|
Here is the thing.
You built the build to exploit a loop hole.
That loop hole got closed.
That is what happened.
I applaud Paizo for closing loopholes.
That may upset people try to exploit loopholes in the game.
I prefer those people not try to play in society games, and go homebrew to their munchkin hearts content.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Ciretose, I can't agree.
What you call "a loophole", most people are calling "a feature". Say I build a character with Feats and items that combine to make his attacks likely to threaten and confirm criticals, and do serious damage on a critical hit. Is that a loophole?
Or my character is a summoner with an eidolon who's good at grappling. Is that a loophole?
|
|
The difference though, is a difference of optimizing your character along a certain theme or concept so that you are the absolute best trip fighter or heal cleric or whatever and being extremely suboptimal for your particular concept or theme so you can exploit a “feature/loophole” at a later level.
There’s a line here somewhere and a ton of shades of gray. Personally, and anyone can choose any way they like, I choose to draw the line right between these two and basically say one is just optimizing, and the other is exploitation. Should it be punished? Not sure I’d go that far. I mean if it is there to be exploited, then it’s there to be exploited. But if suboptimal choices are being made front-end so that a power surge can happen later on that is beyond what typical leveling can accomplish, AND also counteracts the suboptimization.
If the 7 charisma never matters or hinders you with your animal companion because of an exploited loophole, then that is exploiting a loophole, not just optimization.
|
I have absolutely ZERO worries about my characters getting nerfed by the proverbial lines in the sand getting moved because I don't play near the lines.
I wonder: where exactly are those lines?
Care to give an example of your PCs that have ZERO worries of rule changes? If possible your higher level PCs?
Right now my highest level character is a 7th level alchemist. I also have a 5th level summoner and a 4th level alchemist.
Because it seems to me that as your PC levels that they specialize by in large. With this specialization comes the danger that changes to this specialization will dramatically effect your character.
So how could they drastically affect the ability of a middle of the field archer (Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Many Shot, Deadly Aim, Improved Precise, etc, etc) without picking up the goalposts and moving the whole field?
|
|
Foiled Again!!! I will get you Thea! I will get you!...too true~!!!!!!!!Did I get into an argument with anyone in this thread? If so Can I win yet?..;)I think you got in an "argument" with Thea earlier. I think she's already claimed victory though.
Gencon...
Front of Scotty's
Bring your second --
*throws down a guantlet.. mainly cause it's heavy*
|
|
That should be easy, with you chained up next to a pee bucket... MUAHAHAHAHAA...*Cough, cough, cough*Gencon...
Front of Scotty's
Bring your second --
*throws down a guantlet.. mainly cause it's heavy*
I'll get lose .. my piddle walker will grow lax eventually and I'll get loose .. and then I'll gnaw on your ankle.
|
And like we posted a few days ago, anything you read on the boards from us is either a clarification or a hint at the direction things are moving rules-wise. No ruling is official until it's either in the Guide to PFS or a FAQ.
Hyrum.
Not sure when this changed, but...BRAVO. Welcome back from the dark side. ;)
Would you be leery of a metamagic rod of lesser silence for 3,000gp?
Not at all, because the metamagic rods for all +1 metamagics cost 3,000 gp (aside from the typo in the APG that switched the price of Bouncing Spell and Persistent Spell).
|
|
You are talking about a rules change which is quite clearly and in plain english spelled out in the core book. This isn't anywhere near what I suggested. You could equally suggest that GMs can now use D24s to roll monster saving throws nerfing casters. Neither change is going to happen.
Now, how about something that is remotely possible? Something near the edges like I said.
|
|
Elias lobbied for Josh to adopt a specific interpretation of the core rules as PFS 'house rules' and Josh went with it.
Problem: PFS house rules get trumped by the core developers.
Solution: Don't lean too hard on PFS house rules.
Generalizing this and suggesting that Nerfs can come from any direction at any time is patently ridiculous (which is the statement my above comments were replying to).
|
|
Generalizing this and suggesting that Nerfs can come from any direction at any time is patently ridiculous (which is the statement my above comments were replying to).Except they have. Witness the FAQ for LG, or this recent blog on intelligent animals.
-James
The whole purpose of that blog being... to add some clarity to the animal companion rules which are not super clear in the core book. Bringing us right back around to my original reply on this topic. If you stick to the clear stuff in the center you don't have problems.
I've never played PFS but this guys argument sounds bogus to me. Any gripes with posting rules changes aside. You should know when your building a cheeseball character. I don't even have to see his sheet to know that dumb primate had a two handed weapon, power attack etc. In the end that companion alone probaly dwarfed the fighter or rogues damage output for that level. Not even factoring what his actual character the druid could do to make it game breaking.
In my own home group we have multiple DM's. Last session a couple of us stayed after the game to talk shop after the munchkin players had left. My fellow DM's expressed thier aggravation with scaling encounters for the game breaking characters who are indeed by the book for the most part. But those same player's don't try to exploit the rules under the guise of their "build" in my campaign.
When asked by my fellows why this was I told them the truth. When I see a game breaking character entering the game or heading in the direction of munchkinism I look them in the eye and tell them "to stop it". "Or else what" they ask. "Or I'll kill your character with optimal monsters" I said. When asked if that was fair I admitted I've never had to do it. The threat alone stops the problem in it's tracks. Becuase nobody wants to take the time to build a character they know the DM will hate.
Funny thing? Those same players have recently told me they can't wait to play my game again. They like the story, the dungeons AND how well the encounters are balanced to give the group a good fight without wipeing them out. In the end they know I do what I do for play balance and for the enjoyment of the group as a whole. They even come to me for advice on building thier PC's. In closing there is a fine line between customization and min/maxing. And for the record your welcome.
|
|
Elias lobbied for Josh to adopt a specific interpretation of the core rules as PFS 'house rules' and Josh went with it.
Problem: PFS house rules get trumped by the core developers.
Solution: Don't lean too hard on PFS house rules.
Generalizing this and suggesting that Nerfs can come from any direction at any time is patently ridiculous (which is the statement my above comments were replying to).
Brother Elias (the poster, not the character) is a friend of mine. I do not wish to revisit this topic, other than to say that I have a difficult time not responding when it regards a friend of mine. Brother Elias asked a question ("can an animal companion with hands, like an ape, use a weapon?") and Josh answered in the affirmative and put it in the guide.
There was a question, not really much lobbying. He was prepared to accept whatever answer was given. He's pretty good about that, as well as asking about things before he does them and looking up rules before he comments on them or relies on them for something.
|
|
I've never played PFS but this guys argument sounds bogus to me. Any gripes with posting rules changes aside. You should know when your building a cheeseball character. I don't even have to see his sheet to know that dumb primate had a two handed weapon, power attack etc. In the end that companion alone probaly dwarfed the fighter or rogues damage output for that level. Not even factoring what his actual character the druid could do to make it game breaking.
You may want to read very carefully what the original poster actually said in his original post, as well as some of the subsequent discussion. Not only was the character in question not a druid, but Brother Elias was actually quite aware that he could have actually made the ape into more of a combat machine had he not taken weapon proficiencies.
I respect your opinion, but I grow very tired of people ignoring facts and maligning someone that really doesn't deserve all of the vitriol directed at him.
|
|
Brother Elias (the poster, not the character) is a friend of mine. I do not wish to revisit this topic, other than to say that I have a difficult time not responding when it regards a friend of mine. Brother Elias asked a question ("can an animal companion with hands, like an ape, use a weapon?") and Josh answered in the affirmative and put it in the guide.
Sorry, I shouldn't have even responded when they dragged this thread out of mothballs.
Ya know, I'm going to lock this thread it's really been answered and dealt with.