Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL)

4.60/5 (based on 130 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL)

Hardcover Unavailable

Add PDF $19.99

Facebook Twitter Email

Enter a fantastic world of adventure!

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game puts you in the role of a brave adventurer fighting to survive in a world beset by magic and evil. Will you cut your way through monster-filled ruins and cities rife with political intrigue to emerge as a famous hero laden with fabulous treasure, or will you fall victim to treacherous traps and fiendish monsters in a forgotten dungeon? Your fate is yours to decide with this giant Core Rulebook that provides everything a player needs to set out on a life of adventure and excitement!

This imaginative tabletop game builds upon more than 10 years of system development and an open playtest involving more than 50,000 gamers to create a cutting-edge RPG experience that brings the all-time best-selling set of fantasy rules into the new millennium.

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook includes:

  • All player and Game Master rules in a single volume
  • Complete rules for fantastic player races like elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, and half-orcs
  • Exciting new options for character classes like fighters, wizards, rogues, clerics, and more
  • Streamlined and updated rules for feats and skills that increase options for your hero
  • A simple combat system with easy rules for grapples, bull rushes, and other special attacks
  • Spellcaster options for magic domains, familiars, bonded items, specialty schools, and more
  • Hundreds of revised, new, and updated spells and magical treasures
  • Quick-generation guidelines for nonplayer characters
  • Expanded rules for curses, diseases, and poisons
  • A completely overhauled experience system with options for slow, medium, and fast advancement
  • ... and much, much more!

Available Formats

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook is also available as:

Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-60125-150-3

Downloads

Looking for more? Check out the Resources and Free Downloads available for the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.

Errata
Last Updated - 5/30/2013

Other Resources: This product is also available on the following platforms:

Hero Lab Online
Fantasy Grounds Virtual Tabletop
Archives of Nethys

Note: This product is part of the Pathfinder Rulebook Subscription.

Additional Product Images


(click to enlarge)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL) Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL) Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL) Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL)

Product Availability

Hardcover:

Unavailable

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZO1110


See Also:

121 to 125 of 136 << first < prev | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

4.60/5 (based on 130 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Wonderful job

4/5

I got 2 of the hardcopy versions of the core book (one for posterity, the other for play). You all did a fantastic job on the product. From the writing of the rules to the art; I would say that my only issues with it are that the Bard is still fundamentally the same as he is under 3.$ & I would've liked to have seen what the Blackguard would've been like.

Future stuff I'd like to see would be more Prestige Classes (PrCs) and a dataset for RPGXplorer (or whichever company U use for character generating programs). Again, great job


Wonderful book

4/5

I only own this mighty tome in PDF form, so my review necessarily limits itself to that. So no flowery praise for production values, or other aspects limited to the physical product.

The content is good, however. It carries over the best innovations of the Beta editions, while cutting the dross and improving compatibility. In fact, most of the rule messes in 3.5 seem to have been cleared up without violating the "core concepts" and making the game drastically different from what I have grown to love.

For the PDF only, I had to knock off a star for problems with the bookmark navigation. A true pity, given that Paizo worked very hard to produce a great PDF. Hopefully, an update will become available soon, allowing its full glory to be restored.




Excellent work!

5/5

I am highly impressed with not only the physical quality of the book (I am still waiting for mine, but have seen friends') but with the content (I bought the PDF and have been reading it - and once the bookmarking issues are sorted out.......). Congratulations on revitalizing *my* favourite edition of the rules and doing a damn fine job of cleaning up. I know some think it didn't go far enough... but this isn't supposed to be a new game with all new rules. An excellent job of balancing fixes with backward compatability that ensures people will be able to use the excellent Paizo PRPG products whether they choose to use the PRPG rules or not. Great job, folks. This is the most important gaming book on my shelf. :)


Doesn't walk on water...but almost perfect

5/5

The production values on this book are great, the layout, border, interior art are all incredible. There are errors of course, and everyone has different tastes...having been part of the alpha & beta testing, I'm impressed with the way the final version evolved from alpha.

Can't please all the people all the time.

I only have a few gripes, I don't like the armor pictures taken from the Gamemastery cards, they're not very accurate versions of real armor (particularly the banded mail, which doesn't even match the description, and the dwarven plate looks like a samurai armor knock off instead of a thick stone version of Platemail.)

The maneuver system is a blessing compared to the old grapple rules. The new skill system makes character/NPC creation much easier.
Some of the weapons (spiked chain) have been changed, character classes expanded in an attempt to equalize the classes. Sorcerers and wizards are now mechanically and thematically different rather than just in name and meta-game stats.

As a veteran Grognard with 27 years of gaming experience under their belt, I definitely support PATHFINDER.


121 to 125 of 136 << first < prev | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | next > last >>
1,201 to 1,250 of 1,495 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>

3.5 Loyalist wrote:

"master craftsmen which lets you craft magic items in the sense of +1 to +(whatever) magical items. Really? So the blacksmith who has no exposure to or knowledge of the arcane pulls mystical energy from OUT OF NOWHERE and imbues the normal axe with magical power. Huge gap in logic there."

I really found that feat questionable. A quick way for chars to make magic items without a wizard, and for magic items to greatly increase in economies, because craftsman can now make them. What do the rest think? I keep it well away from my games. Don't forget Zhen, the rank also counts as caster level.

I don't care much for that one either, but stories where someone made a great weapon are a part of fantasy, even if the maker had no magical powers. A certain dwarf that was the friend of a certain drow made a certain weapon for a certain Barbarian named Wulfgar.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Would it help if we added "Elf only" to the requirements? Since they're good at magic and crafting and fighting and everything, after all. :)

Sarcasm Police reminds you: this is your strike one. On strike three we will burst thru the wall, hit you with desarcasmizing rays and you will lose your mojo. Consider yourself warned. No Sarcasm Vows, no Sarcasm Powers!


Sarcasm ain't a crime.

Show me your badge. What department did you say you were with again?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Sarcasm ain't a crime.

Show me your badge. What department did you say you were with again?

Bah, another one who didn't watch Scott Pilgrim. :)


Yeah, I have. Wasn't that good though. Too trendy, in a word.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Poor Gorb, can't tell when I'm genuinely joking any more. :)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Poor Gorb, can't tell when I'm genuinely joking any more. :)

My head is ... so ... confused ... must ... drink ... more ... coffee...

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

Gorbacz wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Poor Gorb, can't tell when I'm genuinely joking any more. :)
My head is ... so ... confused ... must ... drink ... more ... coffee...

Yeah, you are looking rather deflated. Not that I'm interested in running into a perky bag of devouring, mind you ...


Seriously Guys are we still arguing about the rules after all this time..the rules are what they are..they won't be changing in the near future so just suck it up and play.

The time for these arguments is when 2nd ed goes to alpha test..in about 8 to 10 years time hopefully.


This is the place to discuss the product and its rules. I've heard others say, hey! no criticism here before.

And some of us don't want to just suck it up, accept the rules and play with them. Some of us what to find what is weak or a bit off, discuss it, change it and throw what we consider better into our games. They can certainly be changed, they don't have to be accepted.

For the greater good, and fun times without wrought.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

This is the place to discuss the product and its rules. I've heard others say, hey! no criticism here before.

And some of us don't want to just suck it up, accept the rules and play with them. Some of us what to find what is weak or a bit off, discuss it, change it and throw what we consider better into our games.

For the greater good, and fun times without wrought.

Gosh, it is too darn bad that you didn't get your 50 cents in when the project was still in its Alpha or Beta phase where you might have been able to affect the outcome. Now it is just coming across as "sound and fury signifying nothing".

Complaining after the fact when the rules are set is a waste of your time to write and mine to read your complaints.

You would be better served coming up with house rules to fix the things you don't like and writing about those on the appropriate forum.

I don't care for many of the rules in the Core book either, but I don't complain about them here. I simply adjust them how and where I choose for my home campaign. I think the majority of persons do this as well.

But that is just MY two cents.


Well this thread is tied to the core book and the rules therein. I would assume some evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses would be appropriate. Of course saying things like, "Paizo should change X and Y." Are meaningless, but saying that the changes A and B that were made are not strengths of the system and are in fact a weakness, is appropriate when discussing this book and the rules therein.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

This is the place to discuss the product and its rules. I've heard others say, hey! no criticism here before.

And some of us don't want to just suck it up, accept the rules and play with them. Some of us what to find what is weak or a bit off, discuss it, change it and throw what we consider better into our games. They can certainly be changed, they don't have to be accepted.

For the greater good, and fun times without wrought.

What is this Wrought you keep going on about..the dictionary definition of the word makes your use of it nonsensical

wrought

— vb
1. archaic a past tense and past participle of work

— adj
2. metallurgy shaped by hammering or beating
3. ( often in combination ) formed, fashioned, or worked as specified: well-wrought
4. decorated or made with delicate care

And for your information I would quite happily be playing 3.5 if it was a game system that was still being supported..but it isn't.


Wrought as it is used at the clubs I have attended (in Melbourne), is cheating, power-gaming, the breach of balance, finding or adopting new rules to take away class weaknesses (e.g. making wizards d6). In sum, something a dm should always be watching for. All new rules or rule-sets should be checked for wrought. Giving a class more and more is wrought, breaking a class so that it is not close to being balanced to other classes is also wrought. Prestige classes that give two levels of spellcasting every level is an example of wrought. Read back over the recent pages for more information.

It is used in the sense of: that is clearly wrought-there, you are trying to wrought the rules. So in a sense it is close to the metallurgy meaning, one hammers away at balance and forges wrought through cheating. One could also cheat at rolls and thereby wrought the outcome of the game.

Trying to start a game with an elven wizard with 30 int and a decent con is another example of wrought that I have seen. "Oh no, I rolled it and if I make him venerable he can start with 30 int, oh I also rolled an 18 con".


wraithstrike wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:

"master craftsmen which lets you craft magic items in the sense of +1 to +(whatever) magical items. Really? So the blacksmith who has no exposure to or knowledge of the arcane pulls mystical energy from OUT OF NOWHERE and imbues the normal axe with magical power. Huge gap in logic there."

I really found that feat questionable. A quick way for chars to make magic items without a wizard, and for magic items to greatly increase in economies, because craftsman can now make them. What do the rest think? I keep it well away from my games. Don't forget Zhen, the rank also counts as caster level.

I don't care much for that one either, but stories where someone made a great weapon are a part of fantasy, even if the maker had no magical powers. A certain dwarf that was the friend of a certain drow made a certain weapon for a certain Barbarian named Wulfgar.

thats all good but the game has rules and authors can write whatever they want in novels. The game system itself has rules and there are short explanations from a logical standpoint for how and why a rule functions a certain way. Saying its a fantasy setting and using that to throw logic to the wind is really unsubstantiated.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Wrought as it is used at the clubs I have attended (in Melbourne), is cheating, power-gaming, the breach of balance, finding or adopting new rules to take away class weaknesses (e.g. making wizards d6). In sum, something a dm should always be watching for.

Thank you. I wasn't understanding your use of the word before. (As common as it might be in Melbourne, it's new to me here in the States.)

I think there's a distinction between a player trying to exploit the system -- cobbling together rules from various sources to build a synergy that the individual rule designers weren't intending -- versus a game design team making changes to suit a shared view of where the game ought to be going. The player probably doesn't have game balance in mind, other than tipping the scales as far as possible in his favor.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
This is the place to discuss the product and its rules.

I concur completely and there are many discussions like this in the forums, especially the Rules forum. In fact, this is where I believe your review(s) would have been more appropriately placed.

Just a suggestion based on the thoughts you've expressed, your efforts would be better placed in offering House Rule ideas in the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew forum.

Best.


Chris Mortika wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Wrought as it is used at the clubs I have attended (in Melbourne), is cheating, power-gaming, the breach of balance, finding or adopting new rules to take away class weaknesses (e.g. making wizards d6). In sum, something a dm should always be watching for.

Thank you. I wasn't understanding your use of the word before. (As common as it might be in Melbourne, it's new to me here in the States.)

I think there's a distinction between a player trying to exploit the system -- cobbling together rules from various sources to build a synergy that the individual rule designers weren't intending -- versus a game design team making changes to suit a shared view of where the game ought to be going. The player probably doesn't have game balance in mind, other than tipping the scales as far as possible in his favor.

+1 on both points..

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Elorebaen wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
This is the place to discuss the product and its rules.

I concur completely and there are many discussions like this in the forums, especially the Rules forum. In fact, this is where I believe your review(s) would have been more appropriately placed.

Just a suggestion based on the thoughts you've expressed, your efforts would be better placed in offering House Rule ideas in the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew forum.

Best.

Yes, please. If everybody addressed everything they do or don't like about every given feat in this thread, it would become totally unnavigable fast. We have an entire forum set aside for discussing the game itself.


Zhen Yi Soh wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:

"master craftsmen which lets you craft magic items in the sense of +1 to +(whatever) magical items. Really? So the blacksmith who has no exposure to or knowledge of the arcane pulls mystical energy from OUT OF NOWHERE and imbues the normal axe with magical power. Huge gap in logic there."

I really found that feat questionable. A quick way for chars to make magic items without a wizard, and for magic items to greatly increase in economies, because craftsman can now make them. What do the rest think? I keep it well away from my games. Don't forget Zhen, the rank also counts as caster level.

I don't care much for that one either, but stories where someone made a great weapon are a part of fantasy, even if the maker had no magical powers. A certain dwarf that was the friend of a certain drow made a certain weapon for a certain Barbarian named Wulfgar.

thats all good but the game has rules and authors can write whatever they want in novels. The game system itself has rules and there are short explanations from a logical standpoint for how and why a rule functions a certain way. Saying its a fantasy setting and using that to throw logic to the wind is really unsubstantiated.

Anyone can provide fluff/flavor. If you don't like the logic(fluff/favor) then change it so it makes sense.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Wrought as it is used at the clubs I have attended (in Melbourne), is cheating, power-gaming, the breach of balance, finding or adopting new rules to take away class weaknesses (e.g. making wizards d6). In sum, something a dm should always be watching for. All new rules or rule-sets should be checked for wrought. Giving a class more and more is wrought, breaking a class so that it is not close to being balanced to other classes is also wrought. Prestige classes that give two levels of spellcasting every level is an example of wrought. Read back over the recent pages for more information.

It is used in the sense of: that is clearly wrought-there, you are trying to wrought the rules. So in a sense it is close to the metallurgy meaning, one hammers away at balance and forges wrought through cheating. One could also cheat at rolls and thereby wrought the outcome of the game.

Trying to start a game with an elven wizard with 30 int and a decent con is another example of wrought that I have seen. "Oh no, I rolled it and if I make him venerable he can start with 30 int, oh I also rolled an 18 con".

I think you mean rort (as in rorting the system - trying to take unfair advantage of loopholes or unforeseen shortcomings in the rules).


Indeed. I have stuck primarily to 3.5 for rules and feats. Which is why I don't allow some of the feats from core like the new version of power attack. Its always been crucial to ensure a feat doesn't give too much or throws all sense of game mechanics to the wind. The same thing with raise dead in core. Permanent negative levels which can be removed. So its no longer really permanent as long as restoration is available? Yep changes like that that try to get around certain really punishing game mechanics persuade me to stick closer to 3.5. So its not so much change, more like remaining unchanged.


In the end it's up to you how you play the game.My preference( and that of my playing group) is for Pathfinder core and additions..what I object to is people telling me that I am in the wrong for choosing that..and that is what the core argument from 3.5 Loyalist seems to be.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

DM Wellard,

I concur that somebody telling me that my choice of game system is "wrong" would be all sorts of annoying.

The line between "These are my decisions, and this is why I made them" versus "These are the decisions you, too, should make" is sometimes a fine one, and comprised of tone-of-voice as much as actual rhetoric. It's always good for all of us to keep that in mind.

Speaking of which, I wonder how my Duskblade character in your DCC play-by-post campaign, Gashelle, would function as a Magus...


I think Gashelle would make a great Magus Chris..unfortunately that particular campaign died due to the fact that some people couldn't get their head around the Old School Dungeon Crawl ethos..

And I agree the interweb does not give itself to nuanced argument.


DM Wellard wrote:

I think Gashelle would make a great Magus Chris..unfortunately that particular campaign died due to the fact that some people couldn't get their head around the Old School Dungeon Crawl ethos..

I miss the dungeon crawl, you should restart it and add me!

Liberty's Edge

Tangible Delusions wrote:
DM Wellard wrote:

I think Gashelle would make a great Magus Chris..unfortunately that particular campaign died due to the fact that some people couldn't get their head around the Old School Dungeon Crawl ethos..

I miss the dungeon crawl, you should restart it and add me!

Oh god, me too! I miss old-school dungeon crawls.


Well I'm running 2 APs and will be adding a Third when Jade Regent commences so the Wilderlands game will be on the back burner for a long time


Is there an estimate as to when the next print will be run?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Another week, another informative and balanced review...

"i can TRIP A GHOST"

"Incorporeal creatures cannot make trip or grapple attacks, nor can they be tripped or grappled."

Sigh.

Dark Archive

And don't forget you can grapple through a wall.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I feel your pain Gorb. It does read like someone who had a knee-jerk reaction and created an account solely for bashing.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Gorbacz, I agree that "e-unit" (no posts, 1 review) probably didn't read terribly carefully before posting. If he has any decency, I would hope that the ease with which you've addressed his central complaint might embarrass him into writing a more careful review.

But one of the citicisms of the product has been that various picky little rules are spread throughout the 500-page book. Combat is especially tricky subject for finding all the rules. Nothing on pages 198 - 201 restricts grappling to corporeal creatures, and ghosts do have a CMD of 22.

But, yeah, the grappling through a wall thing. I don't get that.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:

Gorbacz, I agree that the reviewer probably didn't read terribly carefully before posting. If he has any decency, I would hope that the ease with which you've addressed his central complaint might embarrass him into writing a more careful review.

But one of the citicisms of the product has been that various picky little rules are spread throughout the 500-page book. Combat is especially tricky subject for finding all the rules. Nothing on pages 198 - 201 restricts grappling to corporeal creatures, and ghosts do have a CMD of 22.

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.


Gorbacz wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:

Gorbacz, I agree that the reviewer probably didn't read terribly carefully before posting. If he has any decency, I would hope that the ease with which you've addressed his central complaint might embarrass him into writing a more careful review.

But one of the citicisms of the product has been that various picky little rules are spread throughout the 500-page book. Combat is especially tricky subject for finding all the rules. Nothing on pages 198 - 201 restricts grappling to corporeal creatures, and ghosts do have a CMD of 22.

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.

You rang.

And I wouldn't be too critical of other's reviews, when your own review is lacking in significant detail.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
pres man wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:

Gorbacz, I agree that the reviewer probably didn't read terribly carefully before posting. If he has any decency, I would hope that the ease with which you've addressed his central complaint might embarrass him into writing a more careful review.

But one of the citicisms of the product has been that various picky little rules are spread throughout the 500-page book. Combat is especially tricky subject for finding all the rules. Nothing on pages 198 - 201 restricts grappling to corporeal creatures, and ghosts do have a CMD of 22.

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.

You rang.

And I wouldn't be too critical of other's reviews, when your own review is lacking in significant detail.

Hey, that's a review from back when I was short on time for things like that. I refer you to my Bestiary 2 and Inner Sea World Guide reviews for examples on how reviews can be written to make some sense.

But that's besides the point. While you're there, you might want to check my 1/2-stars (Memory of Darkness and City of Seven Spears) to see that I am capable of trashing a product, when I believe that I blew my hard earned cash on something not exactly usable. But I always try to show why exactly I think so (OK, MoD review is a bit of nerdrage, but it's only because it stopped me from running the otherwise cool campaign).

What I am incapable of is setting up a new account just to trash something. Basing on false points.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

wraithstrike wrote:
Is there an estimate as to when the next print will be run?

Not publicly, no.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Gorbacz wrote:

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.

I'm not justifying or supporting negative reviews. Look: a negative review, and I wasn't supporting it!

I am, rather, all about inviting new people into the Pathfinder community. Mr. "e-unit" probably paid good money for his copy of the rulebook. He was unhappy with, well, the rules as he read and understood them. Indeed, he was unhappy enough to get an account here and post a review. I would hope that engaging him and addressing his questions, as you sort of did, will retain him and people like him, better than dismissing them as easily as they dismiss the game rules.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.

I'm not justifying or supporting negative reviews. Look: a negative review, and I wasn't supporting it!

I am, rather, all about inviting new people into the Pathfinder community. Mr. "e-unit" probably paid good money for his copy of the rulebook. He was unhappy with, well, the rules as he read and understood them. Indeed, he was unhappy enough to get an account here and post a review. I would hope that engaging him and addressing his questions, as you sort of did, will retain him and people like him, better than dismissing them as easily as they dismiss the game rules.

You know, if mr "e-unit" came here and voiced his concerns about the game first, I would be more than happy to engage his issues in my usual, snarky, borderline dismissive sarcastic manner.

However, he chose to communicate his problems by means of a 1-star "this game sucks" review, which means he's not looking for a constructive discussion. That, or he believes that walking into somebody's home and crapping on his carpet is a valid entry into a conversation.


Chris Mortika wrote:
But one of the citicisms of the product has been that various picky little rules are spread throughout the 500-page book. Combat is especially tricky subject for finding all the rules. Nothing on pages 198 - 201 restricts grappling to corporeal creatures, and ghosts do have a CMD of 22..

I would echo this sentiment. Navigating the rules has been my chief challenge as a new player. I think a big part of the issue is that there isn't much guidance after the character creation sections. I understand that players familiar with the genre can easily navigate the book. However without previously exposure, it is very easy to screw things up. Thankfully I'm the only new player in the group I play in. I imagine it would be quite easy to go crazy with a review off the cuff if I didn't have an undrestanding GM to explain things.


Gorbacz wrote:
Hey, that's a review from back when I was short on time for things like that.

I believe you can go back and edit past reviews if you feel you could improve it. Just something to consider.


I have yet to write a review for this product.

Can the review authorization committee let me know what the guidelines are, and exactly how many stars I'm allowed to rank the product?

Or do you folks just want to write the review for me? That way we can ensure that it meets your stringent criteria.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Brian E. Harris wrote:

I have yet to write a review for this product.

Can the review authorization committee let me know what the guidelines are, and exactly how many stars I'm allowed to rank the product?

Or do you folks just want to write the review for me? That way we can ensure that it meets your stringent criteria.

Actually, a review made up of "it sucks" or "it's cool" would be fine. As long as you don't mention ghost trippin'.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Am I the only person wondering whether ghosts can make trip attacks with a +1 ghost-touch flail? According to the rule Gorbacz cited, no. According to common sense, why not?

Dark Archive

Ghost-touch equipment pretty much allows for any melee interaction (AH-HRRM!! No innuendos! ;D ) between material and incorporeal beings, even if I still have some trouble visualizing a character with an appropriate ghost-touch weapon tripping a ghost - think of the librarian woman from the first Ghostbusters movie, a floating torso figure with no legs or lower body whatsoever.
So a ghost wielding a ghost-touch flail (which interferes with its ability to move through walls and other major obstacles) would be able to trip a mortal being. A ghost simply wielding a ghostly flail, would just SWISH! through - even if a cunning telekinetic effect could be quite spectacular.

As a GM, I'd allow for sure a character with a ghost-touch armor that includes gauntlets to grapple a ghost, and viceversa. A scary experience in both occasions.

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

Yeah, the whole concept of incorporeal creatures gets pretty messy once effects show up that play with their incorporeality. Pathfinder doesn't have anything like them yet, but there were several spells in 3.5e that would force incorporeal cretures to be incorporeal, and ghost touch weapons and effects are along the same lines.

Great. So now I've got a corporeal ghost. What happens when you grapple something with no strength score that is no longer incorporeal? And can they still fly?

Lots of worms in that there can :)


Gorbacz wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

I'm not seeing the criticism you are writing about. I'm seeing a kneejerk troll review. I do understand that you want to defend, justify and support negative reviews of Paizo products (I'm curious when Pres Man will pop up, he's on the same boat), but you're making yourself look as silly as the original reviewer, if not more.

I'm not justifying or supporting negative reviews. Look: a negative review, and I wasn't supporting it!

I am, rather, all about inviting new people into the Pathfinder community. Mr. "e-unit" probably paid good money for his copy of the rulebook. He was unhappy with, well, the rules as he read and understood them. Indeed, he was unhappy enough to get an account here and post a review. I would hope that engaging him and addressing his questions, as you sort of did, will retain him and people like him, better than dismissing them as easily as they dismiss the game rules.

You know, if mr "e-unit" came here and voiced his concerns about the game first, I would be more than happy to engage his issues in my usual, snarky, borderline dismissive sarcastic manner.

However, he chose to communicate his problems by means of a 1-star "this game sucks" review, which means he's not looking for a constructive discussion. That, or he believes that walking into somebody's home and crapping on his carpet is a valid entry into a conversation.

He gave reasons sir, but again you are dismissive of low score reviews.


His review though harsh and somewhat vague (regarding grappling through a wall etc.) may be because he's seen something that others have overlooked or it could be because of something else. Whatever it is, this is a forum on the discussion of the core rulebook, not a forum on praising the core rulebook to the sky.

The rational and logical thing to do would be to enquire where he read this instead of just outright dismissing it. It is indeed difficult to be tolerant of someone's criticism of a product you immensely like. But then again he might have a point. If you're dismissing it simply because of the low review score he gave, then maybe you shouldn't be on this forum. I look forward to him coming back and elaborating his argument on this forum.

Oh yeah, being snarky, dismissive and sarcastic is about the farthest thing from being objective and open-minded. It does however make you sound really lazy since dismissing an argument is always easier and more convenient than an actual discussion.

Scarab Sages

As you can't grapple through a wall (unless you just have a poor DM), and you can't trip a ghost (unless your DM doesn't know the rules), his claims that the rules are broken and poorly playtested seem to be the result of a misunderstanding, to say the least. I wouldn't be dismissive of his opinion, but I would not take it as a valid complaint either.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The equalizer wrote:

His review though harsh and somewhat vague (regarding grappling through a wall etc.) may be because he's seen something that others have overlooked or it could be because of something else. Whatever it is, this is a forum on the discussion of the core rulebook, not a forum on praising the core rulebook to the sky.

The rational and logical thing to do would be to enquire where he read this instead of just outright dismissing it. It is indeed difficult to be tolerant of someone's criticism of a product you immensely like. But then again he might have a point. If you're dismissing it simply because of the low review score he gave, then maybe you shouldn't be on this forum. I look forward to him coming back and elaborating his argument on this forum.

Oh yeah, being snarky, dismissive and sarcastic is about the farthest thing from being objective and open-minded. It does however make you sound really lazy since dismissing an argument is always easier and more convenient than an actual discussion.

Ah, the 3.5 Loyalist/Equalizer posting duo. I'll just treat you both as a single entity for convenience.

The reviewer based his review on false statements. That's his only point in the review.

1,201 to 1,250 of 1,495 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.