No CO board? How about a handbook board?


Website Feedback

101 to 105 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pax Veritas wrote:

What is this thread all about.

Edit: I do not even comprehend why anyone would want a so-called character optimization board? Sounds like a throw-back to the munchkin training grounds of 2002-2005. Haven't we determined already that the spirit of the game lives on, and those who do extreme optimal builds tend to cause discomfort for most players looking to have fun and don't wish to watch the one person who seeks loopholes in the rules continue to botch every potentially balanced scenario?

I've said this before.... The ability to exploit grey areas or gaps in the rules or optimize a character to the point that even the GM doesn't have the time to analyze all the complex ways you did so, doesn't make you a good player, it just demonstrates you don't "get it".

Now, if "character optimization" if that is what we're talking about is something different that this, please explain. I'm actually pretty open minded and would love to learn.

Character optimization does not equal munchkin, period. There is nothing worse than a player coming up with a cool concept "in game" that falls flat on its face mechanically. It is a huge let down and you can see it in the players face. Nothing like playing this "amazing [insert concept]" type that ends up not being able to hit the broad side of a barn or live up to the expectation. Optimization is more like making sure your characters mechanics match to the fluff of the game world. And anyone who says optimization is just "bad" as a blanket statement (as some of the earlier posters have) obviously doesn't get "it" either, or doesn't want to.

On another note I'm really happy to see the general attitude change here, I was getting rather irritated with some of the earlier posts by the "regulars" of the community and had a post I was typing up here at work saved last night before I got a chance to finish it. With the recent posts I don't feel the need to complete and put it up (thankfully) as the apparent "attitude" of the thread has become much more upbeat than when it started. I mean I understand some people don't care for the idea of what Treantmonk proposes but at the same time, it is the internet, you don't have to like it or even look at it - its not for you in essence. The people who find it interesting or useful will, you can just not participate in it. No need to get nasty or confrontational or pass judgement on it, I never really understood that behaviour or what drives it. I can only imagine nothing good.

P.S. Treantmonk, I wouldn't hold my breath on the editing restriction being lifted anytime soon ;)

Sczarni

Just a quick question. What books wil it contain info from?


It's just going to use the core book. That's all I have at the moment.

Liberty's Edge

Treantmonk wrote:
It's just going to use the core book. That's all I have at the moment.

I haven't seen much from Paizo - particularly not in the PF RPG era - that would have much impact on a bard build. Except maybe the scorpion whip, but that's just something I would suggest for anyone who might ever think about picking up a whip.


Character Optimization has officially arrived at the Paizo Boards.

Please check out my new handbook, Treantmonk's Guide to Bards

And most importantly...REPLY!

101 to 105 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Website Feedback / No CO board? How about a handbook board? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.