citybound4st's page

Yeah, I would at least like a form fillable one

I have really only been keeping up on reading the responses in this forum, and to be honest....

It feels like a lot of y'all would hate on someone playing a game like Breath of Wild differently to how the creators of the game intended it to be played.

Where's the room for creativity? Isn't this supposed to be a role-playing game and not a "let's see what stats we can put together to best beat the boss" game?

The main reason I come to Pathfinder, to TTRPGs in general, is for the collective and collaborative storytelling aspect. The rules, combat, and dice are just there to help that. If I wanted to play something that was so rigid in how you could do things regarding the rules, then I might as well go play a video game. Heck, the adventure path I mentioned that I was going to run has been made into a video game (and one of my new players has actually played it before, but that's neither here nor there).

Someone brought up the eight pillars of fun, and several other people brought up how they like to have fun at their tables. I'm not going to tell people how they should have fun when attempting to roll weirdly shaped pieces of plastic with numbers on them onto a table while playing adult make-believe.

This thread is completely full of people assuming what I said or what player B or D said, or what was intended by anyone involved, and there's a saying about what happens when you assume. Perhaps I (or Robo) didn't give you enough context for you to understand fully what was going on. Perhaps we didn't feel that context was needed to grasp the situation, and perhaps it may be because nothing else was happening in the situation.

Anyway, I thought I might leave my thoughts here. I'm gonna refrain from saying more as I'm starting to get a little heated about a random conversation online which doesn't really have any bearing on my life.

citybound4st wrote:

I think to add to this is that this is something RoboMNRK and I have been seeing in the Pathfinder playerbase as a whole, that the "only" or "best" way to play the game is to have an optimized/good party comp. Part of what I was trying to do with this thread was to discuss this specific situation, but I was also using it sort of as an example to talk about the player base at large.

citybound4st must have been reading old posts to think that that is the Pathfinder 2nd Edition playerbase as a whole. That view is held by most Pathfinder 1st Edition players.

We've mostly been seeing it from people on the Pathfinder 2E subreddit.

I think to add to this is that this is something RoboMNRK and I have been seeing in the Pathfinder playerbase as a whole, that the "only" or "best" way to play the game is to have an optimized/good party comp. Part of what I was trying to do with this thread was to discuss this specific situation, but I was also using it sort of as an example to talk about the player base at large.

On the topic of "non-standard" party comps, what would happen/how would I as a GM have to adapt if a party doesn't have any Dex-focused characters?

Just to clarify things, Player B has no problem with D playing what he wants to play. And if what he wants to play fills a niche or completes the party comp, fine. His issue was D mainly coming in with the PF meta mindset instead of just making a character out of the air he wanted to play and just be like "this is what I'm playing."

Player B should play what they want to, and you should set an expectation that they not worry about other players planning around them to fill other party roles, for MANY players (myself included) filling out roles on a team, claiming the territory of having a certain party job is fun and it's not really B's business if someone else feels it's important for the team to have one, if it just means the other person is going to play it themselves. It's not something B should feel entitled to control in other words.

The question isn't necessarily about the other players filling roles, it's about why it's so important to fill those roles in the first place and why the game can't be altered around a "non-standard" party comp

A lot of people also forget that Heal & Soothe use Spell-slots. Which is a resource that PCs need to manage but I have yet to see anyone use healing potions on mass outside of like once a campaign unless you have an Alchemist to mass produce healing potions.

We're playing Kingmaker and in the Aldori mansion, there are a lot of healing potions just lying around. Plus the option of just buying them (as Kingmaker overloads on wealth early game).

I have a player of mine who has been kind of upset with some of the meta in the playerbase. I'll explain what I mean by discussing what has been going on in my Kingmaker group that's currently still forming.

Basically, one of the players (Player A) is thinking about doing barbarian, champion, or cleric (potentially Warpriest). Another one of my players (Player B) is looking to build a spell sub mentalist wizard. For a minute, that's all the players I had, but I found a couple more in a LFG page online (it's an online game anyway, so I didn't mind). One of the players I had added (Player C) said he was looking to play either a wizard or a sorcerer. The second player I added (Player D) was simply looking to round out the party after hearing what everyone else was looking to play. Earlier today, Player D said he would be looking to do bard, oracle, druid, or cleric, and mentioned that sorcerers can do a lot, but if Player C didn't play Phoenix Sorcerer, he would stick with one of those four options.

Player B then messages me privately saying that this was one of the things he wanted to avoid in this game, that there would be something the party would have to do in character creation to be a "good" team. He had said he liked when Player A said that having blind spots as a team would make things more difficult but that it can be fun to fail things (and I agree with this sentiment, although none of the other players have commented on this remark). He (B) concluded with "So the mentality of play this subclass of sorcerer and we should be good rubs me the wrong way" and I can't help but see where he's coming from. Players A and B are both pretty versed in D&D5E, to give an idea of their frame of mind.

We were talking about healing as a group and the topic of who gets access to what healing came up, revealing that arcane casters don't have access to healing but occult, divine, and primal casters do through Heal and Soothe. But outside of that, there's also healing potions. Player D then chimes in saying that potions are very action taxing in combat but are great out of combat. Player B also mentioned concerns about this comment to me. I explained that potentially, the mentality could come from the fact that healing potions take an Interact action to take out and then a manipulate action to drink and only restore 1d8 HP whereas Lay on Hands is one action for 6 HP, Heal costs 1 action for 1d8 HP (or 2 actions for 1d8+8 HP), and Soothe costs 2 actions for 1d10+4 HP. He then asks why not change the rule of drinking a healing potion requiring an Interact action to take it out first, to which I replied that I don't have a compelling reason to change the combat rules as I feel they work robustly.

To conclude this post and pose a question to the reader, what should I do about this? Why is the playerbase so bent on making a completely viable party? Would it break the game to house rule that drinking potions don't require an Interact action first?

I told my player that their character would be worshipping a different aspect of Erastil that favored falchions and necksplitters. I'm considering writing a new stat block for Erastil Belkzenia, would I need to do this or just change a couple things from the standard one in the Player Core? Perhaps changing one of the domains to Might.

I have a player in my upcoming campaign of Kingmaker who wants to make an orc Redeemer champion from the Hold of Belkzen. From what it sounds like, they want to take the Orc Weapon Familiarity feat at level 1 to gain the necksplitter. However, there isn't a deity with the necksplitter as a favored weapon. They're asking if it would be possible to make their deity weapon something other than their deity's favored weapon. Secondly, they mentioned that champions have access to their deity's domains like Warpriest Cleric does, but I haven't seen this anywhere; is it in a feat somewhere?

I'm currently running Kingmaker as a solo adventure, and my player has come up with some questions, mostly just about Lady Jamandi's call for heroes. He's confused a bit about why Lady Jamandi would give a charter to a bunch of level 1 nobodies to expand the lands of Restov. He thinks that Lady Jamandi would at least vet the people that come so that they know they have suitable help, although that also kind of kicks out the Black Tears' appearance.

He's not super frustrated by it--it just seems like a consistency error to him--but he would be interested in finding out more about this. I haven't seen any discussion online about it, so here I am.