The worst thing about PathFinder is waiting. The wait for the CoreBook was insane. Same with the APG, now I'm waiting for the campaign guide and Bestiary 2. The waiting has to be the worst.
Of course when I get the book in my hands after months and months of waiting I have yet to be disappointed.
|
Wounds and other such thingies are available in the original SRD, aren't they?
That's not part of the SRD, it's part of the open content from Unearthed Arcana.
d20srd.org != SRD
Recently switching over from 3.0/3.5 D&D, I don't remember there being so many various conditions- sickened, nauseated, constipated, gassy, etc. Every time something happens to my group, we have to look up some new condition. Also, all the monster special attacks that I have to look up to see what they do. I don't remember 3rd edition being that varied. I really like Pathfinder overall. I guess with time those faults will fade as we become more comfortable with the changes (like when I realized after a game that my skeleton champions could have being cleaving away at the PCs because the feat had changed).Sorry buddy but all those conditions already existed since 3.0. You should use the GM Screen however, all the conditions are resumed in it. That's what I do and it's a real time saver when you don't have to look into de CRB every time one of those conditions occurs. ;)
Probably, but it's the same thing with my grocery list, I think I'll remember everything. I mainly use an old, old, 1st edition screen for the retro effect. I could probably draft up a list of the conditions, but those monster special attacks/abilities takes pages in the Bestiary and when Bestiary 2 comes out, I'm sure they will have new attacks/abilities to add.
Wounds and other such thingies are available in the original SRD, aren't they?That's not part of the SRD, it's part of the open content from Unearthed Arcana.
d20srd.org != SRD
Har, dots wut I ment :D
The extreme weight of all the superpacked hardcovers causes forearms to get unnaturally buff. Paizo Popeyeification is the official term.
There's gonna be a lawsuit one a dese days.
|
If you want a death spiral mechanic (where you take penalties to actions when injured, making it more likely to take further injury) then you could try something along the lines of Earthdawn's Damage and Wounds.
Star Wars Saga Edition has a similar mechanic called the Condition track. Damage Threshold = Fortitude Defense = 10 + level + ConMod + Misc. Any attack whose damage exceeds your Damage Threshold moves you 1 step down the Condition Track. As you move down the Condition Track, the penalties mount: -1, -2, -5, -10 (where the penalties affect attacks, skills, defenses, etc.). At -5, you movement is halved and at -10, you fall unconscious. You can spend 3 consecutive Swift Actions to move 1 step up the Condition Track (a Full-Round Action = 3 Swift Actions). All conditions (unless they are Persistent) are removed by at the end of the encounter (when you have time to take as many consecutive Swift actions as needed). Persistent Conditions require a specific action to remove (such as "rest for 8 hours" or something similar).
-Skeld
PS: The above is a simplified version of the SWSE Condition Track mechanics.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.
|
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.
Same damn thing with crocodiles/aligators, I don't know what kind of crack Jason was smoking that made him say, "Okay, wolves have to get to large size because this is a fantasy game where that gets its inspiration from tolkien and other writers where wolves got large enough to ride. But I'm not going to allow animals that in the real world have frequent examples of getting to large size be larger than medium as animal companions." I wouldn't have a problem with the wolves getting large if animals that frequently get to large size also did so, but no, real world animals that can get to large size stay medium but friggin wolves in any DnD world run around the size of friggin horses? IMO this is the worst point of the rules.
Oh and the rules for the garotte are the worst rules ever written for a weapon, I have no idea if they've been erratad or updated, but it is the single worst weapon I have ever seen.
So all in all, the fact that my worst things in pathfinder are minor nit-picky stuff says a lot about how strong I think the system is, and is a testament of what a good job they did. Even so, I think Jason smoked some really good crack before writing up the AnCos.
|
|
Can you explain the problem you have with the expanded bloodlines? Personally I kind of liked the breaking out of the dragon-blooded box that all sorcerers were shoved into in 3.x. Not to menation that the Dragon Disciple PrC is now a functional development path for a dragon-blooded sorcerer.There are a lot of problems that Pathfinder inherited from 3x. These include the Xmas tree effect and the discrepency between caster and non-casters.
But there is one thing that Pathfinder brought in all on it's own that absolutely annoys the crap out of me. This is Sorcerer bloodlines. It makes no sense fluff-wise and is inherently limiting to character concepts. They followed it up by giving the fluff that should have gone to the Sorcerer to the witch (an Int based caster) instead - which is like trying to fix a spoon stuck in your eye by sticking a spoon in the other eye.
There was no dragon-blooded box in 3X. I don't know what you're talking about.
There wasn't even a bloodline box.
There was, it was all flavor text in the description, but it was the only sorcerer relevant flavor text so lots of people took it as a given. Later with the completes they expanded it with different bloodline feats, but if you just went with the PHB sorcerers all had draconic bloodlines according to the text.
of course if you don't like bloodlines, just rule that all sorcerers get the arcane bloodline and get any flavor you want, I don't understand why bloodlines are a problem.
of course if you don't like bloodlines, just rule that all sorcerers get the arcane bloodline and get any flavor you want, I don't understand why bloodlines are a problem.
+1. Bloodlines fixed the biggest problem of the 3.X sorcerer: it was, thematically, boring.
of course if you don't like bloodlines, just rule that all sorcerers get the arcane bloodline and get any flavor you want, I don't understand why bloodlines are a problem.+1. Bloodlines fixed the biggest problem of the 3.X sorcerer: it was, thematically, boring.
I would have to agree with this. And this is coming from someone who still preferred playing a Sorcerer over a Wizard in 3.x.
It just wasn’t worth it to raise a Sorcerer to higher levels. Reach the required level for desired PrC, and switch.
I feel the bloodlines have added a lot for the PF Sorcerer.
+1 Large Bears etc... and no Narnian talking animals...
Plus somebody put a geas on the products forcing me to buy everything...
|
|
There was no dragon-blooded box in 3X. I don't know what you're talking about.
There wasn't even a bloodline box.Hints about dragon blood were dropping left and right. IF that was not enough if you check the various dragon themed spells in spell compendium, you'll noticed that they had the subtext that sorcerers cast those spells at +1 caster level.
Sorcerers were a boring class in 3.x, being nothing more than spontaneous wizards with limited spell knowledge and less feats. The bloodlines of Pathfinder gave them diversity and character. If you really insist on your sorcerer being as boringly vanilla as possible... then go for the arcane bloodline.
Great, you've just triggered LT's "Sorcerers are a unique class due to a different class skills and casting from CHA" routine. The thread is over. Not that it's a bad thing ... ;-)
Bloodlines are thematically boring. Their addition didn't fix that problem.
As for gaining nothing as the Sorcerer raised in level - that's a game mechanic issue, not a fluff issue.
Well, that is your opinion that bloodlines are boring and the addition of them didn't change anything. Myself, and I know many others, disagree and feel the bloodlines add a lot and make the Sorcerer more fun and interesting to play. Having the bloodlines is certainly more than what the Sorcerer had before, which was nothing.
of course if you don't like bloodlines, just rule that all sorcerers get the arcane bloodline and get any flavor you want.[/QUOTE}Clearly, but this thread is about things we hate about Pathfinder. We can house rule every thing we hate about Pathfinder away. It doesn't mean we don't hate the game system because of it.
Not even sure why I was quoted on this as I never said any of it.
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.Black bears which are fairly common in the northern stretches of NJ. (I saw one amble across the highway not that long ago) are actually about the size of a small human. The one I saw was about the size of an average 12 year old child and it was not a cub.
Not every bear is a grizzly.
It's not, I agree, but there *are* large bears in our world. And there are none in Golarion. And yet in Golarion, we have large wolves, when they absolutely cannot grow to such size. Why?
Not even sure why I was quoted on this as I never said any of it.
The [/quote} (notice the syntax error at the end of that code tag) indicates where the quote was suppose to end. My guess is that the statement starting with "Clearly, ..." was the poster's own comment.
You have them... you just don't get them as standard companions.
It's not, I agree, but there *are* large bears in our world. And there are none in Golarion. And yet in Golarion, we have large wolves, when they absolutely cannot grow to such size. Why?
Which is nonsense.
|
As the thread says what do you think are the bad elements of Pathfinder. Please keep the topic civil.
This may have been mentioned (sorry if I'm duplicating a response)
Perception! You're either gifted with great sight and hearing or your not. I prefer that they both be a separate skill. (I know, I could just home rule it...) I don't understand the reasoning for combining the two.
Perception! You're either gifted with great sight and hearing or your not. I prefer that they both be a separate skill. (I know, I could just home rule it...) I don't understand the reasoning for combining the two.
You know, combining Listen and Spot doesn't bother me -- in practice it seemed to me that Spot came up so much more frequently than Listen that you could fairly safely dump Listen -- what does bother me is combining them with Search.
An eagle noticing someone loud but invisible coming up on it doesn't frustrate my sense of immersion so much, but an eagle being very good at finding the right book in a large library or spotting the pressure point for a trap does.
Which is nonsense.You have them... you just don't get them as standard companions.
It's not, I agree, but there *are* large bears in our world. And there are none in Golarion. And yet in Golarion, we have large wolves, when they absolutely cannot grow to such size. Why?
We're not arguing sensor or nonsense it's the RAW.
Deal with it.
I think you stumbled into the wrong thread.
There was no dragon-blooded box in 3X. I don't know what you're talking about.
There wasn't even a bloodline box.Hints about dragon blood were dropping left and right. IF that was not enough if you check the various dragon themed spells in spell compendium, you'll noticed that they had the subtext that sorcerers cast those spells at +1 caster level. And not that the original dragon disciple basically required sorcerer as a preruiisite.
Sorcerers were a boring class in 3.x, being nothing more than spontaneous wizards with limited spell knowledge and less feats. The bloodlines of Pathfinder gave them diversity and character. If you really insist on your sorcerer being as boringly vanilla as possible... then go for the arcane bloodline.
I can't express just how little I care about what was in the mountain of crap splat books in 3X. What I'm talking about is the core books. In the core books, the dragon blood thing was just an unsubstantiated rumor.
Sorcerers were boring in 3X, but so are bloodlines in Pathfinder.
I said when I started this that the Sorcerer should have gotten the Witch's fluff.
Still that unsubstantiated rumor was part of the fluff and paizo decided to expand upon it. However you feel about, its not like it came out of nowhere.
In all seriousness, I think the worst thing about Pathfinder is that it isn't called, "Dungeons & Dragons".
In all seriousness, I think the worst thing about Pathfinder is that it isn't called, "Dungeons & Dragons".
Honestly, I consider that a plus because it has allowed me to get friends who normally wouldn't consider playing "Dungeons & Dragons" to play Pathfinder, lol.
You have them... you just don't get them as standard companions.
It's not, I agree, but there *are* large bears in our world. And there are none in Golarion. And yet in Golarion, we have large wolves, when they absolutely cannot grow to such size. Why?
Why large wolves, then? Large wolves, who in fact have better ability scores than Grizzly Bears.
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.
It's bizarre to me that this, to you, is the worst thing and not just "a thing I don't like."
|
|
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.It's bizarre to me that this, to you, is the worst thing and not just "a thing I don't like."
To me that says that like me he really likes the pathfinder system and the only things that bother him are things that break his immersion. I'm the same way, I'm fine with most abstract rules and actually love pathfinder, so the worst things to me are rules that break immersion, like the fact that it's easy to get a horse sized wolf as an animal companion, but a bear sized bear, or an old alligator sized alligator isn't possible with the current rules. Or the fact that it's almost impossible to strangle a person with a garrote without someones help or specializing in grappling (so that you have the greater grapple feat).
|
Re: Concentration as a skill.
Maximizing 3.5 Concentration was so easy (not to mention Skill Focs > Combat Casting, which was silly), that any sensible optimizer would make his casting auto successful from the get go. At least now, at early to mid levels there is some reasonable chance of a caster not casting a spell in a sticky situation.
Actually if there is something I have against PF changes (as opposed to the conceptual shortcomings of 3.5 in general) is that concentration wasn't made even harder. That, and counterspelling is still rather stupid. Maybe UM will fix that.
I get this point but I don't understand why spellcasting has to be so hard to begin with. It's rare that the fighter can't swing his sword but put a person within five feet of a mage and suddenly they're fumbling all their spells. Despite the fact that they've trained for this very thing.
I think 3.5 Concentartion was perfect. Just like people who put points into Acrobatics have an easier time getting around opponents, spellcasters who put points into Concentration should have an easier time casting when in a stressful situation. It is something that can be practiced so some people SHOULD be better at it than others.
I think 3.5 Concentartion was perfect. Just like people who put points into Acrobatics have an easier time getting around opponents, spellcasters who put points into Concentration should have an easier time casting when in a stressful situation. It is something that can be practiced so some people SHOULD be better at it than others.
But you have to admit that, in practice, every PC caster always maxed it. Which makes it seem suspect in terms of design. And that at some point, you basically stopped having to roll Concentration because you'd always succeed even on a 1. I think that also seems suspect in terms of design.
I mean, if fighters had a skill called 'swording' that they had to put a point into every level or their base attack wouldn't go up, I think we'd call that bad design and I don't think 3.5 Concentration was any different.
Re: Concentration as a skill.
Maximizing 3.5 Concentration was so easy (not to mention Skill Focs > Combat Casting, which was silly), that any sensible optimizer would make his casting auto successful from the get go. At least now, at early to mid levels there is some reasonable chance of a caster not casting a spell in a sticky situation.
Actually if there is something I have against PF changes (as opposed to the conceptual shortcomings of 3.5 in general) is that concentration wasn't made even harder. That, and counterspelling is still rather stupid. Maybe UM will fix that.
I get this point but I don't understand why spellcasting has to be so hard to begin with. It's rare that the fighter can't swing his sword but put a person within five feet of a mage and suddenly they're fumbling all their spells. Despite the fact that they've trained for this very thing.
I think 3.5 Concentartion was perfect. Just like people who put points into Acrobatics have an easier time getting around opponents, spellcasters who put points into Concentration should have an easier time casting when in a stressful situation. It is something that can be practiced so some people SHOULD be better at it than others.
Spellcasting isn't hard to begin with. Like, at all. Not even in Pathfinder.
The problem is that spellcasting already had such an incredibly minute number of ways to disrupt it, and that even those were easily surpassed.
Worst thing about Pathfinder is Medium-sized Bears. Wolf animal companions can be large, but not BEARS? I don't know what's up wit that. Bears can be up to 10 feet long and their average weight is about 1000 pounds and they're medium? Makes no sense at all.It's bizarre to me that this, to you, is the worst thing and not just "a thing I don't like."
It's because I don't have any other complaints, and like Last Knight said, it's just bizzare.
Sorcerers were boring in 3X, but so are bloodlines in Pathfinder. I said when I started this that the Sorcerer should have gotten the Witch's fluff.
You mean the Hex? If this is what you mean, then the sorcerer would still be boring IMO. Hex is the only thing that a ''wizard'' with a reduced and boring spells list (read: a witch) have to distinguish himslef from a real wizard, and that's not much. Maybe I should read the witch description again, but I wasn't impress after my first look at it. Maybe I missed something cool, I don't know.
I honestly wish that they had included better Level Adjustment/ECL rules than they did in the Beastiary. (Either that or none at all, or leave as a monster-by-monster thing like a "For the Players" section). If the goal is to discourage monsters as PC races, include a small section that says something to the effect of "I know some people want to play monsters - but that's a decision that each GM has to make for themselves. Here's a few guidelines, but its the GM's call at the end of the day", instead of the half-assed "Just look at its CR!".
(My group plays a lot of Planescape, so we've seen more than our fair share of monstrous PCs, and even templates - half-fiend, half-celestial - PCs. Unfortunately, "look at its CR!" give me insight to the sum of 0 when trying to determine the appropriate level of a half-celestial player character.)
I have an issue with the sorcerer bloodlines: I'm not a fan of how how every sorcerer of the same bloodline has the same bonus spells; two dragon descended sorcerers both get mage armor, resist energy, etc, even though one is red descended and the other is brass. Not a major issue, but it bugs me nevertheless.
I'd have preferred if the bonus spells were picked by the player, but with restriction that it had to fit thematically; a fire bloodline sorcerer can pick any spell dealing with fire, heat, smoke, etc.
Also, I realize that that's what the rest of the sorcerers spells known represent. Just something I'd prefer, is all.
I'd say the worst thing for me is the holdovers for the sake of backwards compatibility, for example:
-the caster/non-caster divide
-the balance between attacks & defenses
-the ol' Christmas tree...
And other such things.
I honestly wish that they had included better Level Adjustment/ECL rules than they did in the Beastiary. (Either that or none at all, or leave as a monster-by-monster thing like a "For the Players" section).
Promised someday later (no quotes at hand).
If the goal is to discourage monsters as PC races, include a small section that says something to the effect of "I know some people want to play monsters - but that's a decision that each GM has to make for themselves.
Using one of the monsters presented in this book as a character can be very rewarding, but weighing such a character against others is challenging. Monsters are not designed with the rules for players in mind, and as such can be very unbalancing if not handled carefully.
...
Here's a few guidelines
There are a number of monsters in this book that do not possess racial Hit Dice. Such creatures are the best options for player characters, but a few of them are so powerful that they count as having 1 class level, even without a racial Hit Die. Such characters should only be allowed in a group that is 2nd-level or higher.
For monsters with racial Hit Dice, the best way to allow monster PCs is to pick a CR and allow all of the players to make characters using monsters of that CR. Treat the monster's CR as its total class levels and allow the characters to multiclass into the core classes. Do not advance such monsters by adding Hit Dice. Monster PCs should only advance through classes.
If you are including a single monster character in a group of standard characters, make sure the group is of a level that is at least as high as the monster's CR. Treat the monster's CR as class levels when determining the monster PC's overall levels. For example, in a group of 6th-level characters, a minotaur (CR 4) would possess 2 levels of a core class, such as barbarian.
Note that in a mixed group, the value of racial Hit Dice and abilities diminish as a character gains levels. It is recommended that for every 3 levels gained by the group, the monster character should gain an extra level, received halfway between the 2nd and 3rd levels. Repeat this process a number of times equal to half the monster's CR, rounded down. Using the minotaur example, when the group is at a point between 6th and 7th level, the minotaur gains a level, and then again at 7th, making him a minotaur barbarian 4. This process repeats at 10th level, making him a minotaur barbarian 8 when the group reaches 10th level. From that point onward, he gains levels normally.
, but its the GM's call at the end of the day", instead of the half-assed "Just look at its CR!".
GMs should carefully consider any monster PCs in their groups. Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers or role in the game. As monster characters progress, GMs should closely monitor whether such characters are disruptive or abusive to the rules and modify them as needed to improve play.
Aren't the bolded sections just what you wanted for the short article dicouraging the use of monsters, but in differen't words?
(My group plays a lot of Planescape, so we've seen more than our fair share of monstrous PCs, and even templates - half-fiend, half-celestial - PCs. Unfortunately, "look at its CR!" give me insight to the sum of 0 when trying to determine the appropriate level of a half-celestial player character.)
If I was using the guide, then half-clestial is CR +1, so the character counts as having one more level (effectively ECL +1), which is lost half-way between lvls 2 and 3?