| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
2011
ahahaha this made my day
blarrrgle the sky is falling the sky is falling
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I for one am against the bloat of class bloat threads.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
There can never be enough! NEVER!
One person's bloat of class bloat threads is another person's increased options of class bloat threads!
I recall a post from someone from the staff, not much time ago, perhaps in response to people asking for some rules for creating customized classes (basically, the class equivalent of the Race Builder in ARG). Maybe it was in some thread about Pathfinder Unchained.
That post said, more than reasonably, that such rules would be nearly impossible to write, since creating a class is a delicate process that must account of too many things, starting from the answers to some fundamental questions to decide if that class really has a reason to see light. More or less, these:
Is the concept of this class something new, not already covered by the rules?
Can it be easily achieved with already existing classes and class archetypes?
Does it bring some kind of new, interesting and exciting mechanics to the game?
Now, provided that I understand market laws and the need to make cash, I'd be curious to hear from the staff for how many of the newest classes they could honestly answer yes/no/yes to those questions.
Fun fact: the OP of this thread was recently seen rocking an Arcanist, which is something he should totally not be doing if he was to take his own concerns seriously.
Good for him. In fact when I DM (if I DM pathfinder) the Arcanist, with some very minor nerfs, will be the default full arcane caster in our gaming group. I will also let people play a slightly buffed version of the Slayer.
Fun fact 2: ACG is almost sold out, so I guess that until the sales of player-oriented hardcovers pummel, the care box for this thread will remain quite empty.
I’m not sure what you point is besides being Gorbacz
Vote with your wallets! Stop buying Paizo books! Burn the ones you have! Print out the PDFs, and burn them too! Youtube it! Make sure you tell your community! Be a real capitalist!
I do Vote with my wallet. We have started playing 5e and I got my book this week. When this campaign is done will will change DM. A friend that is a fresh DM will give it a try and he will be using pathfinder. After that it is my turn and I will either use Pathfinder with a lot of houserules or use Sean K Reynolds’ Five Moons RPG , if it is out by then. A game I have helped Kinkstarting.
I think class bloat is a myth propagated by people with agendas.
Kind of funny you brought that up considering Paizo now has admitted that the rogue and monk have a problem and that the summoner needs a nerf.
Pathfinder Unchained..BTW, Don’t kid yourself; we all have agendas, that includes people using quotes by Devs to bash or/and ridicule other posters.
Necro this thread.I think people have a reason to be worried, especially if you take all archetypes into consideration, but mostly when you look at the quality of the new classes and why they have been released.
I don’t mind new classes, nor do I mind Paizo doing Psionics, but the ACG is problematic and so are the Ninja, Gunslinger and Summoner. The number of the Archetypes is also a kind of bloat.
The quality is declining and some of the new classes are just there to fix the old classes. The Ninja, Investigator and Slayer are there to fix the rogue and Swashbuckler is a dex fighter fix. Brawler is a monk fix, etc.
I also think lack of support for new classes or mechanics introduced is problematic, and by new classes I also mean archetypes.
Bloat is happening and you should be concerned.
Why should I be concerned because of number? If there is too much, simply trim the undesirable options.
Quality is certainly a problem but that's a matter of poor design, not bloat.
Hell, I welcome "Replacement Classes" for ones that suck. I feel like I could safely ban Rogue at my table if I wanted to now and not feel like I was shutting down anybody's character concept. That's a good thing.
I agree the numbers isn't the problem. As for Replacement Classes I don't mind them, I'll even be using some of them, but I just see them as symptom of a problem that hasn’t been addressed because the Devs haven’t been willing to admit (until now) that there is a problem.
I’m also concerned by the quality of some of the releases of lately. I actually think there is a relation between bloat and quality. When you bite of more than you can chew quality suffers.Anyway, I’m happy we got the slayer even though I think it needs more talents. Lack of talents is another proof that is Paizo not supporting the new classes enough. I seem to remeber SKR saying he had Feat as an option to slayer's advanced talants.
I have a similar first reaction with new stuff... out of my 4 players, 3 of them always go for core, then there's the 4th guy (I call him the early adopter) who ALWAYS show up with a class from the book that came out last night... I wouldn't care so much if it was just occasionally, and driven by story concept, but the pattern has repeated itself over the last few years. Not that it's wrong: I accept anything Pathfinder as long as it's not 3rd party or beta. But it *does* come across as a constant attempt to throw me, the DM, off-balance... and sometimes it comes across as Drizzt Envy Syndrome (i.e. always playing something weird, either brand new class or custom race made via advanced race book... I hate that book...)Really, with archtypes I was really hoping we would see less of the glut of base classes that 3.5 had. But nope, ultimate combat comes with 3 more classes. ultimate magic with 1, advance players guide with 6. I was excited about advanced players guide because I thought okay this book will have new base classes and that'll be it at least for a while, but no, in the two years you've been making rulebooks we see the release of 10 new base classes. Well, I can say I'm dissapointed. Odds are I will not be picking up ultimate combat, or ultimate magic (which bugs me because I liked words of power) because I just can't bring myself to support this kind of class bloat, which is the exact kind of thing that started wearing on me in 3.5Yep, done with it. Everything I do going forward is core/APG/Ultimates. Anything after that is non-grata.
This is untrue. Weird concepts yes.
New not always. Witch is not new, neither is tiefling.
I have nothing from advanced class guide. My class before that was sorcerer.
Game before that was tiefling sorcerer, human paladin before that.
Carrion crown...human alchemist.
I think maybe you are mistaking when I'm dm the npcs I make?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me the new classes are a mixed blessing and I'm mostly on the side of "meh, I'll stick with the Core"
My problem is not that the new classes/concepts/archetypes are bad. Nononono, a lot of them introduce some awesome mechanics and interesting ideas, I have for example pretty much decided to replace the cleric & druid with the oracle for my homegames because I think it does it better.
On one hand you say you'll stick with the core but in the next breath you say Oracle is better than Cleric and Druid???
I'm sorry, but I have two things to say:
1) Maybe you're just "meh" about the new ones because you haven't tried them or fully explored them? or are you "meh" because they appear to be a collection of old class features mixed all together and just recycled under a new class name? If it's the latter, I'm with you on this, because that's how they appear to me after my first reading. They're literally in some case, over a 20 level build, just a multiclass of 2 core classes, albeit slightly more powerful (i.e. a rogue 10 / something 10 would have 5d6 sneak at level 20, but a slayer 20 is at 6d6 with more HP/BAB/saves and additional damage pumping capacity... for someone who might lack imagination yes slayer is AMAZING but I'll take a rogue10/somethingelse10 over slayer20 any day)
2) If you've replaced clerics with oracles, then I'm utterly not with you. I find oracles lacking in every department, and the only good ones suffer for overspecialization problems. Give me a cleric with scribe scroll feat any day over that sad excuse for a "healer" that is the oracle. Oracles of nature are pretty good when you compare with druids, but they suffer from the same problem: give me a druid with scribe scroll any day!! the druid spell selection, once you include all the Paizo hardcovers, is just so huge and FUN, that there's no way you should pigeon hole yourself in the tiny spell selection granted by the oracle. Oracle is the "dip sauce" per excellence but if you want...
Didn't see your reply before today, waasn't being rude, just busy.
1: yes, you're right; I do often think they're a grab-bag of thrown together class abilities. it also upsets me how they "improve" an old class by making a new one with all the stuff they should have added in the first place (brawler, I'm looking at you - the fighter wants his stuff back)I agree with you on your judgement of the "multiclass-into-single"-classes, I prefer the old way too.
2: I personally Hate any class that has full casting and in addittion a whole list to pick from depending on their mood that day. I find it unfocused, unfair to the other clkasses that are "forced" to be specialists, and downright boring. I like to force spellcasters to choose what kind of magic they want to use and then having to live with their choice.
-Of course a wizard/cleric/druid with scribe scroll is better! but he is also an everything-and-the-kitchen-sink-caster .. and I prefer "fire elementalists","enchanters", "demonologists", "wintermages" and "seers"
but this is just my opinion and I don't enforce my views as harshly on my players as I do on myself. And everything is open to discussion
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this post in concealing your true intentions.
If only my true intentions were posted somewhere. You know, publicly available.
TOZ, you have way too much free time! I need to put you to work. :)
I have a similar first reaction with new stuff... out of my 4 players, 3 of them always go for core, then there's the 4th guy (I call him the early adopter) who ALWAYS show up with a class from the book that came out last night... I wouldn't care so much if it was just occasionally, and driven by story concept, but the pattern has repeated itself over the last few years. Not that it's wrong: I accept anything Pathfinder as long as it's not 3rd party or beta. But it *does* come across as a constant attempt to throw me, the DM, off-balance... and sometimes it comes across as Drizzt Envy Syndrome (i.e. always playing something weird, either brand new class or custom race made via advanced race book... I hate that book...)Really, with archtypes I was really hoping we would see less of the glut of base classes that 3.5 had. But nope, ultimate combat comes with 3 more classes. ultimate magic with 1, advance players guide with 6. I was excited about advanced players guide because I thought okay this book will have new base classes and that'll be it at least for a while, but no, in the two years you've been making rulebooks we see the release of 10 new base classes. Well, I can say I'm dissapointed. Odds are I will not be picking up ultimate combat, or ultimate magic (which bugs me because I liked words of power) because I just can't bring myself to support this kind of class bloat, which is the exact kind of thing that started wearing on me in 3.5Yep, done with it. Everything I do going forward is core/APG/Ultimates. Anything after that is non-grata.
Sorry I have to comment on this again before I touch on the thread topic of class bloat because it actually has something to do with it.
I read this again and it’s way wrong.
One, I’ve never played a custom race ever nor have I made one for anyone else ever(I do make a lot of characters for other people though). Two, the majority of races I’ve played in Pathfinder has always been humans.
Human Oracle of life from Cheliax you asked to change to Oracle of Battle. Which I did.
Human(Shoanti) Alchemist. He died against the Shining Childern.
Human Alchemist from Cheliax…”The Dr.” in Carrion Crown.
Human (Keleshite) Paladin of Sarenrae in Jade Regent.
I’ve played two Tieflings and one Undine. Respectively (Sorc/one level dip in oracle), Witch and a sorc.
My witch doesn’t even have the sleep hex nor will she ever.
As for the other people in our group being core? Really only with respect to race which isn’t even the case all the time as in my game the one guy played a Rakshasa-Spawn Tiefling.
In terms of classes the other guy in our group is currently playing a brawler and his paladin in my game had crazy spells not from core. The first guy is currently playing a gunslinger/knife master rogue/freebooter ranger.
Your last 3 characters were: Human Barbarian/Ninja, Half elf gunslinger/pirate rogue and a Human Bard who worshiped Cayden until he became a bard/evangelist and worshiped Desna so he could get better spell penetration. So there is a non-story driven change. Granted you do have good story concepts…well except the barbarian ninja heh heh. I love the one for my new homebrew game.
And my stuff is driven by story concept and oddly enough what the character will look like. In our group I know the lore more than most and I am usually the first to post a character bio. I’m also the only one to draw a picture of my character. Some of the other guys in our group have no story and have names that are essentially swear words. So I think my character concepts are the strongest in our group. Not that I don’t like playing with those guys they are great. Granted generally those two guys have decent to good concepts.
Further, no I don’t try to throw you, I just like playing stuff I think is cool. I generally ask a dm’s permission about confusing rules before I play them. Plus I’ve always changed everything you’ve ever asked me to.
Which gets me back to the whole issue of class bloat, it’s only a problem if the players don’t communicate effectively with their dm’s, which up until now I thought we did.
Face it class bloat is not going away it is too big of a money maker for paizo. Feats, archetypes etc. etc. are in demand.
I love new stuff as allows me to create the concepts I want to create. In some cases the new classes make me think of things I previously would not have. My biggest concern is the quality of all the new stuff and how it meshes with the old stuff. This is admittedly something that isn’t going to get any better.
However, open communication with your dm and other players should take care of most of the issues.
Hugs and kisses?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part of why I like "class bloat" - I've been playing some form of D&D or another since 1977. In 37 years, I've played virtually every combination of core races and core classes I find interesting. At this point new classes, archetypes and races are nice just because they aren't things I've done many times.
Part of why I like "class bloat" - I've been playing some form of D&D or another since 1977. In 37 years, I've played virtually every combination of core races and core classes I find interesting. At this point new classes, archetypes and races are nice just because they aren't things I've done many times.
Totally agree,
I have been playing for around the same time and trying out a new class or archetype keeps the game fresh.
D&D 3.5 imploded because of too many unbalanced options, lack of support of splatbooks, moving too far from core rules, and lack of long term design strategy.
From things I've read, Paizo has been aware of this from the very beginning of Pathfinder.
Recently, I have been thinking maybe this implosion is just a characteristic of roleplaying games and a new edition basically resets the clock for the countdown of the inevitable apocalypse of another RPG implosion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't believe in bloat, i really don't. We have more options, that's it. If you don't like one or more options, don't use them, that's why they're called options. And more options is one of the things gamers are always clamoring for, i know I am.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Play a game without classes?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Untill Unchained comes out i can recommend this:
Might be a bit older and a lot to read, but i guess it functions good with Pathfinder. There are also lots of comments on this at the Intelligence Check blog and it´s for free.
So much for doing your own classes or costumizing them....
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We didn't have Bloat with 11 classes.
We didn't have Bloat with 19 classes.
We don't have Bloat now with 29 classes, though some of the pieces of the Hybrid Classes do overlap with the parent classes, understandably. Then again, Archetypes were already causing class overlap YEARS ago, so meh.
We won't have Bloat when Occult Adventures comes out, unless somehow all 6 classes end up being nothing but palette-swaps of existing classes with "OOO! PSYCHIC!" attached to them, which, right now, doesn't look like that's the case in the slightest.
We've had extra options since as far back as the Game Mastery Guide in 2010. No one HAS to use these options, and not everyone has.
Hell, you still have people these days saying that the Gunslinger is the bar-none most BA-ROKEN class EVER!, even though it's been proven time and again to actually be quite balanced, especially if you just stick to Early Firearms.
I'd rather have rules available for stuff and themes that I might not use as a DM or a Player right now, than maybe need them later and try to have to wing it.
I think this post in concealing your true intentions.BTW, Don’t kid yourself; we all have agendasFINALLY, someone understands exactly what I am saying!
No one knows TOS´s true intentions, but the post did bring some fresh air into this thread.
There is another important reason I like using the new stuff...I bought the books so I want to use them.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was reading through the first page and wondering why people were talking about with class bloat only in Ultimate Combat, then I saw that this thread had started three years ago.
That's somewhat mindblowing.
Just goes to show that no matter how FEW extra classes have been added in there'll always be someone declaring "Bloat", regardless of how justified it is.
In Paizo's case I don't believe that it's justified in the slightest, and clearly a lot of people above this post seem to agree with that assessment.
I just think it's great that if someone wanted to do an all-magic, all-divine, all-sneaky or all-warrior game then the players don't all have to choose from the same one or two classes, they'd have stacks of options so even games like those can have some variety.
An all-divine game.... Sounds like the beginning of a joke.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really, the more classes, the merrier for me and my table. If Paizo can creatively think of new classes to create, or fixes to old ones, I'm all for it. Please don't stop creating new options, Paizo, no matter what the "bloat haters" say.