.
<p>It's a hybrid class between monk, warrior, and VMC druid.</p>
The Shaman wrote:So, only the druid VMC if we go by official sources. Okay, thanks. Pity, I was hoping there would be something in the Ultimate Wilderness book, but IĀ“m not quite looking for a shifter.
Don't worry, the shifter isn't a shifter. It's a hybrid class between monk, warrior, and VMC druid.
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-06T13:26:29Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So, Pathfinder 2.0 based on Starfinder chassis when?
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uj5e&page=8?So-Pathfinder-20-based-on-Starfinder-chassis#359
2017-12-06T13:27:34Z
2017-12-06T13:20:01Z
<p>Our group currently plays Pathfinder, 5e, and Savage Worlds. We have Starfinder books, but no one is running a game right now. I was going too, but then I noticed Savage Worlds had sci-fi, horror, and fantasy expansions. So I'm running in Starfinder's lore with Savage Worlds mechanics.</p>
<p>See this game actually has mech rules, second-hand cybernetic rules, and spaceship rules that interact with player rules.</p>
<p>I'm excited to see what Starfinder can become. I want to see weapon and armor creation rules (as in making new stuff to fill out the dead item levels) and other gear.</p>
<p>What I can't get over is how lacking the classes feel. Mystic and technomancers are full casters shoved into partial casters and I just don't feel like they get enough but they get more than anyone else. The rest of the classes are mundanes and just don't get many decisions per level. I've already built every class once and I just don't see a lot of variation yet.</p>
Our group currently plays Pathfinder, 5e, and Savage Worlds. We have Starfinder books, but no one is running a game right now. I was going too, but then I noticed Savage Worlds had sci-fi, horror, and fantasy expansions. So I'm running in Starfinder's lore with Savage Worlds mechanics.
See this game actually has mech rules, second-hand cybernetic rules, and spaceship rules that interact with player rules.
I'm excited to see what Starfinder can become. I want to see weapon and armor creation...
Rhedyn (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2017-12-06T13:20:01Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter's 2 bad saves
Mythic Magus (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2u35j?Fighters-2-bad-saves#11
2016-12-29T19:16:20Z
2016-12-24T19:51:54Z
<p>Balance, Fighters would be too strong otherwise compared to weaker paladins and rangers.</p>
Balance, Fighters would be too strong otherwise compared to weaker paladins and rangers.
Mythic Magus (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-12-24T19:51:54Z
Re: Forums: Starfinder General Discussion: Blatantly wild speculation about game mechanics!
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tpjv?Blatantly-wild-speculation-about-game-mechanics#48
2017-05-11T17:26:56Z
2016-06-18T12:04:33Z
<p>ITS ALL GOING TO BE IN METRIC UNITS CAUSE FUTURE</p>
<p>I FOR ONE EMBRACE 1.524 METER SQUARES</p>
ITS ALL GOING TO BE IN METRIC UNITS CAUSE FUTURE
I FOR ONE EMBRACE 1.524 METER SQUARES
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-06-18T12:04:33Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What's the deal with the rogue hate?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rqzl&page=13?Whats-the-deal-with-the-rogue-hate#607
2016-03-07T03:31:26Z
2016-03-07T03:31:26Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Talek & Luna wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Snowblind wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Talek & Luna wrote:</div><blockquote>You can be very versatile with a fighter or a rogue if you give them a chance. </blockquote><p>Based on what standard?
<p><a href="https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8K5X_zf2xCpRnp0TFVoZVV1RW8&usp=sharing" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Here is a fighter at various levels</a></p>
<p>That's the most "versatile" fighter I can make, and I still rate it as not nearly good enough. </blockquote>He thinks an 18 starting strength is "cheesed out". Whatever standard he uses, it probably isn't very high. </blockquote>For a first level guy using standard point buy method? I do think that is cheesing your guy out. You could make a balanced fighter and start with a 16 strength and not have to rely upon dump stats. Instead most people complain that their fighters don't get enough skill points but start with an 8 to 10 intelligence. •sigh• </blockquote><p>The fighter I linked ends up with 10 effective skill ranks per level 16 int and started with 18 strength all in a standard point buy.
<p>10 int is not dumping. Dumping is 7 int.</p>
Talek & Luna wrote:Snowblind wrote: Marroar Gellantara wrote: Talek & Luna wrote:You can be very versatile with a fighter or a rogue if you give them a chance.
Based on what standard? Here is a fighter at various levels
That's the most "versatile" fighter I can make, and I still rate it as not nearly good enough. He thinks an 18 starting strength is "cheesed out". Whatever standard he uses, it probably isn't very high. For a first level guy using standard point buy method? I do think that...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-03-07T03:31:26Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What's the deal with the rogue hate?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rqzl&page=13?Whats-the-deal-with-the-rogue-hate#604
2016-03-06T14:54:00Z
2016-03-06T14:54:00Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Talek & Luna wrote:</div><blockquote>You can be very versatile with a fighter or a rogue if you give them a chance. </blockquote><p>Based on what standard?
<p><a href="https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8K5X_zf2xCpRnp0TFVoZVV1RW8&usp=sharing" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Here is a fighter at various levels</a></p>
<p>That's the most "versatile" fighter I can make, and I still rate it as not nearly good enough.</p>
Talek & Luna wrote:You can be very versatile with a fighter or a rogue if you give them a chance.
Based on what standard? Here is a fighter at various levels
That's the most "versatile" fighter I can make, and I still rate it as not nearly good enough.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-03-06T14:54:00Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What's the deal with the rogue hate?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rqzl&page=13?Whats-the-deal-with-the-rogue-hate#602
2016-03-06T13:25:37Z
2016-03-06T13:25:37Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Charon's Little Helper wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Purple Dragon Knight wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">DominusMegadeus wrote:</div><blockquote> There has been at least 3 topics that I found on Google that ask about how Underhanded is supposed to work. The consensus is that it's literally useless unless you take quick draw and are a Bandit. </blockquote>always threatening trait, lookout feat, and a cohort at level 7... this way I don't think you need Bandit... right? </blockquote>Why did you necro this thread now that rogues don't suck anymore? </blockquote><p>When did rogues stop sucking?
<p>Urogue helped, but the class is still kind of garbage. No longer an expert in most fights, but still kind of terra-bad. "Oh let's be good out of combat where casters dominate the narrative and then have substandard combat ability, which combat is the only reason the casters tolerate us mundanes getting a share of the loot"</p>
Charon's Little Helper wrote:Purple Dragon Knight wrote: DominusMegadeus wrote: There has been at least 3 topics that I found on Google that ask about how Underhanded is supposed to work. The consensus is that it's literally useless unless you take quick draw and are a Bandit.
always threatening trait, lookout feat, and a cohort at level 7... this way I don't think you need Bandit... right? Why did you necro this thread now that rogues don't suck anymore? When did rogues stop sucking? Urogue...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-03-06T13:25:37Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#344
2016-01-02T15:15:44Z
2016-01-02T15:15:44Z
<p>Look, if your GM is OK with good characters working against many good characters and ALL good deities for some morally neutral notion, then more power to you.</p>
<p>In my campaigns you would have to be very careful to actually maintain that good alignment, because I don't see anti-theism as a just motivator of any-sort in the PF universe (and unlike people in this thread, I'm not going to shoehorn what my exact opinion on this is in our universe at every possible opportunity because that is completely tangential). Merely telling people to give to the poor does nothing to counter demons. It's presumptuous to assume that your code of ethics would be as easy of a divine source for NPCs as actual gods.</p>
Look, if your GM is OK with good characters working against many good characters and ALL good deities for some morally neutral notion, then more power to you.
In my campaigns you would have to be very careful to actually maintain that good alignment, because I don't see anti-theism as a just motivator of any-sort in the PF universe (and unlike people in this thread, I'm not going to shoehorn what my exact opinion on this is in our universe at every possible opportunity because that is...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T15:15:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#339
2016-01-02T14:26:53Z
2016-01-02T14:26:53Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><p> By the way...</p>
<p>The fact that you cannot see how someone could oppose something without hurting, oppressing, or killing is again, very exemplary of the destructive mindset I was speaking of earlier. </blockquote><p>Weaken those who fight evil.
<p>Evil kills, hurts, and oppresses more often.</p>
<p>Good Religions in PF have clerics, paladins, heal the sick, raise heroes back to life, and stand against the forces of evil. You go around telling people to keep their donations and that they are unneeded weaken these forces for good that actually need support to function. You are personally making the world a worse place with those actions. If you want to anti-theism justly in PF, then you better found and lead a replacement organisation that does the job as good or better.</p>
Ashiel wrote:By the way...
The fact that you cannot see how someone could oppose something without hurting, oppressing, or killing is again, very exemplary of the destructive mindset I was speaking of earlier.
Weaken those who fight evil. Evil kills, hurts, and oppresses more often.
Good Religions in PF have clerics, paladins, heal the sick, raise heroes back to life, and stand against the forces of evil. You go around telling people to keep their donations and that they are unneeded...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T14:26:53Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#336
2016-01-02T14:17:24Z
2016-01-02T14:17:24Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote>idk why someone running around trying to undermine those who protect the multiverse and all that is good would be a good character.</blockquote>I suppose you think that all characters of the same alignment must likewise always agree, and always agree on the best route to achieving good results? Because that's what it sounds like.</blockquote><p>Your character has declared herself the enemy against ALL that prevent demons and devils from overrunning the material plane and destroying all life.
<p>Good characters don't have to agree with each other, but a good character that disagrees with most other good beings and attempts to undermined their good efforts for trivial b%!&@##$, then that wouldn't make much sense would it?</p>
<p>Your religion = bad theory is objectively not true in PF, so using that as a reason to undermine the efforts of good is evil. Your character does that to evil people too, so I say it balances out.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote:idk why someone running around trying to undermine those who protect the multiverse and all that is good would be a good character.
I suppose you think that all characters of the same alignment must likewise always agree, and always agree on the best route to achieving good results? Because that's what it sounds like.Your character has declared herself the enemy against ALL that prevent demons and devils from overrunning the material plane and destroying...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T14:17:24Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#334
2016-01-02T14:09:15Z
2016-01-02T14:09:15Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Milo v3 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote>Being an enemy of good, good people, and good deities would preclude your character from being good in my campaigns.</blockquote>Wait, people sharing a single alignment axis have to always agree in your campaigns and can never be enemies? </blockquote><p>No, but they generally don't despise ALL the deities of their alignment and go out of their way to undermined ALL religions based around their alignment.
<p>When your main motivator, anti-theism, is applied equally regardless of the targets moral impact on the world, then you don't get to claim to be good. Good isn't your motivator, anti-theism is. </p>
<p>If you don't do evil things because of anti-theism (like declare yourself the enemy of the entire host of good aligned outsiders), then you can be good.</p>
Milo v3 wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote:Being an enemy of good, good people, and good deities would preclude your character from being good in my campaigns.
Wait, people sharing a single alignment axis have to always agree in your campaigns and can never be enemies? No, but they generally don't despise ALL the deities of their alignment and go out of their way to undermined ALL religions based around their alignment. When your main motivator, anti-theism, is applied equally regardless of the...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T14:09:15Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#331
2016-01-02T13:35:35Z
2016-01-02T13:35:35Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>Morality is not tied to gods.</blockquote><p>Oh yeah it's only their domain. pfffff
<p>If your character went after religions of good deities in one of my campaigns, she couldn't be good. If your character just went around helping people, then she could be good. An anti-theist attitude would put you neutral in my campaigns. Cursing good deities because you blame them for things they weren't responsible for is a fault of your character. Instead of focusing on just evil or reform, she is instead against supporting objectively good entities that control the afterlife of mortals and prevent the forces of evil from overrunning the multiverse. She is free to view herself as good, the divine spells like holy smite may disagree. </blockquote><p>And you would be wrong.
<p>Gods are subject to alignment in D&D/Pathfinder. They do not determine it. They may be paragons of an alignment but that's not particularly special. Paladins, for example, need no gods and they are champions of Good itself.</p>
<p>Good in D&D/Pathfinder is Altruism, respecting life, and concern for the dignity of sentient creatures. Evil is hurting, oppressing, and killing. Do more of the former rather than the latter and you are Good. There is no argument to be made otherwise. Criticizing deities and the religions surrounding them and offering alternate options is not evil. There isn't even an argument to be made. </blockquote><p>Being an enemy of good, good people, and good deities would preclude your character from being good in my campaigns.
<p>If she isn't as strictly anti-theist as you've alluded her to being then she may get to be good. </p>
<p>idk why someone running around trying to undermine those who protect the multiverse and all that is good would be a good character.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote: Ashiel wrote:Morality is not tied to gods.
Oh yeah it's only their domain. pfffff If your character went after religions of good deities in one of my campaigns, she couldn't be good. If your character just went around helping people, then she could be good. An anti-theist attitude would put you neutral in my campaigns. Cursing good deities because you blame them for things they weren't responsible for is a fault of your character. Instead of focusing on...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T13:35:35Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#328
2016-01-02T11:31:13Z
2016-01-02T11:31:13Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>Morality is not tied to gods.</blockquote><p>Oh yeah it's only their domain. pfffff
<p>If your character went after religions of good deities in one of my campaigns, she couldn't be good. If your character just went around helping people, then she could be good. An anti-theist attitude would put you neutral in my campaigns. Cursing good deities because you blame them for things they weren't responsible for is a fault of your character. Instead of focusing on just evil or reform, she is instead against supporting objectively good entities that control the afterlife of mortals and prevent the forces of evil from overrunning the multiverse. She is free to view herself as good, the divine spells like holy smite may disagree.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Morality is not tied to gods.
Oh yeah it's only their domain. pfffff If your character went after religions of good deities in one of my campaigns, she couldn't be good. If your character just went around helping people, then she could be good. An anti-theist attitude would put you neutral in my campaigns. Cursing good deities because you blame them for things they weren't responsible for is a fault of your character. Instead of focusing on just evil or reform, she is instead...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T11:31:13Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#321
2016-01-02T08:01:41Z
2016-01-02T08:01:41Z
<p>You know maybe I shouldn't complain about stereotypes when the person attacking people because of them is also enforcing a stereotype. </p>
<p>The cleric of atheism should be true neutral. If your character is against both objective physical manifestations of evil, good, law, chaos, and neutrality, then I would think that sticks you in the middle on PF's objective morality scale regardless of the moral weight you would give the concept in the real world.</p>
You know maybe I shouldn't complain about stereotypes when the person attacking people because of them is also enforcing a stereotype.
The cleric of atheism should be true neutral. If your character is against both objective physical manifestations of evil, good, law, chaos, and neutrality, then I would think that sticks you in the middle on PF's objective morality scale regardless of the moral weight you would give the concept in the real world.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-02T08:01:41Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=7?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#302
2023-02-06T16:05:42Z
2016-01-01T14:46:44Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>It's not people assuming my affiliation is evil that disgusts me. It's reading my holy texts and confirming it that's the problem. </blockquote><p>Which texts, the ones heavy with idiom or the ones heavy with metaphor? Are these the same text about a deity who didn't write anything down himself?
<p>I get fascinated that a book mainly about life advice is taken with such moral weight. If God said, "Don't stick your hand in fire" you would get people claiming warmth is evil and moving to Canada.</p>
Ashiel wrote:It's not people assuming my affiliation is evil that disgusts me. It's reading my holy texts and confirming it that's the problem.
Which texts, the ones heavy with idiom or the ones heavy with metaphor? Are these the same text about a deity who didn't write anything down himself? I get fascinated that a book mainly about life advice is taken with such moral weight. If God said, "Don't stick your hand in fire" you would get people claiming warmth is evil and moving to Canada.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T14:46:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#299
2016-01-01T13:48:58Z
2016-01-01T13:48:58Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Klara Meison wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">The_Hanged_Man wrote:</div><blockquote><p> My take.</p>
<p>A cleric who is atheist is feasible, but a cleric of atheism is nonsensical. </p>
<p>The cleric who is atheist ("atheist" here defined as someone thinks the "gods" are not worthy of worship) could channel their divine powers through belief in some cause or domain in the abstract.</p>
<p>A cleric of atheism is a contradiction in terms. Clerics receive their powers through prayer and worship, something that antithetical to atheism. In other words, you can't worship atheism. </p>
<p>So basically you can be a cleric of battle/love/whatever, who just so happens to be atheist, but that atheism would not be central to your role as a cleric. </blockquote><p>>You can't worship an ideology that opposes worship
<p>Sure you can. Look up "Malal" from Warhammer 40k, he is pretty much an atheist god(not IRL atheism, those guys aren't violent). He is described as "having a tendency towards destruction, even of itself and it's own agents".</p>
<p>Hmm, a cleric of Malal sounds fun. </blockquote><p>I DO WHAT I WANT!
Klara Meison wrote:The_Hanged_Man wrote:My take.
A cleric who is atheist is feasible, but a cleric of atheism is nonsensical.
The cleric who is atheist ("atheist" here defined as someone thinks the "gods" are not worthy of worship) could channel their divine powers through belief in some cause or domain in the abstract.
A cleric of atheism is a contradiction in terms. Clerics receive their powers through prayer and worship, something that antithetical to atheism. In other words, you can't...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T13:48:58Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#298
2016-01-01T13:46:59Z
2016-01-01T13:46:59Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>I usually use a dictionary myself. A word that means a lot to me is <i>responsibility</i>. When the title you have taken means something evil to others because those sharing your title have committed atrocities against them, it's your responsibility to either change that by pressing the weights in the other direction through action or find a new title, because do you really want to spread confusion and be a part of those evils over a simple word? </blockquote><p>I don't believe it is your responsibility. If people want to assume you are evil over a word then that is their problem. If the assumption of evil bothers you then use a different word.
<p>I personally do not feel morally responsible to preemptively correct the stereotypes about me. I'll correct the stereotype when it comes up, mainly because I always enjoy those conversations. My crossdressing bisexual lifestyle is not what most assume as something that can coincide with religion X. "Oh but they hate you!" Well those people are dying off and the world at large is listening to them less and less.</p>
<p>To tie it back to the topic. This why I think atheist cleric is fine, regardless of how some atheist don't approve of others using that word to mean strong belief and a code of ethics. No one owns a word. People are allowed to use it to mean different things. They aren't wrong. At worst they may be confusing people.</p>
Ashiel wrote:I usually use a dictionary myself. A word that means a lot to me is responsibility. When the title you have taken means something evil to others because those sharing your title have committed atrocities against them, it's your responsibility to either change that by pressing the weights in the other direction through action or find a new title, because do you really want to spread confusion and be a part of those evils over a simple word?
I don't believe it is your...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T13:46:59Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#289
2016-01-01T11:19:18Z
2016-01-01T11:19:18Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>I think it's perfectly rational to assume certain things about people ascribing to a religion that prescribes certain things.</blockquote><p>Sadly, it isn't rational to assume that.
<p>Words mean different things to different people.</p>
Ashiel wrote:I think it's perfectly rational to assume certain things about people ascribing to a religion that prescribes certain things.
Sadly, it isn't rational to assume that. Words mean different things to different people.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T11:19:18Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#285
2016-01-01T10:55:44Z
2016-01-01T10:55:44Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>Now I guess we need to discuss if it's okay for the religion can claim the good actions of the few, while demanding that it cannot be blamed for the evil actions of the "few".</blockquote><p>No, the point is not to assume things about PEOPLE.
<p>A religion isn't a single entity with thoughts and beliefs. It's label that is thrown onto people and any connotations associated with it are basically stereotypes. A single entity with thoughts and beliefs that religious people would definitively want to share is a God. To criticize one is to first accept its existence, because if it doesn't exist then it doesn't have thoughts or beliefs to criticize.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Now I guess we need to discuss if it's okay for the religion can claim the good actions of the few, while demanding that it cannot be blamed for the evil actions of the "few".
No, the point is not to assume things about PEOPLE. A religion isn't a single entity with thoughts and beliefs. It's label that is thrown onto people and any connotations associated with it are basically stereotypes. A single entity with thoughts and beliefs that religious people would definitively want to...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T10:55:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#283
2016-01-01T10:33:08Z
2016-01-01T10:33:08Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>No, I would get into a real life or death battle to protect another human being. Is that so hard to understand? Is that so unfathomable? Especially if there are eight others in my group. Eight people can subdue a person a lot easier than the victim can protect themselves.</blockquote><p>It's one thing to say you would. It's another to actually do it. It's also entirely different to expect everyone in that position to do the same and judge those who wouldn't.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>However, given that I'm just one person and not a particularly wealthy one at that, I've got only my words and actions. I can hope my words work, and I hope my actions live up to them when they don't. </blockquote><p>So you can absolve yourself of guilt, but people you've never talked to or have never heard speak about the topic must be in silent agreement?
<p><a href="http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/church-aids-expansion-of-shelter-for-gay-youths/?_r=0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Google Christian gay shelters and hit the first link</a></p>
Ashiel wrote:No, I would get into a real life or death battle to protect another human being. Is that so hard to understand? Is that so unfathomable? Especially if there are eight others in my group. Eight people can subdue a person a lot easier than the victim can protect themselves.
It's one thing to say you would. It's another to actually do it. It's also entirely different to expect everyone in that position to do the same and judge those who wouldn't. Ashiel wrote:However, given that...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T10:33:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#281
2016-01-01T10:12:04Z
2016-01-01T10:12:04Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><p>If a member of my group was doing a thing that was hurting someone else, I would do everything I could in my power to stop my friend from hurting them and do everything I could to help them.</p>
<p>Wouldn't that be the expected, rational thing to do? </blockquote><p>Calling the police isn't good enough? What are you going to do? Pull out your gun? Stab him? Your ex-friend is in a murder rage. I do not believe you are obligated to get in a life or death battle just to maintain group prestige.
<p>What you are describing is the basis to the concept known as collective punishment. That has never lead to good places. Following your logic, all humans are garbage. You specifically are silently encouraging all religious behavior because you haven't done everything in your power to stop it. Unless a few internet post on a forum dedicated to a miscellaneous game in a niche genre is the extent of your power.</p>
Ashiel wrote:If a member of my group was doing a thing that was hurting someone else, I would do everything I could in my power to stop my friend from hurting them and do everything I could to help them.
Wouldn't that be the expected, rational thing to do?
Calling the police isn't good enough? What are you going to do? Pull out your gun? Stab him? Your ex-friend is in a murder rage. I do not believe you are obligated to get in a life or death battle just to maintain group prestige. What you...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T10:12:04Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#277
2016-01-01T09:49:41Z
2016-01-01T09:49:41Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>At the moment, two religions I've read about during my search for reference on the subject, that don't seem to have innately destructive tendencies, include Buddhism and Deism. I'll see if I can expand the list (though the major religions are right out). </blockquote><p>My hometown is home to many Chin refugees from oppressive Buddhist governments. They were given the option to convert, die, or flee.
<p>People may be quick to point out that Buddhism itself does not encourage such behavior, but as we all know, the actions of a few define the entire worth of a religion. </blockquote><p>An interesting point. Thanks for bringing it up! It reminds me to discuss one of the other reasons I think most religions are probably lots and lots of badwrongfun.
<p>The funny thing is that yes, the actions of a few DO define the entire worth of any religion more often than not, and here's why.</p>
<p>Pretend my religion says many good things and attempts to present itself as a religion of peace and such (like Serenrae). Now I'm a bad egg in that basket. I murder, commit violence, oppress, and hurt others in the name of peace and goodness. If I am a rogue from the norms of my religion, then those who are the norm should stand up and drive me out. But if they don't, and my goddess is still granting me spells, then they are collaborators. They are accepting my behavior or are too cowardly to do anything about it.</p>
<p>Any resemblance to real world religions is both coincidental and yet entirely expected.</p>
<p><b>EDIT:</b> Put another way, if a you're a group of dudes 10 men strong, and one of your group attacks someone, mugs them, beats them up, and pisses on them, you cannot claim innocence by saying "Oh, we're totally innocent. We just watched our friend deliver an inhuman and degrading beating to a random stranger outside of our group. We didn't actually do it ourselves". Inaction and acceptance of evil isn't an argument that's particularly convincing. </blockquote><p>I'm confused. Do you want religious people to force people to worship a certain way or not?
<p>Your edit: You may be obligated to call the police and give honest testimony. You would also be obligated to not call them your friend. (But that doesn't stop them from calling you friend) I would not say that you are obligated to kill your ex-friend or brainwash them into holding the same beliefs you do to prevent misconduct.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote: Ashiel wrote:At the moment, two religions I've read about during my search for reference on the subject, that don't seem to have innately destructive tendencies, include Buddhism and Deism. I'll see if I can expand the list (though the major religions are right out).
My hometown is home to many Chin refugees from oppressive Buddhist governments. They were given the option to convert, die, or flee. People may be quick to point out that Buddhism itself...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T09:49:41Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#275
2016-01-01T09:17:39Z
2016-01-01T09:17:39Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>At the moment, two religions I've read about during my search for reference on the subject, that don't seem to have innately destructive tendencies, include Buddhism and Deism. I'll see if I can expand the list (though the major religions are right out). </blockquote><p>My hometown is home to many Chin refugees from oppressive Buddhist governments. They were given the option to convert, die, or flee.
<p>People may be quick to point out that Buddhism itself does not encourage such behavior, but as we all know, the actions of a few define the entire worth of a religion.</p>
Ashiel wrote:At the moment, two religions I've read about during my search for reference on the subject, that don't seem to have innately destructive tendencies, include Buddhism and Deism. I'll see if I can expand the list (though the major religions are right out).
My hometown is home to many Chin refugees from oppressive Buddhist governments. They were given the option to convert, die, or flee. People may be quick to point out that Buddhism itself does not encourage such behavior, but as...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T09:17:39Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=6?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#273
2016-01-01T09:46:29Z
2016-01-01T07:33:52Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Chengar Qordath wrote:</div><blockquote> What always irks me when folks go on about the evils of religion is that they almost always exclusively talk about Christianity and maybe Islam while denouncing all religion everywhere. People <b>do</b> realize that those aren't the only two religions in the world, don't they? </blockquote><p>If you are going to talk about religion, you might as well talk about the right one.
Chengar Qordath wrote:What always irks me when folks go on about the evils of religion is that they almost always exclusively talk about Christianity and maybe Islam while denouncing all religion everywhere. People do realize that those aren't the only two religions in the world, don't they?
If you are going to talk about religion, you might as well talk about the right one.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2016-01-01T07:33:52Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#233
2015-12-31T13:30:26Z
2015-12-31T13:22:27Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote>It fits and I might play one now.</blockquote><p>Spells granted. Go forth and do my will!
Ashiel wrote:It fits and I might play one now.
Spells granted. Go forth and do my will!
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T13:22:27Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#229
2015-12-31T12:06:29Z
2015-12-31T12:06:29Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Domains I'd peg for an atheist cleric to represent what I would expect their inclinations to be...</p>
<p>Artifice, Community, Healing, Knowledge, and Liberation.</p>
<p>It would represent pretty much everything that religion craps on. I include the community because organized religion actively damages communities by dividing them and producing contention, and I included Artifice, Healing, and Knowledge because organized religion has stood barrier to progress in advancement of virtually every field of science and medicine due to dogma. Liberation should be obvious. </blockquote><p>Good good. Unleash the unbiased truth upon the incorrect masses.
Ashiel wrote:Domains I'd peg for an atheist cleric to represent what I would expect their inclinations to be...
Artifice, Community, Healing, Knowledge, and Liberation.
It would represent pretty much everything that religion craps on. I include the community because organized religion actively damages communities by dividing them and producing contention, and I included Artifice, Healing, and Knowledge because organized religion has stood barrier to progress in advancement of virtually...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T12:06:29Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#225
2015-12-31T08:20:44Z
2015-12-31T07:59:45Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Sword wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Guys, I think we have been asked to keep it to Parhfinder or at least game world gods rather than arguing about benefits of real world religion.</p>
<p>We are going off topic here... Massively. </blockquote><p>AGREED!
<p>Let's focus on how clerics can properly not worship me.</p>
The Sword wrote:Guys, I think we have been asked to keep it to Parhfinder or at least game world gods rather than arguing about benefits of real world religion.
We are going off topic here... Massively.
AGREED! Let's focus on how clerics can properly not worship me.
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T07:59:45Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#220
2015-12-31T07:02:05Z
2015-12-31T07:02:05Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Crai wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">God of Atheism wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Claiming objective word meanings is silly. The best that can be achieved is consensus. Thankfully the all-powerful Google can provide that. </p>
<p>agĀ·nosĀ·tic:
<br />
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.</p>
<p>aĀ·theĀ·ist:
<br />
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.</p>
<p>Obviously you can use these words and mean something else, but this is the definition google provides and is a definition most people have easy access to. </blockquote><p>Interesting. Please demonstrate where you see "objective word meanings" and how you interpret Matt Dillahunty's intent is to frame said words as inherently objective.
<p>As for your claim that the best that can be achieved is consensus ... that's patently wrong. The best that can be achieved .. is where •all• participating parties involved in a given discussion mutually agree upon the framework of usage of a given word or set of words. The meanings of said words should be thought of as a contextually driven extension of word usage. Especially when the discussion may involve people who speak different primary languages and/or hail from disparate sociocultural backgrounds. </p>
<p></blockquote><p>Ah see this is a debate tactic know as TL;DR. If someone says "Atheist" and means "Disney Princess Enthusiast", I wouldn't say that is wrong, just confusing.
<p>conĀ·senĀ·sus:
<br />
general agreement.</p>
<p>The best case you describe, I would say falls under the term consensus.</p>
Crai wrote:God of Atheism wrote:Claiming objective word meanings is silly. The best that can be achieved is consensus. Thankfully the all-powerful Google can provide that.
agĀ·nosĀ·tic:
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
aĀ·theĀ·ist:
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
Obviously you can use these words...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T07:02:05Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#214
2015-12-31T05:42:18Z
2015-12-31T05:42:18Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Crai wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I highly recommend folks who are having difficulty parsing the linguistic gymnastics of •belief• as it relates to atheism and agnosticism ... try to first get a base foundation of how epistemology works.</p>
<p>The most comprehensive yet easily-digestable online reference I've seen that helps people understand these challenging issues is on the Iron Chariots Wiki. Google to get their Atheist vs. Agnostic page link. </blockquote><p>Claiming objective word meanings is silly. The best that can be achieved is consensus. Thankfully the all-powerful Google can provide that.
<p>agĀ·nosĀ·tic:
<br />
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.</p>
<p>aĀ·theĀ·ist:
<br />
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.</p>
<p>Obviously you can use these words and mean something else, but this is the definition google provides and is a definition most people have easy access to.</p>
Crai wrote:I highly recommend folks who are having difficulty parsing the linguistic gymnastics of *belief* as it relates to atheism and agnosticism ... try to first get a base foundation of how epistemology works.
The most comprehensive yet easily-digestable online reference I've seen that helps people understand these challenging issues is on the Iron Chariots Wiki. Google to get their Atheist vs. Agnostic page link.
Claiming objective word meanings is silly. The best that can be achieved...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T05:42:18Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#207
2015-12-31T00:42:02Z
2015-12-31T00:42:02Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Atarlost wrote:</div><blockquote>Agnostics do not believe. Atheists believe in a negative statement. </blockquote><p>People tend to use the same words to mean different things.
<p>A moniker will not tell you what a person actually believes. But that doesn't stop amateur linguist from telling you that there is no such thing as atheist or agnostic, just agnostic atheists. They'll also provide a bunch of labels that only really apply to straw-men to reduce the word agnostic to a meaningless term.</p>
Atarlost wrote:Agnostics do not believe. Atheists believe in a negative statement.
People tend to use the same words to mean different things. A moniker will not tell you what a person actually believes. But that doesn't stop amateur linguist from telling you that there is no such thing as atheist or agnostic, just agnostic atheists. They'll also provide a bunch of labels that only really apply to straw-men to reduce the word agnostic to a meaningless term.
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-31T00:42:02Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=5?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#202
2015-12-30T23:26:51Z
2015-12-30T23:26:51Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Furthermore Atheism is actually a very complicated belief system if you wish to deny all God-like entities.</blockquote><p>Not really. "I don't believe in god-like entities without plausible proof" isn't very complicated. In fact, neither is not believing in <b>most</b> any other supernatural thing that someone decides to attribute to anything.
<p>Given that there is no tangible difference between belief in any deity and believing that Santa Clause brought those presents and not your mom, it's easy to see why many people simply don't.</blockquote><p>Booo! These kind of weak statements make you a poor follower of Atheism. If there was a heaven, you wouldn't get in.
<p>I require that my clerics deny ALL supernatural things. We can't leave any intellectual room for a religion. Especially since the mortals keep shifting around what it means to be a God.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Quote:Furthermore Atheism is actually a very complicated belief system if you wish to deny all God-like entities.
Not really. "I don't believe in god-like entities without plausible proof" isn't very complicated. In fact, neither is not believing in most any other supernatural thing that someone decides to attribute to anything. Given that there is no tangible difference between belief in any deity and believing that Santa Clause brought those presents and not your mom, it's...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T23:26:51Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=4?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#194
2015-12-30T15:24:12Z
2015-12-30T15:24:12Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Casual Viking wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">God of Atheism wrote:</div><blockquote> I find the parallel words theory more persuasive than Universals are merely mental constructs. </blockquote><p>Because you like magical thinking more than evidence or rigour. Universals in particular become very transparent once you get the perspective of a few different languages and apply it to the "problem".
</p>
</blockquote><p>You must be able totranslate communication into a version that uses only things not universals and things to convey the same meaning while not having access to things accrossed many worlds.
<p>Bravo! That will surely convince everyone to devoutly not believe I exist.</p>
Casual Viking wrote:God of Atheism wrote: I find the parallel words theory more persuasive than Universals are merely mental constructs.
Because you like magical thinking more than evidence or rigour. Universals in particular become very transparent once you get the perspective of a few different languages and apply it to the "problem".
You must be able totranslate communication into a version that uses only things not universals and things to convey the same meaning while not having access...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T15:24:12Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=4?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#192
2015-12-30T14:31:04Z
2015-12-30T14:31:04Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Casual Viking wrote:</div><blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Are universals distinct entities or unneeded concepts? Universals in some form are very useful to answer metaphysical questions.</blockquote>"Useful concepts". Part of the toolset of thought and communication, but without concrete reality. Just like the entire field of "Metaphysics". </blockquote><p>I find the parallel words theory more persuasive than Universals are merely mental constructs.
<p>I do appreciate that you have the balls to deny metaphysics as a valid field of thought rather than relent an inch on inclinations or spend time tackling serious logical questions. Those kind of qualities should be useful for OP when trying to construct a cleric of atheism. Parallels can be drawn to certain clerics denying the whole field of evolutionary biology for being pointless speculation "without concrete in reality".</p>
Casual Viking wrote:Quote:Are universals distinct entities or unneeded concepts? Universals in some form are very useful to answer metaphysical questions.
"Useful concepts". Part of the toolset of thought and communication, but without concrete reality. Just like the entire field of "Metaphysics". I find the parallel words theory more persuasive than Universals are merely mental constructs. I do appreciate that you have the balls to deny metaphysics as a valid field of thought rather than...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T14:31:04Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=4?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#189
2015-12-30T13:49:42Z
2015-12-30T13:49:42Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Sissyl wrote:</div><blockquote> Just as much fun as seeing religious people keeping up their claim that atheism is "just another religion, so there". </blockquote><p>Do people really feel like they have to do that?
<p>They need to try using my system:
<br />
1. Do they believe in our Lord and savior Jesus?
<br />
2. Are they wrong? != answer to 1.
<br />
3. Don't be belligerent about your own rightness. Worst case scenario, more room in heaven for you.
<br />
4. Do not be so insecure of your beliefs that you feel like you need to be able to convert people with the reasoning behind your beliefs. </p>
<p>NOTE: System may not work for people who are wrong :P</p>
Sissyl wrote:Just as much fun as seeing religious people keeping up their claim that atheism is "just another religion, so there".
Do people really feel like they have to do that? They need to try using my system:
1. Do they believe in our Lord and savior Jesus?
2. Are they wrong? != answer to 1.
3. Don't be belligerent about your own rightness. Worst case scenario, more room in heaven for you.
4. Do not be so insecure of your beliefs that you feel like you need to be able to convert people...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T13:49:42Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=4?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#187
2015-12-30T13:25:44Z
2015-12-30T13:25:44Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Well not believing in Bigfoot is neither a belief nor ideology. It's the same thing.
</p>
<b>EDIT:</b> Or the loch ness monster.
<br />
Or the tooth fairy.
<br />
Or Santa Clause.
<br />
Or Rumplestilzkin.
<br />
Or trolls.
<br />
Or dragons.
<br />
Or 99.99999999999999% of our hobby.</p>
<p>I now found the church of not believing in make believe?
<br />
I can be the pope of the church of not believing that dragons actually exist.</p>
<p>Disbelief does not an ideology make, good sir. </blockquote><p>There is a difference between not believing something exist and believing something does not exist.
<p>The first is absence the second is positing a negative. </p>
<p>Furthermore Atheism is actually a very complicated belief system if you wish to deny all God-like entities. Are universals distinct entities or unneeded concepts? Universals in some form are very useful to answer metaphysical questions. Both metaphysical realist and metaphysical nominalist have tackled this question for a very long time. Universals have bothered many would be atheist philosopher. You either have to explain the world without them or explain how immaterial things do not conflict with an Atheistic viewpoint. Normally an atheist would have trouble accepting the immaterial as a cornerstone of their thought process and how they view the world.</p>
Ashiel wrote:Well not believing in Bigfoot is neither a belief nor ideology. It's the same thing.
EDIT: Or the loch ness monster.
Or the tooth fairy.
Or Santa Clause.
Or Rumplestilzkin.
Or trolls.
Or dragons.
Or 99.99999999999999% of our hobby.I now found the church of not believing in make believe?
I can be the pope of the church of not believing that dragons actually exist.
Disbelief does not an ideology make, good sir.
There is a difference between not believing something exist and...
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T13:25:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Thought Experiment: A Cleric dedicated to Atheism
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2shgw&page=4?Thought-Experiment-A-Cleric-dedicated-to-Atheism#181
2015-12-30T10:29:59Z
2015-12-30T10:29:59Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Entryhazard wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote>I prefer my razor sharp wit. </blockquote><p>But it's a natural weapon and not everybody can use it
<p>Maybe you can do like Apsu that has both Bite and Quarterstaff </blockquote><p>Do you dare question my followers?
Entryhazard wrote:Rhedyn wrote:I prefer my razor sharp wit.
But it's a natural weapon and not everybody can use it Maybe you can do like Apsu that has both Bite and Quarterstaff Do you dare question my followers?
God of Atheism (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-12-30T10:29:59Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=5?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#221
2015-01-26T01:01:55Z
2015-01-26T01:01:55Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">bookrat wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">andreww wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>This single ability puts a whole new spin on martial caster disparity conversations when using strict RAW. </blockquote><p>The only spin I see from doing such a thing is that in order to compete at all with casters a martial character has to become a caster. Nothing about a martial characters class abilities is adding anything to the debate here.
<p>That is pretty much the entire martial/caster debate established right there. To compete with a caster you must become one. </blockquote>I've been laughing about that for a while now. You are absolutey correct. </blockquote><p>DSP psionics seems to address this issue. Both the caster and martial concept are polluted by the other.
<p>The martials without anysort of "spellcasting" still conjure psionic weapons and/or armor with various associated effects that allow them to stay relevant in higher levels. The downside for added utility and diversified defensive capabilities was a dialing back on DPR. Fighters are still better at full attacking than soulknifes and aegi at high levels.</p>
<p>Likewise "casters" get easier access to AC, temp health, DR, blasting, and many other straightforward solutions to problems. The downside is that there is not nearly as many exploits and tricky RAW "spells" for psionics. They are not expected to exploit the system.</p>
<p>When was the last time you saw a high level wizard rain magical destruction down on foes or slam a foe into a wall with his mind?
<br />
When was the last time you saw a high level fighter actually get within melee reach of a dragon?</p>
bookrat wrote:andreww wrote: Quote:This single ability puts a whole new spin on martial caster disparity conversations when using strict RAW.
The only spin I see from doing such a thing is that in order to compete at all with casters a martial character has to become a caster. Nothing about a martial characters class abilities is adding anything to the debate here. That is pretty much the entire martial/caster debate established right there. To compete with a caster you must become one. I've...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-26T01:01:55Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=5?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#202
2015-01-25T23:20:05Z
2015-01-25T23:20:05Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Devil's Advocate wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Check it out, everyone! The Eschew Materials feat lets fighters cast unlimited 9th-level spells!</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Eschew Materials wrote:</div><blockquote><b>Benefit:</b> You can cast any spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less without needing that component. The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1 gp, you must have the material component on hand to cast the spell, as normal.</blockquote><p>See that! "You can cast any spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less..." It says it right there in the first sentence. And it doesn't say that spells you cast require you to spend spell slots or mythic power. As long as it's a spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less, you just cast it for free whenever you want.
<p>Also, the Quick Draw feat lets you draw a weapon even if you have no free hands or other prehensile limbs! It says, "You can draw a weapon as a free action..." It's granting you the ability to draw weapons even if you would otherwise be physically incapable of drawing weapons! After all, the ability to physically draw weapons is not a prerequisite for this feat, and the feat explicitly grants you that ability! If you have no available hands, you can just telekinetically draw your weapons!</p>
<p>Well, either that or an ability that says, "You can do X without doing Y," is granting you the ability to ignore Y whenever you do X, not also granting you the ability to do X. But that's crazy talk. That argument assumes that the English language grants readers the latitude to consider context and common sense when determining which of two clauses within a sentence is dependent upon the other. And, as we all know, the English language is an infinitely precise computer language, any sentence of which can have only one meaning when parsed, regardless of context. </blockquote><p>Huh.
<p>That is a fair point.</p>
<p>I'm still pondering over the exact implications of this. But I want to commend you on forming an actual argument instead of frothing at the mouth going "nuh uh".</p>
<p>EDIT: Someone did point out that this feat does give you an action to cast spells. SO although you can cast spells, you have no action to actually spend casting spells.</p>
Devil's Advocate wrote:Check it out, everyone! The Eschew Materials feat lets fighters cast unlimited 9th-level spells!
Eschew Materials wrote:Benefit: You can cast any spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less without needing that component. The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1 gp, you must have the material component on hand to cast the spell, as normal.
See that! "You can...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T23:20:05Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=4?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#182
2015-01-25T21:54:38Z
2015-01-25T21:54:38Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote><p> How about everyone who used "but it's RAW" in a discussion when you knew it was not RAI just apologize to BigDTbone so he does not make any more silly threads like this one. </p>
<p>Then we can waste our time on threads that actually have a point. </blockquote><p>Actually most people use, "but it is RAW" because they disagree with the other person on what RAI is.
<p>There are a few posters who both play and GM under the idea that high level spell casters get free wishes.</p>
wraithstrike wrote:How about everyone who used "but it's RAW" in a discussion when you knew it was not RAI just apologize to BigDTbone so he does not make any more silly threads like this one.
Then we can waste our time on threads that actually have a point.
Actually most people use, "but it is RAW" because they disagree with the other person on what RAI is. There are a few posters who both play and GM under the idea that high level spell casters get free wishes.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T21:54:38Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=4?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#177
2015-01-25T21:19:08Z
2015-01-25T21:19:08Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Cyrad wrote:</div><blockquote>5) There's already plenty of RAW ways to break the game. Ones that don't need finding loopholes in mythic rules using convoluted munchkin logic to work. No player would use this "loophole" unless they were intentionally trying to break the game. No GM would allow such an obvious attempt to break the game.</blockquote><p>No really?
<p>Of course no one would actually do this. That doesn't make it munchkin logic or any other sort of derogatory name-calling logic.</p>
<p>I am more impressed by the people willing to decrease their literacy for the sole purpose of rejecting a RAW quirk.</p>
Cyrad wrote:5) There's already plenty of RAW ways to break the game. Ones that don't need finding loopholes in mythic rules using convoluted munchkin logic to work. No player would use this "loophole" unless they were intentionally trying to break the game. No GM would allow such an obvious attempt to break the game.
No really? Of course no one would actually do this. That doesn't make it munchkin logic or any other sort of derogatory name-calling logic.
I am more impressed by the people...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T21:19:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=4?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#172
2015-01-25T21:00:05Z
2015-01-25T21:00:05Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Yuugasa wrote:</div><blockquote><p> While it does say you can cast any arcane spell and thus a fighter could do that you would need to make up a bunch of house rules just to make it work(what is the CL? What sets the DCs? etc) </p>
<p>It's basically just a bad turn of phrase that even an extremely permissive GM would have make a bunch of judgement calls on to have it function. </blockquote><p>It's actually pretty simple.
<p>You have no CL and you have no relevant bonus to the DC of spells. Plenty of spells are plenty strong without either of those (because spellcasting is just a tad broken).</p>
<p>Now having an SLA gives you both a CL and scales it off your cha. But that only follows from the nonsense FAQ the devs gave about SLAs. You couldn't actually interpret that from the rules.</p>
Yuugasa wrote:While it does say you can cast any arcane spell and thus a fighter could do that you would need to make up a bunch of house rules just to make it work(what is the CL? What sets the DCs? etc)
It's basically just a bad turn of phrase that even an extremely permissive GM would have make a bunch of judgement calls on to have it function.
It's actually pretty simple. You have no CL and you have no relevant bonus to the DC of spells. Plenty of spells are plenty strong without either...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T21:00:05Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=4?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#160
2015-02-21T21:52:19Z
2015-01-25T18:56:44Z
<p>I like how people try to change how English works rather than accept a Non-RAI RAW mistake.</p>
<p>Mythics are just packed full of nonsense RAW. GM interpretations are mandatory to run the base game, not to mention mythics.</p>
I like how people try to change how English works rather than accept a Non-RAI RAW mistake.
Mythics are just packed full of nonsense RAW. GM interpretations are mandatory to run the base game, not to mention mythics.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T18:56:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=3?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#123
2015-01-26T16:12:05Z
2015-01-25T06:13:23Z
<p>Well the relevant ability score for fighters is strength.</p>
<p>Therefore DC = 10 + str + spell level!</p>
<p>But if we are being consistent, then the DC for fighter spells would be 10+spell level because they were not listed as having a relevant ability score nor does the fighter class give them one.
<br />
If they get a CL through an SLA and the SLA is cha based then the relevant ability score would be cha.</p>
Well the relevant ability score for fighters is strength.
Therefore DC = 10 + str + spell level!
But if we are being consistent, then the DC for fighter spells would be 10+spell level because they were not listed as having a relevant ability score nor does the fighter class give them one.
If they get a CL through an SLA and the SLA is cha based then the relevant ability score would be cha.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T06:13:23Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=3?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#118
2015-01-25T05:45:55Z
2015-01-25T05:45:55Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">kestral287 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">WWWW wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Hmm, this is a neat trick.</p>
<p>Though what would be the attribute for the save DC calculation. I am unaware of where, if anywhere, pathfinder might have listed casting stat DC priority. </blockquote>That comes from individual class features. At best your DCs are looking at 10+spell level. </blockquote><p>Obviously your spells have no DC.
kestral287 wrote:WWWW wrote:Hmm, this is a neat trick.
Though what would be the attribute for the save DC calculation. I am unaware of where, if anywhere, pathfinder might have listed casting stat DC priority.
That comes from individual class features. At best your DCs are looking at 10+spell level. Obviously your spells have no DC.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T05:45:55Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=3?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#105
2015-01-25T04:47:02Z
2015-01-25T04:47:02Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote><p>"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot."</p>
<p>Oh look it lets you cast a spell!</blockquote>Without expending a slot. So if you can't cast a spell in the first place, the ability does nothing for you. </blockquote><p>That is not how words work.
TriOmegaZero wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote:"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot."
Oh look it lets you cast a spell!
Without expending a slot. So if you can't cast a spell in the first place, the ability does nothing for you. That is not how words work.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:47:02Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=3?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#103
2015-01-26T16:10:25Z
2015-01-25T04:44:22Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Glad we're in agreement. It doesn't say it gives the ability to cast spells to people who can't cast spells.</p>
<p>So it doesn't.</p>
<p>Get over it. </blockquote><p>"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot."
<p>Oh look it lets you cast a spell!
<br />
Amazing! It is like it says you can do that word for word.</p>
<p>Reading.</p>
Rynjin wrote:Glad we're in agreement. It doesn't say it gives the ability to cast spells to people who can't cast spells.
So it doesn't.
Get over it.
"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot." Oh look it lets you cast a spell!
Amazing! It is like it says you can do that word for word.
Reading.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:44:22Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=2?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#100
2015-01-25T04:40:42Z
2015-01-25T04:40:42Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote>No one is forcing you to reply. </blockquote><p>No one is forcing you either.
TriOmegaZero wrote:No one is forcing you to reply.
No one is forcing you either.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:40:42Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=2?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#98
2015-01-25T04:40:14Z
2015-01-25T04:38:38Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TOZ wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote>The ability says you can cast spells.</blockquote>It says you can spend a point to cast a spell without expending a slot. It doesn't say "you gain the ability to cast a spell". You still need to be able to cast spells in the first place. </blockquote>I don't see how you could read it that way. </blockquote>I've noticed. </blockquote><p>I have this bad habit of believing that words mean what they do.
<p>Abilities do what they say they do.</p>
<p>Get over it.</p>
TOZ wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote: TriOmegaZero wrote: Marroar Gellantara wrote:The ability says you can cast spells.
It says you can spend a point to cast a spell without expending a slot. It doesn't say "you gain the ability to cast a spell". You still need to be able to cast spells in the first place. I don't see how you could read it that way. I've noticed. I have this bad habit of believing that words mean what they do. Abilities do what they say they do.
Get over it.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:38:38Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=2?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#90
2015-01-25T04:20:14Z
2015-01-25T04:20:14Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote>The ability says you can cast spells.</blockquote>It says you can spend a point to cast a spell without expending a slot. It doesn't say "you gain the ability to cast a spell". You still need to be able to cast spells in the first place. </blockquote><p>I don't see how you could read it that way.
TriOmegaZero wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote:The ability says you can cast spells.
It says you can spend a point to cast a spell without expending a slot. It doesn't say "you gain the ability to cast a spell". You still need to be able to cast spells in the first place. I don't see how you could read it that way.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:20:14Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=2?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#79
2015-01-26T16:03:52Z
2015-01-25T04:09:39Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> To cast a spell, you must have the ability to cast spells. Fighters don't get that ability. You can rule it however you want, that's my ruling. </blockquote><p>The ability says you can cast spells.
<p>I wouldn't rule that it works. But it does by RAW.</p>
TriOmegaZero wrote:To cast a spell, you must have the ability to cast spells. Fighters don't get that ability. You can rule it however you want, that's my ruling.
The ability says you can cast spells. I wouldn't rule that it works. But it does by RAW.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T04:09:39Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn&page=2?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#70
2015-01-25T03:33:04Z
2015-01-25T03:33:04Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BigDTBone wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Mathius wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I wonder how Andreww will rule on this in our fight. If you use it. I can see the minimal level rule going either way.</p>
<p>By the way I agree with you about sno cones. </p>
<p>In a home game I would go with Scythia idea and even if you can crank it all the way to CL 9 or something it is still not a big deal unless you level 3 mt 1 or something. WBL should make that difficult anyway. </blockquote>He said no. </blockquote><p>Of course he did, he has a caster bias.
BigDTBone wrote:Mathius wrote:I wonder how Andreww will rule on this in our fight. If you use it. I can see the minimal level rule going either way.
By the way I agree with you about sno cones.
In a home game I would go with Scythia idea and even if you can crank it all the way to CL 9 or something it is still not a big deal unless you level 3 mt 1 or something. WBL should make that difficult anyway.
He said no. Of course he did, he has a caster bias.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T03:33:04Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#46
2015-01-26T05:35:04Z
2015-01-25T02:27:34Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ipslore the Red wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">kestral287 wrote:</div><blockquote>The various traits give you a CL for that SLA/those SLAs only. They're explicit in that regard.</blockquote><p>False.
<p>SLAs qualify you for magic item crafting feats. But an SLA <b>may be considered</b> spont casting, thus crippling this trick. </blockquote>Houserules are irrelevant to RAW. </blockquote><p>Key word was maybe.
<p>"pell-Like Abilities (Sp) Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or material components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability is based on would be subject to spell resistance.</p>
<p>A spell-like ability usually has a limit on how often it can be used. A constant spell-like ability or one that can be used at will has no use limit; unless otherwise stated, a creature can only use a constant spell-like ability on itself. Reactivating a constant spell-like ability is a swift action. Using all other spell-like abilities is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so provokes attacks of opportunity. It is possible to make a concentration check to use a spell-like ability defensively and avoid provoking an attack of opportunity, just as when casting a spell. A spell-like ability can be disrupted just as a spell can be. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.</p>
<p>For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature's caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature's Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature's Charisma modifier.</p>
<p>Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order.</p>
<p>Format: At willāburning hands (DC 13); Location: Spell-Like Abilities."</p>
<p>I don't see anything that gives you slots or spontaneous casting by name.</p>
<p>As long as your SLA is arcane then that is your arcane caster level as per FAQ. Therefore all spells you cast with this mythic ability work off that caster level.</p>
<p>•The main thing here is that that SLA faq was silly</p>
Ipslore the Red wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote: kestral287 wrote:The various traits give you a CL for that SLA/those SLAs only. They're explicit in that regard.
False. SLAs qualify you for magic item crafting feats. But an SLA may be considered spont casting, thus crippling this trick. Houserules are irrelevant to RAW. Key word was maybe. "pell-Like Abilities (Sp) Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, focus, or...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T02:27:34Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#42
2015-01-26T15:49:55Z
2015-01-25T02:18:46Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">kestral287 wrote:</div><blockquote>The various traits give you a CL for that SLA/those SLAs only. They're explicit in that regard.</blockquote><p>False.
<p>SLAs qualify you for magic item crafting feats. But an SLA may be considered spont casting, thus crippling this trick.</p>
kestral287 wrote:The various traits give you a CL for that SLA/those SLAs only. They're explicit in that regard.
False. SLAs qualify you for magic item crafting feats. But an SLA may be considered spont casting, thus crippling this trick.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T02:18:46Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#40
2015-01-25T02:16:47Z
2015-01-25T02:16:47Z
<p>Since you don't have a CL, then most of the spells you can cast will be really weak.</p>
<p>For example you can dimension door farther than you can teleport.</p>
Since you don't have a CL, then most of the spells you can cast will be really weak.
For example you can dimension door farther than you can teleport.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T02:16:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Fighter going mythic? Choose archmage. Here's why.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwwn?Fighter-going-mythic-Choose-archmage-Heres-why#38
2015-01-25T04:12:52Z
2015-01-25T02:14:31Z
<p>•slow claps•</p>
*slow claps*
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T02:14:31Z
Re: Forums: Conversions: How do I make Lars in Pathfinder?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwtj?How-do-I-make-Lars-in-Pathfinder#9
2015-01-25T02:07:39Z
2015-01-25T02:07:39Z
<p>Can you make an Archer as good as Lars who would also not be able to survive falling out of a plane while drinking gallons of cyanide?</p>
Can you make an Archer as good as Lars who would also not be able to survive falling out of a plane while drinking gallons of cyanide?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-25T02:07:39Z
Forums: Conversions: How do I make Lars in Pathfinder?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rwtj?How-do-I-make-Lars-in-Pathfinder#1
2015-01-24T01:34:39Z
2015-01-24T01:30:29Z
<p><a href="http://digg.com/video/the-modern-archer-who-can-fire-three-arrows-in-0-6-seconds" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Video</a></p>
<p>How would I mimic this real person's abilities with PF mechanics?</p>
Video
How would I mimic this real person's abilities with PF mechanics?
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-24T01:30:29Z
Re: Forums: Rules Questions: Sacred Geometry
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rb6y&page=9?Sacred-Geometry#402
2015-01-22T15:42:37Z
2015-01-22T15:42:37Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Emo Duck wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Mr Feeny wrote:</div><blockquote> If your GM allows it, there is a <a href="https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.clucasprojects.sacredgeometry" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">calculator</a> on Android that does a pretty good job of quickly finding solutions to sacred geometry. </blockquote>Is there a version of this for a plain, ol' Windows PC? :P </blockquote><p>Eclispe android emulator.
Emo Duck wrote:Mr Feeny wrote: If your GM allows it, there is a calculator on Android that does a pretty good job of quickly finding solutions to sacred geometry.
Is there a version of this for a plain, ol' Windows PC? :P Eclispe android emulator.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-22T15:42:37Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v&page=2?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#63
2015-01-21T21:01:14Z
2015-01-21T21:01:14Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">JRutterbush wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Mathius wrote:</div><blockquote> Does scribe scroll count as crafting feat? </blockquote>Yes. It's a feat that allows you to craft a kind of magic item, listed with the item creation feats. How could someone possibly think it's not a crafting feat? </blockquote><p>Idk perhaps any wizard that does not have 220,000 gold in scrolls.
JRutterbush wrote:Mathius wrote: Does scribe scroll count as crafting feat?
Yes. It's a feat that allows you to craft a kind of magic item, listed with the item creation feats. How could someone possibly think it's not a crafting feat? Idk perhaps any wizard that does not have 220,000 gold in scrolls.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-21T21:01:14Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#45
2015-01-20T17:26:12Z
2015-01-20T16:25:49Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Uwotm8 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Trogdar wrote:</div><blockquote>Sure, but if leadership is a valid option, then there is no reason for the wizard not to take it as it is obviously the best in slot feat. All of the wizards other minions will come directly from class features, which prevents them from muddying the waters. </blockquote>But best in slot spells are fine, yeah? </blockquote><p>Are those spells really a wizard class feature?
<p>Both sorcerers and arcanist can take them. Some even argue that the shaman can have them.</p>
Uwotm8 wrote:Trogdar wrote:Sure, but if leadership is a valid option, then there is no reason for the wizard not to take it as it is obviously the best in slot feat. All of the wizards other minions will come directly from class features, which prevents them from muddying the waters.
But best in slot spells are fine, yeah? Are those spells really a wizard class feature? Both sorcerers and arcanist can take them. Some even argue that the shaman can have them.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-20T16:25:49Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#40
2015-01-20T00:39:47Z
2015-01-20T00:39:47Z
<p>Just one example Aasimar ages are different in Golarion and APs than in the advance race guide.</p>
<p>PRD and setting specific Pathfinder are very different things.</p>
Just one example Aasimar ages are different in Golarion and APs than in the advance race guide.
PRD and setting specific Pathfinder are very different things.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-20T00:39:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#36
2015-01-20T00:12:17Z
2015-01-20T00:12:17Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">kestral287 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Cerberus Seven wrote:</div><blockquote>I think his point is that Golarion =/= Pathfinder. Inner Sea Gods/Combat/Magic and other such regional specific books, as well as all the adventure paths, offer setting specific options. That's why they're not in the PRD. Same with <i>blood money</i> (from an adventure path) and Sacred Geometry (from a campaign setting book). If you want to compare the system itself, which is setup to run games on worlds <b>other</b> than Golarion, well, that's what the core product line in the PRD is for. </blockquote><p>To rephrase the same statement then: Books published by the owner of Pathfinder that say Pathfinder on the cover with the official Pathfinder logo are not Pathfinder?
<p>I... would like to hear that from Marroar Gellantara if that's what his point is. </blockquote><p>Did you read sacred geometry?
kestral287 wrote:Cerberus Seven wrote:I think his point is that Golarion =/= Pathfinder. Inner Sea Gods/Combat/Magic and other such regional specific books, as well as all the adventure paths, offer setting specific options. That's why they're not in the PRD. Same with blood money (from an adventure path) and Sacred Geometry (from a campaign setting book). If you want to compare the system itself, which is setup to run games on worlds other than Golarion, well, that's what the core product...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-20T00:12:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#32
2015-01-19T23:40:50Z
2015-01-19T23:40:50Z
<p>Pummeling Charge is in the PRD, and so is divine protection and quicken spell rods.</p>
<p>I fail to see your point.</p>
Pummeling Charge is in the PRD, and so is divine protection and quicken spell rods.
I fail to see your point.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-19T23:40:50Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#29
2015-01-19T22:13:40Z
2015-01-19T22:13:40Z
<p><a href="http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/sacred-geometry" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Read this feat again</a> and tell me all "PF material" should be the assumed default standard.</p>
<p>It is also entirely possible for be people to act in different capacities at different times.</p>
Read this feat again and tell me all "PF material" should be the assumed default standard.
It is also entirely possible for be people to act in different capacities at different times.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-19T22:13:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Martial versus Wizard
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rw6v?Mythic-Martial-versus-Wizard#26
2015-01-19T21:45:33Z
2015-01-19T21:45:33Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BigDTBone wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote> Eh this contest is already using non-PRD material as if it is more legitimate than 3rd party or homebrew. It holds no relevance to my games. </blockquote><p>It is definately more relevant than PRD. Pathfinder is the game as it exists in totality as published by its creators. That includes all Paizo product lines.
<p>I really think that no leadership and no custom items are a big problem but I'm willing to deal. </blockquote><p>The PRD are the rule books written by the rule devs. The other material is written by creative devs.
<p>The PRD is Pathfinder, while the other material is just pathfinder in golarion or other settings.</p>
BigDTBone wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote: Eh this contest is already using non-PRD material as if it is more legitimate than 3rd party or homebrew. It holds no relevance to my games.
It is definately more relevant than PRD. Pathfinder is the game as it exists in totality as published by its creators. That includes all Paizo product lines. I really think that no leadership and no custom items are a big problem but I'm willing to deal. The PRD are the rule books written by the rule devs. The...
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-19T21:45:33Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Mythic Fighter vs Wizard!
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rvum&page=24?Mythic-Fighter-vs-Wizard#1181
2015-01-19T21:18:51Z
2015-01-19T21:18:51Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Avh wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marroar Gellantara wrote:</div><blockquote>You don't have to spend the points, you can save up.</blockquote><p>In pathfinder, you can't save up anything for later.
</p>
You can't save up feats, skill ranks, spells chosen when you level, etc...</p>
<p>So unless Spellcasting has a specific text that goes against the general rule, it can't be saved up. </blockquote><p>You know how and why you are full of it.
</p>
If you really don't, I can safely ignore your input too.</p>
Avh wrote:Marroar Gellantara wrote:You don't have to spend the points, you can save up.
In pathfinder, you can't save up anything for later.
You can't save up feats, skill ranks, spells chosen when you level, etc...So unless Spellcasting has a specific text that goes against the general rule, it can't be saved up. You know how and why you are full of it.
If you really don't, I can safely ignore your input too.
Marroar Gellantara (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2015-01-19T21:18:51Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A thank-you to Paizo
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rq9g?A-thankyou-to-Paizo#8
2014-11-25T04:09:57Z
2014-11-25T04:09:57Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote><p> While it is great of Paizo to allow stuff like the SRD and Archives of Nethys to exist, it's not an entirely altruistic act. It simply doesn't impact the company as much, since unless I've been mislead the majority of their income comes from the Adventure Paths, not the rules supplements.</p>
<p>I think it might be a different story if their main source of revenue was the rule books, like the various editions of D&D ran on. </blockquote><p>Well, I for one have only bought rule books from Paizo and I would not have done that if I could not google the rules (mainly because I would not be playing pathfinder).
<p>I bought the books for the art.</p>
Rynjin wrote:While it is great of Paizo to allow stuff like the SRD and Archives of Nethys to exist, it's not an entirely altruistic act. It simply doesn't impact the company as much, since unless I've been mislead the majority of their income comes from the Adventure Paths, not the rules supplements.
I think it might be a different story if their main source of revenue was the rule books, like the various editions of D&D ran on.
Well, I for one have only bought rule books from Paizo and I...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-11-25T04:09:57Z
Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Rogue Archetype
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rpc4?Rogue-Archetype#1
2014-11-15T01:36:33Z
2014-11-15T01:36:33Z
<p><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/12fx0QRYORnNwibcRGt1Tw65ThagCQM9BjZxAHh-ZyZA/edit#" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Archetype</a></p>
<p>This archetype is not meant to be balanced next to the vanilla rogue. The goal here was to make a class that was better at skills and combat than a slayer/investigator even multiclass character. I still want the slayer to be "better" at combat and the investigator to still be generally better at skills.</p>
<p>I could use some suggestions and feedback.</p>
Archetype
This archetype is not meant to be balanced next to the vanilla rogue. The goal here was to make a class that was better at skills and combat than a slayer/investigator even multiclass character. I still want the slayer to be "better" at combat and the investigator to still be generally better at skills.
I could use some suggestions and feedback.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-11-15T01:36:33Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: If you could change one thing about the Rogue.....
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rozj?If-you-could-change-one-thing-about-the-Rogue#4
2014-11-12T05:46:29Z
2014-11-12T05:46:29Z
<p>I had a thought about changing sneak attack dice to precision dice. Half the progression, but have the precision dice add d6s to both to-hit and damage rolls against "vulnerable" foes.</p>
<p>"Vulnerable" would be a condition defined as a foe that is hampered in anyway via movement reduction (even from armor), dex denied, flat footed, feinted, grappled, prone, ect.</p>
<p>I would also like for dex to be added to damage rolls as precision damage against vulnerable foes.</p>
<p>Lastly, I would want to offer the option that whenever you threaten a critical hit, you could forgo the conformation roll to instead as an AOO strike the foe again for just precision damage. (picture it as rending with the weapon or twisting the knife)</p>
<p>Obviously I wouldn't have the 30ft or concealment restrictions. There are already feats and items that get around that issue, you might as well bake into the class instead of having "mandatory options".</p>
I had a thought about changing sneak attack dice to precision dice. Half the progression, but have the precision dice add d6s to both to-hit and damage rolls against "vulnerable" foes.
"Vulnerable" would be a condition defined as a foe that is hampered in anyway via movement reduction (even from armor), dex denied, flat footed, feinted, grappled, prone, ect.
I would also like for dex to be added to damage rolls as precision damage against vulnerable foes.
Lastly, I would want to offer the...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-11-12T05:46:29Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why low magic?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm18&page=6?Why-low-magic#293
2014-11-27T07:05:22Z
2014-10-30T04:58:16Z
<p>I once ran a session where I made the party worry about having enough food to make it to the next town.</p>
<p>They nearly passed out from boredom.</p>
I once ran a session where I made the party worry about having enough food to make it to the next town.
They nearly passed out from boredom.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-30T04:58:16Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why play a first world summoner?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nno8?Why-play-a-first-world-summoner#25
2014-10-27T21:58:26Z
2014-10-27T21:58:26Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jackissocool wrote:</div><blockquote> Don't get me wrong, I always put role playing ahead of optimizing. But I see literally no advantage gained by the first world summoner. I want it to be mechanically not a terrible choice, but the eidolon hit points and base attack are basically halved, it loses Darkvision for low-light vision, and you get SNA instead if summon monster. I see nothing gained other than flavor, and I think that's unfair for people who would want to play this for role playing reason (i.e. me). </blockquote><p>Someone necro'd this thread pretty hard, but I've seen people like JJ and a straight reading of the archetypes says that you can have both your eidolon out AND any number of SLAs summons out.
<p>So even though you are weaker in both aspects, being able to use both at once is pretty impressive.</p>
Jackissocool wrote:Don't get me wrong, I always put role playing ahead of optimizing. But I see literally no advantage gained by the first world summoner. I want it to be mechanically not a terrible choice, but the eidolon hit points and base attack are basically halved, it loses Darkvision for low-light vision, and you get SNA instead if summon monster. I see nothing gained other than flavor, and I think that's unfair for people who would want to play this for role playing reason (i.e. me).
...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-27T21:58:26Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: XP rates and Classes?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm8q?XP-rates-and-Classes#12
2014-10-20T19:23:08Z
2014-10-20T19:23:08Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Zhayne wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote> The idea is nice, but I only ever see a 1-3 level gap. Is that really enough? </blockquote>It's too much. </blockquote><p>Somehow I really do not feel like the level 10 wizard would be envious of the level 12 rogue, or even a level 11 bard/investigator/slayer/ranger/inquisitor would be envious of a level 12 rogue.
Zhayne wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote: The idea is nice, but I only ever see a 1-3 level gap. Is that really enough?
It's too much. Somehow I really do not feel like the level 10 wizard would be envious of the level 12 rogue, or even a level 11 bard/investigator/slayer/ranger/inquisitor would be envious of a level 12 rogue.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T19:23:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: XP rates and Classes?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm8q?XP-rates-and-Classes#10
2014-10-20T19:04:07Z
2014-10-20T19:04:07Z
<p>The idea is nice, but I only ever see a 1-3 level gap. Is that really enough?</p>
<p>You could try taking a gestalt multiclassing approach, where stacking class feature levels takes those levels xp instead of more. Then you could not let fullcasters do that, maybe create XP penalties for casters.</p>
<p>For example, a level 10 wizard could take 105,000 xp, while an level 8 fighter/rogue gestalt would take 102,000 xp. Then you could throw in your idea of different classes having different xp rates. So when you have level 10 wizards (160K xp), you could have lvl 10 fighter/rogue gestalts(142K xp).</p>
The idea is nice, but I only ever see a 1-3 level gap. Is that really enough?
You could try taking a gestalt multiclassing approach, where stacking class feature levels takes those levels xp instead of more. Then you could not let fullcasters do that, maybe create XP penalties for casters.
For example, a level 10 wizard could take 105,000 xp, while an level 8 fighter/rogue gestalt would take 102,000 xp. Then you could throw in your idea of different classes having different xp rates. So...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T19:04:07Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So who here is Super Happy about sticking with Pathfinder?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm5j&page=2?So-who-here-is-Super-Happy-about-sticking#65
2014-10-20T05:32:36Z
2014-10-20T05:32:36Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> The pfsrd is a fan-site. </blockquote><p>So? It being allowed to exist is a mark for Paizo and Pathfinder.
TriOmegaZero wrote:The pfsrd is a fan-site.
So? It being allowed to exist is a mark for Paizo and Pathfinder.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T05:32:36Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So who here is Super Happy about sticking with Pathfinder?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm5j&page=2?So-who-here-is-Super-Happy-about-sticking#61
2014-10-20T05:15:49Z
2014-10-20T05:15:49Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kthulhu wrote:</div><blockquote> I have to wonder, Marcus, do you know what Pathfinder is? It has a PRD, not an SRD. So it's possible you've never heard of the game. </blockquote><p>Why yes Kthulhu I am well aware that PF has both a PRD and a pf<b>srd</b>.
<p>I thought I explained quite clearly that being able to google "D&D 5e X" and getting sent straight to the relevant rules is invaluable in any-sort of rules heavy TTRPG.</p>
Kthulhu wrote:I have to wonder, Marcus, do you know what Pathfinder is? It has a PRD, not an SRD. So it's possible you've never heard of the game.
Why yes Kthulhu I am well aware that PF has both a PRD and a pfsrd. I thought I explained quite clearly that being able to google "D&D 5e X" and getting sent straight to the relevant rules is invaluable in any-sort of rules heavy TTRPG.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T05:15:49Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So who here is Super Happy about sticking with Pathfinder?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm5j?So-who-here-is-Super-Happy-about-sticking#38
2014-10-20T03:34:57Z
2014-10-20T03:10:35Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote>•Was aware of free "Basic Rules"• </blockquote>Then why ask 'what system'? :P </blockquote><p>Implied: Without an SRD it might as well not exist.
TriOmegaZero wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:*Was aware of free "Basic Rules"*
Then why ask 'what system'? :P Implied: Without an SRD it might as well not exist.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T03:10:35Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So who here is Super Happy about sticking with Pathfinder?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm5j?So-who-here-is-Super-Happy-about-sticking#33
2014-10-20T02:55:25Z
2014-10-20T02:55:25Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">MYTHIC TOZ wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Gnomezrule wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote><p> •Checks for 5e SRD•</p>
<p>What new system? </blockquote><p>This + infinity!!!
</p>
</blockquote><a href="http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules?x=dnd/basicrules" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Here you are!</a> </blockquote><p>Where is the search function?
</p>
Can I type into google "5e Fighter" and go straight to the class table?</p>
<p>•Was aware of free "Basic Rules"•</p>
MYTHIC TOZ wrote:Gnomezrule wrote: Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:*Checks for 5e SRD*
What new system?
This + infinity!!!
Here you are! Where is the search function?
Can I type into google "5e Fighter" and go straight to the class table?*Was aware of free "Basic Rules"*
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T02:55:25Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So who here is Super Happy about sticking with Pathfinder?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm5j?So-who-here-is-Super-Happy-about-sticking#19
2014-10-20T16:34:20Z
2014-10-20T02:21:28Z
<p>•Checks for 5e SRD•</p>
<p>What new system?</p>
*Checks for 5e SRD*
What new system?
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-20T02:21:28Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Magic: The Actual Problems
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rbxx&page=14?Magic-The-Actual-Problems#683
2014-10-19T21:42:17Z
2014-10-19T21:42:17Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Te'Shen wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Atarlost wrote:</div><blockquote>. . . The problem starts with the invisible flying wizard at level 5. That's an encounter that's basically impossible without magic. A martial can use a bow, but only after a friend has glitterdusted or faerie fired the enemy and if he's not an archer he probably doesn't have a magic bow and has to chew through protection from arrows before doing any damage unless a friend casts magic weapon or he has an oil. Things only get worse from there. Where they reach unacceptable varies with who you ask. </blockquote><p>And this probably falls into the realm of DM fiat, but if one of the players decides to tie an alchemist's fire or two to a bag of flour and toss it in the air while another player hits it with an arrow, I have no problem with it exploding and making the caster visible until he can remove the flour.
<p>I've always thought that most spells should have a mundane weakness. If you, as the storyteller, warn your players and incorporate that element into the game then cool. But I accept that it's not standard, and as such, falls out of the area of discussion. </blockquote><p>In 3.5 this would work. In PF the flour would also turn invisible just like any other object the target of the spell picks up.
Te'Shen wrote:Atarlost wrote:. . . The problem starts with the invisible flying wizard at level 5. That's an encounter that's basically impossible without magic. A martial can use a bow, but only after a friend has glitterdusted or faerie fired the enemy and if he's not an archer he probably doesn't have a magic bow and has to chew through protection from arrows before doing any damage unless a friend casts magic weapon or he has an oil. Things only get worse from there. Where they reach...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-19T21:42:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So why do these classes suck?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rm0a?So-why-do-these-classes-suck#12
2014-10-18T16:46:46Z
2014-10-18T16:46:46Z
<p>Rogues: Good at skills and nothing else when plenty of classes have tons of skills, more damage/saves/ac, and spells</p>
<p>Cavalier: Idk, they probably do just fine.</p>
<p>Fighter: Lord of the DPR and nothing else. Suffers from being a mere mortal as levels go up and up. Recent archetypes can help it immensely (ACG)</p>
<p>Monk: An eclectic mess of class features, BUT this class has received the best archetype love in the game. With Qinggong alone, trading out slowfall for barkskin, and something for the double edge sword SR, you can do pretty well with Dragon Style. Human Wanderers get a nice to-hit boost too. Monk is one of the few martials where power attack can actually hurt their DPR.</p>
Rogues: Good at skills and nothing else when plenty of classes have tons of skills, more damage/saves/ac, and spells
Cavalier: Idk, they probably do just fine.
Fighter: Lord of the DPR and nothing else. Suffers from being a mere mortal as levels go up and up. Recent archetypes can help it immensely (ACG)
Monk: An eclectic mess of class features, BUT this class has received the best archetype love in the game. With Qinggong alone, trading out slowfall for barkskin, and something for the...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-18T16:46:46Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Chaotic Evil without the crazy
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rlgo&page=2?Chaotic-Evil-without-the-crazy#72
2014-10-16T05:15:18Z
2014-10-16T05:15:18Z
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_egoism" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Ethical Egoism</a></p>
<p>We have a bad habit on these forums in assuming that acting in self-interest is a bad thing.</p>
<p>Pure sociopathy could be a facet of NE, or it could be TN. I feel that CE has too much moral capacity to be define by a disorder that represents a lack of moral capacity. </p>
<p>Now that I think about it, members of the Darkbrotherhood could be described as sane CE. They glorified in the void, in the comfort of their dark family. There worship did not have the overarching stratagems common with NE mortals or CE abyssal lords. Some were insane. Others did not even revel in the kill. They were simply content with the worship of Sithis. The society in Skyrim or Cyrodiil did not consider them crazy as a whole.</p>
Ethical Egoism
We have a bad habit on these forums in assuming that acting in self-interest is a bad thing.
Pure sociopathy could be a facet of NE, or it could be TN. I feel that CE has too much moral capacity to be define by a disorder that represents a lack of moral capacity.
Now that I think about it, members of the Darkbrotherhood could be described as sane CE. They glorified in the void, in the comfort of their dark family. There worship did not have the overarching stratagems common...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-16T05:15:18Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Magic: The Actual Problems
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rbxx&page=13?Magic-The-Actual-Problems#614
2014-10-18T08:20:09Z
2014-10-16T03:20:17Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">LazarX wrote:</div><blockquote><p> The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.</p>
<p>The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes. </blockquote><p>I find if you interpret wizards into the ground then the other classes will only get furthered pushed into the ground via the fairness of harsh interpretation.
<p>If wizards cannot be creative with spells, then so much less for rogue skills and fighter strength.</p>
LazarX wrote:The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes.
I find if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-16T03:20:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Chaotic Evil without the crazy
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rlgo&page=2?Chaotic-Evil-without-the-crazy#67
2014-10-15T22:39:05Z
2014-10-15T22:39:05Z
<p>CE is generally considered crazy regardless of the competence of the individual. Society has been trained to view such incarnations of ruin as "wrong". Such entities do not fit to our mental norms. Their desires seem self destructive. Certain agents of doom like Galactus, the Abyss, Death, Diablo (from the games), GW dragons, and Sithis are seen as forces of nature and less people. So their CE tendencies don't mark them for insane because they have a cosmic mandate for their values.</p>
<p>Those of us entwined in the mortal coil who lean CE do not have such a mandate. CE tendencies seem to run counter to what an appropriate human is suppose to strive for. We can understand LE(vice), LG(virtue), CN(personal freedom), CG(societal freedom/unlawful justice), and TN(apathy / balance), but CE has nothing going for it that any sane individual could want (NE may also fall into this category).</p>
CE is generally considered crazy regardless of the competence of the individual. Society has been trained to view such incarnations of ruin as "wrong". Such entities do not fit to our mental norms. Their desires seem self destructive. Certain agents of doom like Galactus, the Abyss, Death, Diablo (from the games), GW dragons, and Sithis are seen as forces of nature and less people. So their CE tendencies don't mark them for insane because they have a cosmic mandate for their values.
Those of...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-15T22:39:05Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Magic: The Actual Problems
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rbxx&page=12?Magic-The-Actual-Problems#600
2014-10-15T20:36:23Z
2014-10-15T20:36:23Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ed Reppert wrote:</div><blockquote> What is a "tier 3" class? For that matter, what is a tier 1 or tier 2 or tier 4 or higher class? </blockquote><p>Tier one is prepared full casters, tier 2 are spontaneous full casters. The gap between those tiers is fairly narrow. Hence why tier 3 is all 6th level casters regardless of being prepared or spont. tier 4 comprises of 4th level casters and fully featured non-casters. Tier 5 is reserved for flawed classes. Tier 6 classes just should not be played.
<p>The summoner goes into tier 1 or 2 because the class has condensed full casting and class features that more than make up for having less slots. The Master Summoner archetype can even be argued as the most dangerous class, but that is more a testament to the strength of summoning than to the strength of the archetype.</p>
<p>Certain other classes break the tier mold and certain archetype combos move where the class falls in the tiers.</p>
Ed Reppert wrote:What is a "tier 3" class? For that matter, what is a tier 1 or tier 2 or tier 4 or higher class?
Tier one is prepared full casters, tier 2 are spontaneous full casters. The gap between those tiers is fairly narrow. Hence why tier 3 is all 6th level casters regardless of being prepared or spont. tier 4 comprises of 4th level casters and fully featured non-casters. Tier 5 is reserved for flawed classes. Tier 6 classes just should not be played. The summoner goes into tier 1 or...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-15T20:36:23Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Would the fighter be the best fighter if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkov&page=4?Would-the-fighter-be-the-best-fighter-if#156
2014-10-15T19:19:36Z
2014-10-15T19:19:36Z
<p>I think the fighter could be really cool if I wanted 11 general feats and 11 combat feats at the level I would get them.</p>
<p>I don't though. The fighter is great for quickly getting high feat chain builds to come online quickly, but for that to be valuable feats themself have to valuable.</p>
<p>This is why I like spont feats so much. Far too many feats are only situationally good, spont feats allow you to build fighter that grabs the early feats in multiple feat chains so he came make use of them.</p>
<p><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OOsSkbxOcVqilv01ZPLdhByYGR0xVfNdEQ9o8cprp2k/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Sample progression</a></p>
<p>Things like critical focus by themselves are pretty meh, but when that feats allows you to spontaneously grab any crit effect feat, the worth of critical focus goes way up.</p>
<p>Even with that premise, I ran out of feats I actually wanted.</p>
I think the fighter could be really cool if I wanted 11 general feats and 11 combat feats at the level I would get them.
I don't though. The fighter is great for quickly getting high feat chain builds to come online quickly, but for that to be valuable feats themself have to valuable.
This is why I like spont feats so much. Far too many feats are only situationally good, spont feats allow you to build fighter that grabs the early feats in multiple feat chains so he came make use of them.
...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-15T19:19:36Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Class skills feeling off?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rljx?Class-skills-feeling-off#14
2014-11-17T00:45:38Z
2014-10-15T05:21:50Z
<p>Commoners have perception as a class skill...</p>
<p>At this point perception may just need to go the way of concentration and scale off BAB or something.</p>
Commoners have perception as a class skill...
At this point perception may just need to go the way of concentration and scale off BAB or something.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-15T05:21:50Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Class skills feeling off?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rljx?Class-skills-feeling-off#8
2014-10-15T04:46:25Z
2014-10-15T04:46:25Z
<p>Profession(Soldier) is used in mass combat rules, and that is a fighter class skill.</p>
Profession(Soldier) is used in mass combat rules, and that is a fighter class skill.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-15T04:46:25Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Would the fighter be the best fighter if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkov&page=3?Would-the-fighter-be-the-best-fighter-if#138
2014-10-14T23:08:50Z
2014-10-14T23:08:50Z
<p>I actually think a martial master mutagen fighter does fairly well.</p>
<p>Flight + spont feats + not being tied to specific weapons = a character I could see playing.</p>
<p>Based on that here is my idea for a fighter-fix
<br />
1. Apply the Unbreakable and Martial Master archetypes for free(don't trade anything out)
<br />
2. Make weapon training a flat bonus to all weapons, allow the option for a fighter to instead focus on one weapon for double the bonuses.
<br />
3. Make cheap good flight items readily available
<br />
4. 4+int skill points</p>
I actually think a martial master mutagen fighter does fairly well.
Flight + spont feats + not being tied to specific weapons = a character I could see playing.
Based on that here is my idea for a fighter-fix
1. Apply the Unbreakable and Martial Master archetypes for free(don't trade anything out)
2. Make weapon training a flat bonus to all weapons, allow the option for a fighter to instead focus on one weapon for double the bonuses.
3. Make cheap good flight items readily available
4....
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-14T23:08:50Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo&page=8?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#400
2014-10-14T22:57:18Z
2014-10-14T22:57:18Z
<p>Pathfinder has balance issues but there are subtle things that you as GM can do to give every character spot light.</p>
<p>For fighters, you just have to have enemies charge the party. If things are in fighter full attack range, the fighter is generally happy.</p>
<p>For rogues, just allow your monsters to get flanked (it is really easy to 5ft step out of flanking full attacks). You also need to have opportunity for those rogue skills to work. Actually allow the rogue to party scout reliably (it's really easy for enemies to have full vision through an area, making the stealth check irrelevant. Let them have blind spots).</p>
<p>For wizards, allow there magic to work. You will find it is very hard to let other classes shine if you are rules lawyering the wizard into the ground. It is also important to let them do their thing so that they don't decide to encroach on everyone else's niche.</p>
<p>Lastly, encourage the party to not have overlapping niches. If one player wants to play a slayer/trapper ranger/ect. and someone else wants to play a TWF rogue. Make sure both of those players understand that those classes fill the same niche and that there are a lot of bases to cover. If that doesn't work just come out and say that your campaign requires a balanced party (or ban the rogue class).</p>
Pathfinder has balance issues but there are subtle things that you as GM can do to give every character spot light.
For fighters, you just have to have enemies charge the party. If things are in fighter full attack range, the fighter is generally happy.
For rogues, just allow your monsters to get flanked (it is really easy to 5ft step out of flanking full attacks). You also need to have opportunity for those rogue skills to work. Actually allow the rogue to party scout reliably (it's really...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-14T22:57:18Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Discussion: Are builds TOO specialized?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk9z&page=7?Discussion-Are-builds-TOO-specialized#320
2014-10-16T04:32:45Z
2014-10-14T02:36:51Z
<p>IMO Pathfinder does not work well as a roguelike. Even 3.5 was better for that play-style with the way experience was calculated and how XP loss was something that could actually happen.</p>
<p>Random stats and random health work just fine in roguelike games because you are expected to churn through characters regularly to keep the game fresh and interesting. PnP RPGs have long since evolved past depending on this crutch.</p>
IMO Pathfinder does not work well as a roguelike. Even 3.5 was better for that play-style with the way experience was calculated and how XP loss was something that could actually happen.
Random stats and random health work just fine in roguelike games because you are expected to churn through characters regularly to keep the game fresh and interesting. PnP RPGs have long since evolved past depending on this crutch.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-14T02:36:51Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Discussion: Are builds TOO specialized?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk9z&page=6?Discussion-Are-builds-TOO-specialized#292
2014-10-13T07:00:17Z
2014-10-13T07:00:17Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">swoosh wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote> The differences between 3.5 diplomacy and PF diplomacy are vast. </blockquote><p>To be fair, even 3.5 Diplomacy only does that if you're playing with epic rules.
<p>Part of the problem is that people use Diplomacy as "Roll to talk", which is.. weird and not what it does. </blockquote>I did not know exactly what he was trying to say, but if he was saying it was nonmagical dominate person then no, not even in 3.5. </blockquote><p>The two step shift limit.
<p>Without that you can easily make everyone helpful towards you. That's not a mind-thrall, but you could make former mind-thrall(from spells) forgive you. In PF the highest you make hostile creatures is indifferent.</p>
wraithstrike wrote:swoosh wrote: Marcus Robert Hosler wrote: The differences between 3.5 diplomacy and PF diplomacy are vast.
To be fair, even 3.5 Diplomacy only does that if you're playing with epic rules. Part of the problem is that people use Diplomacy as "Roll to talk", which is.. weird and not what it does. I did not know exactly what he was trying to say, but if he was saying it was nonmagical dominate person then no, not even in 3.5. The two step shift limit. Without that you can...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-13T07:00:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Discussion: Are builds TOO specialized?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk9z&page=6?Discussion-Are-builds-TOO-specialized#282
2014-10-13T01:35:26Z
2014-10-13T01:35:26Z
<p>The differences between 3.5 diplomacy and PF diplomacy are vast.</p>
The differences between 3.5 diplomacy and PF diplomacy are vast.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-13T01:35:26Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo&page=5?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#232
2014-10-11T07:25:37Z
2014-10-11T07:01:09Z
<p>In the chronicles of Amber magic was crazy powerful, more so if you counted shadow walking. (In this story, powerful wielders of magic revered a one-armed swordsman)</p>
<p>In the Belgariad magic was far stronger than even what D&D wizards can do.</p>
<p>The Book of the New Sun had pretty epic "magic"</p>
<p>Mageborn magic was also very strong</p>
<p>#Anime/manga/manhwa/ect</p>
In the chronicles of Amber magic was crazy powerful, more so if you counted shadow walking. (In this story, powerful wielders of magic revered a one-armed swordsman)
In the Belgariad magic was far stronger than even what D&D wizards can do.
The Book of the New Sun had pretty epic "magic"
Mageborn magic was also very strong
#Anime/manga/manhwa/ect
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-11T07:01:09Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo&page=5?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#220
2014-10-10T22:34:50Z
2014-10-10T22:34:50Z
<p>There is making the game balance and then there is making life better for martials and rogues.</p>
<p>The former may be impossible with just the way the game is set up, but the latter should be doable.</p>
There is making the game balance and then there is making life better for martials and rogues.
The former may be impossible with just the way the game is set up, but the latter should be doable.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-10T22:34:50Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo&page=3?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#103
2014-10-13T20:03:29Z
2014-10-10T00:17:28Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ssalarn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> <a href="http://paizo.com/products/btpy99gr?The-Genius-Guide-to-Bravery-Feats" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">A very</a> <a href="http://paizo.com/products/btpy8xoo?The-Genius-Guide-to-the-Talented-Fighter" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">easy start</a> would be <a href="http://paizo.com/products/btpy8yqw?The-Genius-Guide-to-the-Talented-Rogue" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">more options</a> for <a href="http://paizo.com/products/btpy99n5/discuss?Path-of-War#tabs" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">martial characters</a> giving them a level of competence and narrative control akin to that enjoyed by spellcasters. It actually isn't that hard a thing to execute within the current framework of the game, and the Brawler and Investigator both gave some pretty serious hints about how that could be possible.</p>
<p>Less simple but probably with even faster and more satisfying results would be to rein in spellcasters so that we have more Hunters and Warpriests running around and fewer Clerics and Druids. A really large number of the biggest problem spells can be found in the last couple levels of spellcasting. </blockquote><p>So what I noticed is that martials basically just become more competent at what they do with level, while casters become more competent AND ascend up in tiers of power until they are fundamentally different.
<p>Martials don't become fundamentally different. The problem I think with addressing that is A LOT of PF players prefer martials that way, and would rather casters switch to a more competency increase than for martials to tier up. On the flip side you have people who like what casters do and would want martials to level in a similar way. PF has a spectrum of players inbetween those extremes. This makes addressing the issue difficult. Paizo has their own answer, just keep printing classes. Tiering martials are the 3/4 casters, but they can also be considered more competency increasing casters. You don't need full casters to make a working party, nor do you need martials. I've come to the conclusion that PF/3.5's popularity stems from their mass appeal, but that is also responsible for the systemic balance problems.</p>
<p>I have a theory. A litmus test if you will about you(the reader) as a player and how much you enjoy PF.
<br />
Test: Ask yourself what level the fellowship of the ring was, specifically Aragon.
<br />
Your answers will probably range from 4 to 20.
<br />
If your answer is closer to level 4, you see levels more as an increase in tier. You see large problems in PF. You prefer to play casters. You may want to play martials, but wouldn't do so unless the group and GM is very laid-back and you have no obligation to optimize.
<br />
If your answer is more in the 10-13 range you see level as both a mixture of competency and tiers. You probably don't see many problems in PF. You'll play any class and have fun doing so without feeling like you are weak or overpowered.
<br />
If your answer is closer to 20, you see levels as an increase in competency. You see large problems in PF. Magic is simply out of control and reigns need to be pulled back on it. You prefer to play martials, you may want to play a caster, but the way magic works in PF just doesn't sit right with you.</p>
<p>The odd thing is, in PF there is no correct answer. If Aragon was 10 or higher, he could fall from the sky and be just fine. But he could also not be low level just from the experience of all the orcs he killed, even assuming the orcs were CR1. He was also able to hang with a guy who solo'd a CR 20 encounter. Really the PF perspective of level has contradicting factors that make any answer both right and incorrect.
<br />
I myself fall in the 4 range, but I would also prefer a game where levels were an increase in tier not competency, regardless of how "weaboo" it might seem.</p>
Ssalarn wrote:A very easy start would be more options for martial characters giving them a level of competence and narrative control akin to that enjoyed by spellcasters. It actually isn't that hard a thing to execute within the current framework of the game, and the Brawler and Investigator both gave some pretty serious hints about how that could be possible.
Less simple but probably with even faster and more satisfying results would be to rein in spellcasters so that we have more Hunters...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-10T00:17:28Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo&page=2?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#80
2014-10-09T22:13:41Z
2014-10-09T21:34:10Z
<p>I see PF as a tilted top. It's not perfectly balanced, but it is close enough that I could keep the game going with nudges.</p>
<p>As a player though, I am growing less and less tolerant of playing a mere mortal next to gods.</p>
<p>I'll just link 3 chars (26 point buy, because that is what the campaigns I play in are using):
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/18I8OZmjVA20jN4OqsOC__4_OExFZq63SmOhcvMtXI9Q/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Magus</a> - Current character
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EYg-VVvuNiLsLKMXhceaw1FtNVpamvn813IyhMJHW0I/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Sorceress</a> - Back up char (campaign is a meat grinder where things worse than death can happen to chars)
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/17l76D0lZ6JLhTR8r9TkyYMqi-qUiYg-KoEjwrn9-HYs/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">MMM Warrior</a> - A build for a different <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/13r2znYZB8mqkjKg_q50pRUU6X-EvWQZjd-os2nuwUOI/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">char</a> that avoids getting mythic vital strike</p>
<p>Now the Magus is a real char, so not at WBL. The sorceress and the MMM Warrior are more comparable. The Fighter has 3 mythic tiers and WBL over the sorceress, but the sorceress is both a better ally and a worse foe to face. She drains no party resources (no need for gear), can poop monsters, and is the perfect scout. All that is just the beginning, but already puts her leagues above the fighter. If you don't think so, ask yourself who you would rather have as an ally, and who you would rather not have as an enemy.
<br />
Now I think the geared Magus vs Sorceress comparison is much closer. But then you have to remember that one has no money. No money spent on bribing outsiders, or making a bloody skeleton army, or crafting gear for the rest of the party. When I really pour over the numbers and the features, the comparison result is just not fair. Even the magus starts to suffer from having mortal elements as the levels climb higher and higher. </p>
<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>
I see PF as a tilted top. It's not perfectly balanced, but it is close enough that I could keep the game going with nudges.
As a player though, I am growing less and less tolerant of playing a mere mortal next to gods.
I'll just link 3 chars (26 point buy, because that is what the campaigns I play in are using):
Magus - Current character
Sorceress - Back up char (campaign is a meat grinder where things worse than death can happen to chars)
MMM Warrior - A build for a different char that...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-09T21:34:10Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do you actually care about Balance?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkvo?Do-you-actually-care-about-Balance#11
2014-10-11T02:41:37Z
2014-10-09T16:39:08Z
<p>Do I expect things that are the same CR to be equally challenging?
<br />
Yes I do.</p>
<p>If the system is not at-least somewhat balanced, then why am I using it?</p>
<p>•That's my issue with HERO or GURPS. You can make whatever you want! But there is no guarantee of any sort of balance.</p>
Do I expect things that are the same CR to be equally challenging?
Yes I do.
If the system is not at-least somewhat balanced, then why am I using it?
*That's my issue with HERO or GURPS. You can make whatever you want! But there is no guarantee of any sort of balance.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-09T16:39:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#99
2014-10-09T15:42:52Z
2014-10-09T15:42:52Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Langley wrote:</div><blockquote>why was I quoted</blockquote><p>Heaven forbid we don't quote snips.
James Langley wrote:why was I quoted
Heaven forbid we don't quote snips.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-09T15:42:52Z
Re: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: What is your favorite fantasy country?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkt0?What-is-your-favorite-fantasy-country#4
2014-10-09T04:15:07Z
2014-10-09T04:15:07Z
<p>Favorite fantasy "country" is Amber. Favorite D&D/PF country has to go to Cheliax. You can just make endless stories out of it, since it is orderly enough to have good people within it, but the overarching evil throughout makes it the perfect breeding ground for tragic heroes.</p>
Favorite fantasy "country" is Amber. Favorite D&D/PF country has to go to Cheliax. You can just make endless stories out of it, since it is orderly enough to have good people within it, but the overarching evil throughout makes it the perfect breeding ground for tragic heroes.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-09T04:15:07Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Would the fighter be the best fighter if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkov&page=2?Would-the-fighter-be-the-best-fighter-if#67
2014-10-12T18:18:59Z
2014-10-08T18:56:12Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">AndIMustMask wrote:</div><blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote>Like I recently tried to write system and I realized two things: 1) Such an endeaver is lots of work. 2) The high level martials I envisioned made sense as not magic and could compete with casters, but they stopped resembling the PF/D&D martial. <b>They were more like Hercules or Gilgamesh or Goku.</b></blockquote>I fail to see the issue there. affecting the world at large at high levels is to be expected of all adventurers, not reserved only for casters.</blockquote><p>That is just the issue. Not everyone would see that as a problem. Plenty of people are OK with levels being an increase in tier. While other prefer levels to be an increase in competency. Pathfinder caters to both and neither.
<p>The issue with a tier based interpretation of levels is that there is no reason for an increase in tier to be expected. Outside of a shonen manga/anime, battle experience doesn't mean your power will increase in tier. In PF it does because levels also mean an increase in competency. Martials mask levels being tiers by not treating them as so. With how martials level it makes sense that they get stronger the more they fight. Because they don't become fundamentally different. They way martials work set the progression pace in PF. One of the reasons I think a lot of people see PF falling apart at high levels is because of how martials fall behind. Once martials are irrelevant, it suddenly makes a lot less sense to be fighting level appropriate foes or to even be in dungeons. Once martials fall to the way-side, the game has to scale in tier with the levels. Before that happens you can just increase the competency of foes and the scale quests. Once "hitting it with a sword" is a silly tactic, "combat" becomes something that begins far before initiative is ever rolled. Heroic struggles shift to dramatic chess matches between demi-gods.</p>
<p>The issue I see with addressing this is that you can't without losing a large section of your player-base. If you move PF more towards levels as competency by reining in the "out of control" magic, then you'll lose everyone who prefers levels as tiers. Like-wise, if you make martials treat levels as tiers, then suddenly the whole game is too "weaboo" for everyone who views levels as an increase in competence. </p>
<p>An interesting question to ask yourself is "What level was the fellowship of the ring?" and that will really tell you where your view of levels is. If the fellowship was 4-6, you see levels as tiers. If Aragorn was level 20 then you see levels as an increase in competency. The more you fall inbetween those two extremes, the more you view levels as both or neither.</p>
<p>PF ends up with mass appeal, because it is trying to please everyone. This causes problems, but there is really no way to fix it without the game losing what a lot of people like about it.
<br />
EDIT: Although you can mask the issue a bit. Make life easier for the martials. Increase skill points, trim feat trees, make resisting magic easier, up DPR for less optimal tactics to increase diversity. 3.5 to PF already did a lot of this. They gave fighters bravery so they could fight dragons and liches. They consolidated skills and reworked cross-class skills, effectively giving everyone more skill points. They gave everyone more feats, effectively making chains shorter (but then they extended chains...). They turned save or die to save or tons of damage, so martials could actually tank it. You can actually TWF for higher DPR (barely) than a two hander after enough investment.
<br />
All you will ever do though is obscure the issue.</p>
AndIMustMask wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:Like I recently tried to write system and I realized two things: 1) Such an endeaver is lots of work. 2) The high level martials I envisioned made sense as not magic and could compete with casters, but they stopped resembling the PF/D&D martial. They were more like Hercules or Gilgamesh or Goku.
I fail to see the issue there. affecting the world at large at high levels is to be expected of all adventurers, not reserved only for casters.That is...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-08T18:56:12Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Would the fighter be the best fighter if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkov?Would-the-fighter-be-the-best-fighter-if#44
2014-10-08T15:05:42Z
2014-10-08T15:03:15Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Eltacolibre wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Like Lemmy and Marcus mentioned, maybe that's just the glass ceiling the fighter have reached in this iteration of 3rd edition. At least the martial master fighter archetype will let some players actually use the obscure combat feats that never sees the light of a day on a table, because they are suboptimal and situational at best.
</p>
</blockquote><p>Love that combo: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OOsSkbxOcVqilv01ZPLdhByYGR0xVfNdEQ9o8cprp2k/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Build Path</a>
</p>
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uG9VBWpMLJpEk2sAvFD_yJllNyU0p_Qez1vkPvt8pgs/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">lvl 12</a>
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/18L4ysghuLs9CcXcJhOBkviXM9zf6wPtUXADhDnX91VY/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">lvl 20</a>
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OqaaeGyxp_d7_fFhibEEHp9flnBPeoHXMmJ7JaC992E/edit" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Mythic</a></p>
<p>Oddly the mythic version could kill Cthulhu, but could still die to ten-thousands of arrows from lvl 1 warriors. Meanwhile a level 8 sorcerer with shadow projection could eat that army alive, but do nothing to Cthulhu.</p>
Eltacolibre wrote:Like Lemmy and Marcus mentioned, maybe that's just the glass ceiling the fighter have reached in this iteration of 3rd edition. At least the martial master fighter archetype will let some players actually use the obscure combat feats that never sees the light of a day on a table, because they are suboptimal and situational at best.
Love that combo: Build Path
lvl 12
lvl 20
MythicOddly the mythic version could kill Cthulhu, but could still die to ten-thousands of arrows...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-08T15:03:15Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Warpriest doesn't have full BAB?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk8v&page=3?Warpriest-doesnt-have-full-BAB#108
2014-10-08T03:39:26Z
2014-10-08T03:39:26Z
<p>Magi are great!</p>
<p>At some point though you'll start to feel like a mere mortal next to the true casters. But as far as being an effective martial goes, magi actually do it.</p>
Magi are great!
At some point though you'll start to feel like a mere mortal next to the true casters. But as far as being an effective martial goes, magi actually do it.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-08T03:39:26Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Would the fighter be the best fighter if...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkov?Would-the-fighter-be-the-best-fighter-if#18
2014-10-14T14:45:04Z
2014-10-08T00:03:48Z
<p>What if the fighter can't be fixed?
<br />
What if at high levels a mundane martial equivalent to casters just doesn't fit the setting?</p>
<p>Like I recently tried to write system and I realized two things: 1) Such an endeaver is lots of work. 2) The high level martials I envisioned made sense as not magic and could compete with casters, but they stopped resembling the PF/D&D martial. They were more like Hercules or Gilgamesh or Goku. </p>
<p>I realized that no matter how perfect I made the system, I couldn't satisfy everyone's setting idea or everyone's idea of level.</p>
<p>Some see level as a competence increase, while PF treats level more like an increase in tier. High level characters are untouchable by lower levels and do not resemble them, except for martials... Martials look like they only increased in competence, while casters went from spraying colors to building castles on the sun.</p>
<p>The two are playing different games at the same table. This idea is contradictory and yet there is no way to fix it without fundamentally changing a game that people like.</p>
What if the fighter can't be fixed?
What if at high levels a mundane martial equivalent to casters just doesn't fit the setting?
Like I recently tried to write system and I realized two things: 1) Such an endeaver is lots of work. 2) The high level martials I envisioned made sense as not magic and could compete with casters, but they stopped resembling the PF/D&D martial. They were more like Hercules or Gilgamesh or Goku.
I realized that no matter how perfect I made the system, I couldn't...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-08T00:03:48Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#95
2014-10-07T23:49:28Z
2014-10-07T23:49:28Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DrDeth wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote>Also interesting to know that your successful important fighter is not playing with a wizard. </blockquote>There's a Sorcerer, Oracle and a Cleric. </blockquote><p>And?
<p>A cleric can tangle with the wizard. I don't really know how, but I've been assured that they can (I could never get into their spell list, pass the druid please).</p>
<p>Without knowing the builds for the sorcerer and the oracle, I can't really assess what they are capable of. It's really easy to just grab lots of spells that do little and be stuck with them forever.</p>
DrDeth wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:Also interesting to know that your successful important fighter is not playing with a wizard.
There's a Sorcerer, Oracle and a Cleric. And? A cleric can tangle with the wizard. I don't really know how, but I've been assured that they can (I could never get into their spell list, pass the druid please).
Without knowing the builds for the sorcerer and the oracle, I can't really assess what they are capable of. It's really easy to just grab lots of...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-07T23:49:28Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#93
2014-10-07T22:28:41Z
2014-10-07T22:28:41Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DrDeth wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">DrDeth wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">James Langley wrote:</div><blockquote><p> ...</p>
<p>So...</p>
<p>The point of this was to say "hey, I like rogues," but very few have...
<br />
Sad day.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>Well, a few things. Some posters pile on anyone who claims to like rogues. I, myself, have seen it played and played well, and it can really contribute.
<p>Of course, like with most classes, you have to pick your archetype for your game. For Combat the Scout and Ninja archetype are good choices (and yes, the Ninja is a just a rogue archetype, statted out.) </p>
<p>True, in Pathfinder AP's you dont have the diabolical Gygaxian traps we had back in AD&D days. This does mean the Scout/skillmonkey/Trapfinder is not as critical as before. This does make me a little sad.</p>
<p>And, it means nothing that other classes can fill the Scout/skillmonkey/Trapfinder niche. This is a FEATURE of Pathfinder, not a bug. No one cares that both the Witch & Sorc can fill the Wizard niche. PF has 30+ classes, there are only four classic niches, thus of course there will be overlap. </p>
<p>Mind you, the Rogue does need some cool new rogue talents. The Devs have said they are on the way. I even started a thread some time ago so we could suggest some.</p>
<p>The Rogue's talents do suffer from one design flaw- the "one a day" talents, which should be 3+ times a day, in line with other bloodlines, schools, etc.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>So I've seen you talk about the effectiveness of a Fighter in your high level groups in the fighter's realm of expertise.
<p>You have similar stories for high level rogues? </blockquote><p>No, sorry. Just low-mid level.
<p>Perhaps, indeed, the rogue suffers at high levels. Perhaps the Wizard does too, since I havent seen any of them played past L5. But I doubt it. </blockquote><p>Wizard has two problems:
</p>
1) Tendency to be a spreadsheet simulator with all the various resources you can have in play (our party wizard carries around 160+ magically crafted items at all times).
<br />
2) Wizards either do little or devastate the encounter. They can also devastate the encounter easily, but for Wizards who have party members that can't keep up, they'll scale themselves back. Either for fun's sake or because they fear GM ire. (I mainly see the latter, which is disgusting)</p>
<p>Also interesting to know that your successful important fighter is not playing with a wizard.</p>
DrDeth wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote: DrDeth wrote: James Langley wrote:...
So...
The point of this was to say "hey, I like rogues," but very few have...
Sad day.
Well, a few things. Some posters pile on anyone who claims to like rogues. I, myself, have seen it played and played well, and it can really contribute. Of course, like with most classes, you have to pick your archetype for your game. For Combat the Scout and Ninja archetype are good choices (and yes, the Ninja is a just a...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-07T22:28:41Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#89
2014-10-07T22:02:15Z
2014-10-07T22:02:15Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DrDeth wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">James Langley wrote:</div><blockquote><p> ...</p>
<p>So...</p>
<p>The point of this was to say "hey, I like rogues," but very few have...
<br />
Sad day.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>Well, a few things. Some posters pile on anyone who claims to like rogues. I, myself, have seen it played and played well, and it can really contribute.
<p>Of course, like with most classes, you have to pick your archetype for your game. For Combat the Scout and Ninja archetype are good choices (and yes, the Ninja is a just a rogue archetype, statted out.) </p>
<p>True, in Pathfinder AP's you dont have the diabolical Gygaxian traps we had back in AD&D days. This does mean the Scout/skillmonkey/Trapfinder is not as critical as before. This does make me a little sad.</p>
<p>And, it means nothing that other classes can fill the Scout/skillmonkey/Trapfinder niche. This is a FEATURE of Pathfinder, not a bug. No one cares that both the Witch & Sorc can fill the Wizard niche. PF has 30+ classes, there are only four classic niches, thus of course there will be overlap. </p>
<p>Mind you, the Rogue does need some cool new rogue talents. The Devs have said they are on the way. I even started a thread some time ago so we could suggest some.</p>
<p>The Rogue's talents do suffer from one design flaw- the "one a day" talents, which should be 3+ times a day, in line with other bloodlines, schools, etc.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>So I've seen you talk about the effectiveness of a Fighter in your high level groups in the fighter's realm of expertise.
<p>Do you have similar stories for high level rogues?</p>
DrDeth wrote:James Langley wrote:...
So...
The point of this was to say "hey, I like rogues," but very few have...
Sad day.
Well, a few things. Some posters pile on anyone who claims to like rogues. I, myself, have seen it played and played well, and it can really contribute. Of course, like with most classes, you have to pick your archetype for your game. For Combat the Scout and Ninja archetype are good choices (and yes, the Ninja is a just a rogue archetype, statted out.)
True, in...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-07T22:02:15Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#75
2014-10-07T15:02:44Z
2014-10-07T15:02:44Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Erick Wilson wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think PF justifies itself just fine. The PRD alone is a big enough reason for me to stick with PF and buy paizo products. I'm not content with only having the "basic rules" when looking over a system.
</p>
An SRD also makes looking up rule LOADS easier. WotC can keep their "better game".</p>
<p>Also from what I have seen of 5e, it seems like Swords and Wizardry fills the niche better. </blockquote><p>PF has a major issue which is game balance, or in other words the fact that there isn't any. No balance means players and GMs have to agree amongst themselves what the internal balance of their game will be, and that is very often an aggravating process.
<p>When I say 5e is a "better game," pretty much all I mean is that by and large it avoids this problem. Since I consider it a major problem though, that's a big deal. </p>
<p>PF does indeed have a lot going for it still. The monsters and tactics are more complex and interesting, especially with the release of Mythic Adventures. But then, tactics are only interesting when there is balance, so we're back to that... </p>
<p>The point is that 5e is much closer to the spirit and design of PF/3e than 4e was, so I think we have to acknowledge that D&D is now in much more competitive territory with PF than before. Have to wait and see what comes of that. </blockquote><p>PF has enough balance that it is manageable if you are GM willing to nudge the spinning top so it stays upright.
</p>
You have to realize that yes casters > martials, that if you want CR appropriate fights you do need to make it rain gear (for the martials), and that you can only counter magic with magic. </p>
<p>The "balance" problem in PF is the same one as in 3.5, but what PF does better is that it is easier to obscure that problem. </p>
<p>5e will never be a consideration for me with WotCs business practices staying as they are. Unless they come out with God's gift to table-top gaming, they can keep their system that only seems balanced because it is new and has yet to be thoroughly combed through by the user-base.</p>
Erick Wilson wrote:Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:I think PF justifies itself just fine. The PRD alone is a big enough reason for me to stick with PF and buy paizo products. I'm not content with only having the "basic rules" when looking over a system.
An SRD also makes looking up rule LOADS easier. WotC can keep their "better game".Also from what I have seen of 5e, it seems like Swords and Wizardry fills the niche better.
PF has a major issue which is game balance, or in other words the fact...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-07T15:02:44Z
Re: Forums: Advice: Best Summon Monster by level
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2md44&page=2?Best-Summon-Monster-by-level#63
2014-10-07T01:13:53Z
2014-10-07T01:13:53Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">ShoulderPatch wrote:</div><blockquote> If it hasn't been tossed in before, I'll add if you can pick up the feat Superior Summoning it can changes the math to what's best, generally or situation dependent.</blockquote><p>As always, summonings most limiting factor is not in-game. It's turn speed. You won't be a summoner for long if your turns take forever. Superior Summoning is great, but unusable for the vast majority of players.
ShoulderPatch wrote:If it hasn't been tossed in before, I'll add if you can pick up the feat Superior Summoning it can changes the math to what's best, generally or situation dependent.
As always, summonings most limiting factor is not in-game. It's turn speed. You won't be a summoner for long if your turns take forever. Superior Summoning is great, but unusable for the vast majority of players.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-07T01:13:53Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What it feels like to be a vanilla rogue in a party with a master summoner...
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rkfm?What-it-feels-like-to-be-a-vanilla-rogue-in-a#17
2014-10-06T15:34:56Z
2014-10-06T15:34:56Z
<p>I have a bad habit of making back-up chars. Right now the naked sorcerer is hands down better than all my other fully geared back up characters.</p>
<p>Now the sorcerer is on par with my current fully geared magus, but somehow I am not comforted by that.</p>
I have a bad habit of making back-up chars. Right now the naked sorcerer is hands down better than all my other fully geared back up characters.
Now the sorcerer is on par with my current fully geared magus, but somehow I am not comforted by that.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-06T15:34:56Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: A Little Love for the Rogue
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk72&page=2?A-Little-Love-for-the-Rogue#63
2014-10-05T21:44:48Z
2014-10-05T21:44:48Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Erick Wilson wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">memorax wrote:</div><blockquote> It's all good to point out that one can take a Mithral Kikko. Not so much when a DM allows core only. </blockquote><p>Any DM that wants to run this game with Core only should probably just be running 5e. At this point, PF has to justify its existence over D&D 5e, and I think the main thing doing that is the number of choices and the amount of customization available. Take that away and 5e is just a better game.
<p>That said, I think the pressure is now on for PF to develop a more definitive attitude towards game balance, since customization invariably disrupts that. But that's for another thread, I'd say. </blockquote><p>I think PF justifies itself just fine. The PRD alone is a big enough reason for me to stick with PF and buy paizo products. I'm not content with only having the "basic rules" when looking over a system.
</p>
An SRD also makes looking up rule LOADS easier. WotC can keep their "better game".</p>
<p>Also from what I have seen of 5e, it seems like Swords and Wizardry fills the niche better.</p>
Erick Wilson wrote:memorax wrote: It's all good to point out that one can take a Mithral Kikko. Not so much when a DM allows core only.
Any DM that wants to run this game with Core only should probably just be running 5e. At this point, PF has to justify its existence over D&D 5e, and I think the main thing doing that is the number of choices and the amount of customization available. Take that away and 5e is just a better game. That said, I think the pressure is now on for PF to develop a...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-05T21:44:48Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Dungeon Challenge
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rjl5&page=2?Dungeon-Challenge#62
2014-10-01T05:40:47Z
2014-10-01T05:40:47Z
<p>I know our groups run 20-point buy and use PFS like HP (as an option for those who don't want to roll).</p>
<p>I suggest limiting material to the PRD. That's more restrictive than PFS, but not so restrictive as to be unrepresentative for most games. It also avoids a lot of RAW-grey areas that seems more prevalent in non-PRD material.</p>
<p>I also don't really feel like non-PRD books are rule books, even assuming they are, if casters can get things like blood money and sacred geometry, then you don't need to run a test. And no I really don't care that this would also block out Dervish dance and other non-PRD feat dependent builds.</p>
<p>NOTE: PFS is very different from normal pathfinder to the point it is basically a different game.</p>
I know our groups run 20-point buy and use PFS like HP (as an option for those who don't want to roll).
I suggest limiting material to the PRD. That's more restrictive than PFS, but not so restrictive as to be unrepresentative for most games. It also avoids a lot of RAW-grey areas that seems more prevalent in non-PRD material.
I also don't really feel like non-PRD books are rule books, even assuming they are, if casters can get things like blood money and sacred geometry, then you don't...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-10-01T05:40:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: rogues
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qakk?rogues#16
2014-09-30T22:05:05Z
2014-09-30T22:05:05Z
<p>Rogue items:
<br />
<a href="http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/e-g/goggles-sniper-goggles" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Sniper Goggles, Greater</a> - Addresses nonsense range limitation and allows for single-sneak attack range rounds to do decent damage
<br />
<a href="http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-the-ninjitsu" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Headband of the Ninjitsu</a> - Allows rogues to be dangerous in dim lighting and other very rogue-like things, also helps address the to-hit issue (I rule that attacking from out of sight grants the +2 to-hit bonus from being invisible in addition to what this item provides)</p>
<p>[Another ruling I make is to allow the bluff distraction to hide to be done as part of the move action to hide, but all hiding directly after attacking has to be done with snipping rules.]</p>
<p>As a GM I would just give these items to a low-mid level rogue and not count it against WBL(since they are 65,000 gold for what should be class features). Now the issue of saves and AC is harder to address. You could turn your rogue into a lich (thus giving a reason to pump cha).</p>
Rogue items:
Sniper Goggles, Greater - Addresses nonsense range limitation and allows for single-sneak attack range rounds to do decent damage
Headband of the Ninjitsu - Allows rogues to be dangerous in dim lighting and other very rogue-like things, also helps address the to-hit issue (I rule that attacking from out of sight grants the +2 to-hit bonus from being invisible in addition to what this item provides)
[Another ruling I make is to allow the bluff distraction to hide to be done as...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-09-30T22:05:05Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: DPR - Other Metrics of Character Power?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rjc1&page=3?DPR-Other-Metrics-of-Character-Power#149
2014-09-30T02:17:44Z
2014-09-30T02:17:44Z
<p>Considering it is impossible to actually run PF RAW, your test may have some problems.</p>
Considering it is impossible to actually run PF RAW, your test may have some problems.
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-09-30T02:17:44Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: DPR - Other Metrics of Character Power?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rjc1&page=3?DPR-Other-Metrics-of-Character-Power#117
2014-09-29T04:53:53Z
2014-09-29T04:53:53Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Darkholme wrote:</div><blockquote><p> @Marcus; none of that is very specific though.</p>
<p>What if steve and mike both build archery rangers, and I want to be able to accurately and meaningfully compare them?</p>
<p>I'm not sure what sort of industry you'e referring to, but it sounds like you're describing an industry where they can't take their measurements by running statistics. For instance, for car safety, they often crash many cars (crash test dummies) to collect data regarding the car's safety. </blockquote><p>Cars is a good example. You do this to compare designs not products. You can test products.
<p>For Archers (assuming Fighter archers) count the DPR, AC, and Saves. Then weight those values. For an Archer DPR and Saves are worth more than AC. If the archer is at far enough range the value of saves goes down (since a lot of severe effects are close range), but not much lower. So if archer A had twice the DPR, but half the saves and AC than archer B, then Archer A is probably better (provided that the saves are above critical values).</p>
<p>Pure archers don't really have spell effects though. Which is the main comparison point.</p>
<p>EDIT: Something I inferred is that you asked "who is the better archer" instead of who is the better character. The weights to the metrics will fluctuate on role. The general weights make tiers. Specific weights evaluate roles. Not all parties have the same rolls. In truth there is always many many factors to consider when making comparisons. What's funny is I think Guild Wars 2 meta actually fits PF pretty well, since it is also an aggro-less game. If your campaign plays like PvE then DPS is king, because you need to kill the enemy before someone is unlucky. If it's more like PvP then suddenly the meta is a lot more complicated.</p>
Darkholme wrote:@Marcus; none of that is very specific though.
What if steve and mike both build archery rangers, and I want to be able to accurately and meaningfully compare them?
I'm not sure what sort of industry you'e referring to, but it sounds like you're describing an industry where they can't take their measurements by running statistics. For instance, for car safety, they often crash many cars (crash test dummies) to collect data regarding the car's safety.
Cars is a good example....
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-09-29T04:53:53Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: DPR - Other Metrics of Character Power?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rjc1&page=3?DPR-Other-Metrics-of-Character-Power#114
2014-09-29T04:37:24Z
2014-09-29T04:37:24Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Darkholme wrote:</div><blockquote><p> But; showing where Bob and Joe are on the power curve was the point from the beginning.</p>
<p>I've got no real interest in a broad generalization about how classes work in general. The tier system/niche system covers that well enough that I can guess, even if I don't have hard numbers to work with.</blockquote><p>"If you really want a non-DPR metric, then you could weight classes next to each other by the amount and variety of spell-like effects they can produce. Certain Not-Spell things like DPR, AC, and Saves could be used to break ties or in great disparity even muddle the order a bit."
<p>You can count the amount and variety of spell-like effects someone can produce. You can count DRP, AC and Saves.</p>
<p>What's left after that is applying weights to those values (factoring synergistic qualities) and you have an exact value determining strength.</p>
<p>Fuzzy logic following this calculation makes tiers. You can make weights, but chances are you'll tweak the weights to meet your own intuitions. Regardless that's how you compare "designs" in industry, so it should be good enough here.</p>
Darkholme wrote:But; showing where Bob and Joe are on the power curve was the point from the beginning.
I've got no real interest in a broad generalization about how classes work in general. The tier system/niche system covers that well enough that I can guess, even if I don't have hard numbers to work with.
"If you really want a non-DPR metric, then you could weight classes next to each other by the amount and variety of spell-like effects they can produce. Certain Not-Spell things like...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-09-29T04:37:24Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: DPR - Other Metrics of Character Power?
Marcus Robert Hosler
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rjc1&page=3?DPR-Other-Metrics-of-Character-Power#111
2014-09-29T04:08:03Z
2014-09-29T04:08:03Z
<p>As much as I think the game is playable and can be well balanced, in a vacuum without GM intervention: Spells > Not-Spells</p>
<p>If you really want a non-DPR metric, then you could weight classes next to each other by the amount and variety of spell-like effects they can produce. Certain Not-Spell things like DPR, AC, and Saves could be used to break ties or in great disparity even muddle the order a bit.</p>
<p>So with that in mind:
<br />
Wizard = Druid = Cleric = Arcanist = Witch = Shaman = Summoner >
<br />
Oracle = Sorcerer >
<br />
Magus = The Barbar Build = Inquisitor = Investigator = Alchemist = Warpriest = Bard = Skald >
<br />
Mutagen Martial Master Fighter = Slayer = Paladin = Ranger = Other Barbar builds = Optimized Monks = Gunslinger(?) = Bloodragers >
<br />
Monks = Fighters = Caveliers = Ninja = Swashbucklers >
<br />
Rogues </p>
<p>•Certain borked builds omitted</p>
<p>EDIT: If I had to tier it then: T1, T1.5, T2, T3, T4, T5</p>
As much as I think the game is playable and can be well balanced, in a vacuum without GM intervention: Spells > Not-Spells
If you really want a non-DPR metric, then you could weight classes next to each other by the amount and variety of spell-like effects they can produce. Certain Not-Spell things like DPR, AC, and Saves could be used to break ties or in great disparity even muddle the order a bit.
So with that in mind:
Wizard = Druid = Cleric = Arcanist = Witch = Shaman = Summoner >...
Marcus Robert Hosler
2014-09-29T04:08:03Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: ACG and swift actions?
Mythic Magus (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2reuc?ACG-and-swift-actions#5
2014-08-22T18:53:22Z
2014-08-22T18:53:22Z
<p>Some people don't use swift actions?</p>
Some people don't use swift actions?
Mythic Magus (alias of Marcus Robert Hosler)
2014-08-22T18:53:22Z