And, if the OP really hates the company that much, it's simple enough not to frequent their message boards instead of ranting in pointless, inflammatory troll threads.Now if only we could get this message out to some of the Pathfinder fans over on the WotC forums...
Interestingly enough, I don't frequent those forums (except, of course, at my initial excitement towards essentials, which the board quickly quashed). Either way, that really doesn't justify the OP's ranting.
Interestingly enough, I don't frequent those forums (except, of course, at my initial excitement towards essentials, which the board quickly quashed). Either way, that really doesn't justify the OP's ranting.And, if the OP really hates the company that much, it's simple enough not to frequent their message boards instead of ranting in pointless, inflammatory troll threads.Now if only we could get this message out to some of the Pathfinder fans over on the WotC forums...
No, it certainly doesn't. And I definitely didn't mean to imply that you were guilty of the same.
|
And, if the OP really hates the company that much, it's simple enough not to frequent their message boards instead of ranting in pointless, inflammatory troll threads.Now if only we could get this message out to some of the Pathfinder fans over on the WotC forums...
Or to 4e fans over at Enworld...
But 1e is soooo limited. I could never make the character I want to play.
Oh here we go. Yet another Rock/Paper/Scissors™ 2e crybaby whining about how awesome it'd be to pull a ridiculous half-rock/half-spock horta combo. Go weep into your overbloated 2e splatbook rando1000...
Balance is not a matter of opinion; it's a matter of math.
And, if the OP really hates the company that much, it's simple enough not to frequent their message boards instead of ranting in pointless, inflammatory troll threads.Now if only we could get this message out to some of the Pathfinder fans over on the WotC forums...Or to 4e fans over at Enworld...
EN World is a D&D website, not a 3e website. 4e fans are - or should be - perfectly welcome there.
~*~
Also, to answer the question, there are in fact two questions with answers.
The first: 3e chassis is why PF is unbalanced.
"So why is the 3e chassis unbalanced?"
For a number of reasons, but the primary reason boils down to the idea that the supernatural must be "magic" rather then the magic being part of the supernatural.
Balance is an illusion, just like time.
"And lunch-balance doubly so."
Didn't work out as well for me as for Douglas Adams. ;)
A pity the math is adjustable then, eh?
Oberoni farts in your general direction.
4E was created for the players (who mostly played Fighters and Rogues) who were sick of the godlike Wizards and Clerics dominating the game. They screamed out for balance and got it. I really enjoy that aspect of the game, but dislike the lack of fluff and flavor in 4E.
Just a little observation about the gamers in our area....alot of power gamers loved the balance of 4th ed because they felt ok to power game to their heart content and it will be ok because the non-power gamers could keep up...because they are no trap powers....
It was like they were adicts to the power and could you know just not break the game.
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch. 4th ed is breakable too...sometime I think even more so in ways...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also in response to this thread title...I don't know what the OP is talking about...I have all 6 og the Hardcovers balanced in a house shape right now. And it was easy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
This is blatently untrue though, and I feel this is the most damning problem in the 3e chassis - not how easy it is for someone who knows the rules like the back of their hand to twist it all but, but how easy it is for someone who doesn't know the rules to cock it all up.
Pun Pun was never the problem, it was the new player that said "Hey, soulknife sounds cool, I'm going to be that" playing with the new player that said "Hey, glitterdust sounds pretty potent, so does web, and I want my spellcasting stat to be really high..."
4th ed is breakable too...sometime I think even more so in ways...
I have found that 3e is broken in ways that exclude the party, where as players that are "too good" in 4e are such in ways that make the entire party feel awesome. Furthermore, 3e is broken on every level (see: spells replacing skills) whereas 4e's problems only come out when characters are too good at their job in a fight.
Having the wizard end the encounter and then solve every problem with a spell is not satisfying or balanced.
Having a warlord give everyone way too many attacks with way too high bonuses may be unbalanced, but it sure makes all the players feel incredibly awesome, and it doesn't make Stabby the rogue feel useless when it comes time to be sneaky because the wizard can't just use invisibility.
I never "knew" Two-Weapon Fighting to be unbalanced. My experience is the exact opposite. But then again, I know what I am doing.
Case in point: At the height of 3.5, I helped my wife fine-tool a TWF elf ranger who could easily hold his own damage-wise against the party's axe-wielding half-ogre barbarian. Yes, the damage was spread out over more attacks per round, but what's the big, fat difference?
As some have pointed out, there is a matter of the role of each class being at work here. And I agree with that. Ranger was the right choice to match the barbarian's output in this way. Probably a fighter of the same level would have been a little harder to tweak for the purpose, though not impossible. But then, this is part of the ranger's role. The simple fact is, if you came to Pathfinder hoping to find your druid dual-wielding twin scimitars expertly at 1st-level, you came to the wrong place.
I am sick to death of the edition wars, but if it must be, I'll take the classic definition of roles over what I've seen of 4th's blurred lines of damage-output and class role.
I never "knew" Two-Weapon Fighting to be unbalanced. My experience is the exact opposite. But then again, I know what I am doing.
Case in point: At the height of 3.5, I helped my wife fine-tool a TWF elf ranger who could easily hold his own damage-wise against the party's axe-wielding half-ogre barbarian. Yes, the damage was spread out over more attacks per round, but what's the big, fat difference?
I can see the ranger outdamaging the +2 LA version of the half-ogre if she were up against the right favored enemies...but that's a pretty big "if." Point being, TWF was only really viable for two classes: rangers (who got it for free) and rogues (who could add +10d6 damage to every attack). For anyone other than those two, it sucked.
Balance is not a matter of opinion; it's a matter of math.
But which math? Any background in mathematical modeling will tell you that there are often many approaches that may be taken. Which one should you choose? What assumptions and abstractions must be made with the approach you choose? What do you give up by choosing approach over the other?
These questions are an underlying reason why game design is not merely about math, but also about art.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
More FOod fOr thE TroLLz!
oh my, there's nothing like the good ol' poo/fan thang. glad i didn't pick a front row seat. all the funny smell and none of the splatter. YEE-HAW!
|
Real men know that "chess" is not a verb.
Adjective, not verb.
This timed pencil-stabbing version of tic-tac-toe sounds dull. Instead, draw the diagram on the floor, about four feet across, and have the contestants rush in and attempt to place a body part in the space they want to claim. Tic-tac-twister!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead, draw the diagram on the floor, about four feet across, and have the contestants rush in and attempt to place a body part in the space they want to claim. Tic-tac-twister!
Turning a good tabletop game into a bad LARP is never the answer.
Why did I even bother to read this thread ???
|
|
Absolute balance nobody wants. Relative balance is important.
It annoys me greatly that Paizo or designers cannot see how powerful a feat Power Attack is, and then make other feats that don't scale automatically as well. Vital Strike is the main offender of this. Power Attack gets better automatically over time, but Vital Strike needs 2 other feats to keep in damage and usefulness.
The other problem was action economy being an issue. I think Paizo might be pushing the power up a bit with UM and UC classes. The APG classes are balanced or weak compared to Core, but UM and UC seems far stronger, with lots of ways to recharge powers like BoS in the samurai and gunslinger.
At the end of the day, I live with this imbalanced system because most of the time it's not utterly abused. And I REALLY don't want to learn another system.
I brought chocolate bars, now let's see if anyone has any graham crackers.*Pulls up a chair and offers Ambrus some popcorn.*Ooh, popcorn. All I have are these marshmallows.
Start the campfire guys, here's the graham crackers.
Start the campfire guys, here's the graham crackers.
Seems to me that the flames in this thread are smores than adequate.
*rimshot*
Warmage?No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
Compared to a Fighter?
|
Compared to a Fighter?Warmage?No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
You think a Fighter can't outdamage a Warmage?
No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
Funniest thing I've read all week :D
You think a Fighter can't outdamage a Warmage?Compared to a Fighter?Warmage?No, no it's not. You could be the undouchiest full-caster ever and unless you ACTIVELY underplayed your character, you are going to outclass mundane characters at every turn by about level... 8.
PF(or 3.5) is perfectly balanced...just don't be a douch.
You think a Fighter has the better end of the deal?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
What else does the Warmage do besides damage? I thought that was why everyone despised it. Because it didn't get utility spells.That was fixed in the Player's Handbook II with the Eclectic Learning Alternative Class Feature. It allowed a Warmage to take any Wizard/Sorcerer spell, rather than just Evocation magic, with the same limitations as Advanced Learning and that the spell takes a slot one level higher. To say nothing of the Extra Spell feat.
Best to say nothing of the Extra Spell feat. I don't recall WotC ever clarifying that you could grab a spell from another class' spell list.
oh my, there's nothing like the good ol' poo/fan thang. glad i didn't pick a front row seat. all the funny smell and none of the splatter. YEE-HAW!
Ahhh, it's not so bad. We brought flame-retardant raincoats and hip waders!
I'm sensing a theme there...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I removed a couple posts. Please be civil.
What else does the Warmage do besides damage? I thought that was why everyone despised it. Because it didn't get utility spells.
Also, Healer.
Healer gets a Unicorn companion, and more class capabilities. Warmage has more capability due to being Cha based and secondary on Int.
and it doesn't make Stabby the rogue feel useless when it comes time to be sneaky because the wizard can't just use invisibility.
Actualy the wizard feels pretty useless when a the people trying to sneak by have True Seeing....Detect invisible...etc up and they get caught. Or if the wizard needs to be stealthed for longer than a few minutes. (Also a problem with disguise spells.
the skill stealth is a 100% better than the invisibility spell.
Actualy if the wizard is at all intelligent about it he would cast invisibility on the rogue. But than again 4th ed is for players that need teamworked enforced by the rules.