For the most part, RAW works very well for most things. But I learned very early on with 3.0 that being a slave to RAW is not a good thing. For one, it slows down the game during play when you have to look up every rule to be 100% precise. RAW be damned if it slows my game down to a crawl; I'll do an impromptu ruling now and fix it later after the game.
But, IMO, most importantly, when a corner case like this pops up (and there are many corner cases with a complex rule system like Pathfinder), RAW fails and becomes contradicting and extremely confusing, which is the exact opposite of RAW should be, clear and concise. That's when RAI comes in to pick up the slack along with a good dose of common sense.
My two copper.
|
If you can't handle people attacking your publically released product, don't release it publically.
Yeah, it sucks when people troll or others get nitpicky to the extreme. But at the same time, that's the cost of making it public.
It's also not an excuse to insult one's customer base, no matter how stubborn and annoying they may be.
As a public product, we have every right to criticize its flaws just as much as we have to praise it.
None of us have insulted him. Therefore he has no right to insult us in turn by alluding to our being "dishonest" and "obtuse."
Calling the designers incompetent because they didn't write a rule for every possible RAW exploit you churn out, or accusing them of deliberate mischief isn't an insult? I'd like to see your dictionary, actually never mind, I don't really.
There's a large segment of the American public that has some warped sense of entitlement that translates into a viewpoint which sees people that do a service as having willingly volunteered for any form of abuse the First Amendment permits.
Luckily in Europe, we don't have the First Amendment. All of you would be sitting in our socialist prisons by now and undergoing an extensive psychological re-assignment therapy. ;-)
Calling the designers incompetent ... or accusing them of deliberate mischief...
At no point did I do either of those things. Don't put words into my mouth.
All I did was to ask the developers to be more mindful of how they phrase things on these boards, as it can be taken as an insult. Nothing more.
Put your axe away. You've been grinding it for so long there's not much left.
|
Do you know the rules of Chess, Go, Tic-Tac-Toe ?I have never heard of RAI while playing any of these games and a myriad others.
Obviously you haven't heard of variant chess games. This is where someone says "Hey, what would happen if we were playing on a 3-d Chess field and you could move up and down as well?"
These games were developed using the RAI. When they original designed chess they had a set board and set rules, but with variant rules you start with a different set up and because there are new options not already covered in the chess game, you must use the RAI.
You could do the same with any simplistic game really. But just because you add anther layer to the chess board doesn't mean that pawns can now go backwards.
The rules of chess specify you must set up your pieces in a certain fashion on your side of the board.
Nothing, however, says I can't use magnetic pieces and set mine up on the underside of a two-sided (printwise) board, leaving my opponent and I two free and non-integrated planes with which to move about freely, never meeting one another, resulting in an unwinnable stalemate from the very start of the match.But that's ridiculous and so obviously against the intent and spirit of the rules that only somebody deliberately trying to subvert the nature of the game would attempt it. They'd be laughed out of any kind of official or unofficial chess match at the mere suggestion. It sounds like a really lame plot for one of those 'I played the Grim Reaper in chess for my life' cliches.
As it pertains to Ultimate Magic: a small loophole was left in the rules that only someone attempting to purposefully exploit it in a patently obvious fashion could leverage, and couldn't succeed anyway when held up to the light of peer review (this is a communal game, after all) - why all the invective against the designers? Why go around telling other posters 'stop lying' if they express a differing interpretation than your own? This is a game, not the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. The stakes are pretty low for vitriol like that.
There are many reasons to criticize UM, to be honest (I would be lying if I said I didn't trash it in my review), but this particular one is so trivial I cannot fathom the level of nerd rage at play here. I gotta give credit to SKR for showing as much restraint as he did, if 'facepalm-worthy', 'deliberate', and 'dishonest' are the extent of his crimes.
It's because this is a "Ravingdork" thread. That's all. Apparently my reputation corrupts everything it touches, even good intentions.
umm... wow.
You bring it upon yourself from what I read. Magnificent track record btw.Then theres this.....
I can kinda see where your interpretation is coming from, but please don't pretend that the rules are clear when they are not. It's akin to calling us idiots for thinking otherwise, and it's insulting.
and this....
Thank you for your thoughtful, in-depth reply Serisan. It was a refreshing refrain from the hate speech so often thrown my way.
1) You do NOT speak for all of us, i'm "insulted" you would think that you do.
2) The tone of your response in all three quotes above indicate that you are back to trolling for a fight despite your initial post.3) Some common sense would be nice too. Your Bull strength example shows a distinct lack of, tbh. If you really think that once that particular 2nd level spell is cast that the strength becomes permanent (like an 8th or 9th level spell in power), then I agree that it's purposely misinterpreting it.
People here are too stubborn, serious, and insensitive.
You light a match, start a fire, then have the stones to say this about the people here.
Good thing I dont admin this site, I'd probably have perma-banned you by now. Trouble posters are just trouble posters.
On topic...
Neither. :P
Disclaimer*** The above is based on reviews that I've read for both books. I dont actually have the books.
1) I'm afraid of unbalanced splat from previous incarnations of the hobby. Im a stickler for well-balanced classes, abilities, etc.
2) I love the APG to death and I agree that it's the most well done splat to date. That said, take the fan favorite Inquisitor for example. Based on my initial read through of the class, it seemed like a better version of a Paladin with more abilities and very little restrictions.
So based on the reviews of UM and UC and my own fears, it looks like I wont be able to use much of either book. While I hear good things about the Magus, I dont want to buy the book for just that one class. Gunslingers dont fit into my vision of a fantasy world, Ninjas seem overpowered compared to Rogues (again based on multiple reviews), and based on my own thoughts Samurai (and Ninjas) would only see use if I were running an asian flavored campaign. I dont know if the Samurai class has mounted combat abilities, but I do know that I could count the mounted combat scenarios from about 30 years of DMing on one hand (add Cavalier to this btw, they never see much use in my games for the same reason).
YMMV.
Ultimate combat managed to make monks cool, interesting, diverse, and PLAYABLE. That's not just an awesome book thats a freaking miracle.
|
|
Ultimate combat managed to make monks cool, interesting, diverse, and PLAYABLE. That's not just an awesome book thats a freaking miracle.
Not only that but UC also added interesting options for bards and rogue / ninjas as well. The archetypes in UM were far less interesting because most were very UP. Only the Qinggong monk was a real standout from UM.
Ultimate combat managed to make monks cool, interesting, diverse, and PLAYABLE. That's not just an awesome book thats a freaking miracle.
Monks were always playable. They just had a (significantly) smaller niche than other classes. UC certainly did make them a lot more fun and interesting, though.
Yeah, UC did give a lot of cool new toys to the monk, but where is it that it provided much need synergy between monk class abilities? Last I checked, that was the real problem with the monk: None of their abilities had much synergy--with many not being able to be used together at all.
|
|
I'm not optimistic. Still, I'd love to be proven wrong.It's been mentioned in the past, that major re-writes of the core classes is not the intention for the Ultimate series splatbooks. However, Sean has indicated they are looking at they are looking at fixing some of the issues that have arisen for the Core monk class.
I WANT TO BELIEVE
I'm not optimistic. Still, I'd love to be proven wrong.It's been mentioned in the past, that major re-writes of the core classes is not the intention for the Ultimate series splatbooks. However, Sean has indicated they are looking at they are looking at fixing some of the issues that have arisen for the Core monk class.
Well, I wouldn't really say that second post has anything really do to with the first. At least, I don't see fixing issues with the core monk class as being on the same track as making monks function well with little to no exceptional gear.
|
|
Well, I wouldn't really say that second post has anything really do to with the first. At least, I don't see fixing issues with the core monk class as being on the same track as making monks function well with little to no exceptional gear.I'm not optimistic. Still, I'd love to be proven wrong.It's been mentioned in the past, that major re-writes of the core classes is not the intention for the Ultimate series splatbooks. However, Sean has indicated they are looking at they are looking at fixing some of the issues that have arisen for the Core monk class.
Considering the frustration over AoMF and the brass knuckle drama I wouldn't mind seeing this turn into a two-birds-with-one-stone situation.
|
|
What exactly is the result of the Brass Knuckle "drama"?
Brass Knuckles in Adventurer's Armory got errata's almost a year after Ultimate Combat's Brass Knuckles gave monks a fairly priced(though flavor breaking) way to get enhancements and DR-punchers along with their unarmed strike damage. It wasn't overpriced and capped at +5 like the AoMF.
The current version in Adventurer's Armory doesn't do that anymore. And it's been stated that the Ultimate Combat version that damn near every monk player has been using over the AA version is going to get the same exact rewrite. Thus removing one of the things that had earlier been considered a godsend for monks.
So now we don't even have that option to reflavor into something more monk-appropriate.
Some of us were a bit unhappy about that.
|
I think I knew the issue, (retracting that Brass Knuckles where either a "Monk" weapon, or that they no longer did Unarmed Strike Damage). I find most of Paizo's "errata" . . .inconsistent, . . .randomly placed, or far too difficult to follow, so usually ignor it.
So, right now, Brass Knuckles do what, if you don't mind me asking? I found them an interesting addition for Cleric's as well, so that's why I ask.
|
|
So, right now, Brass Knuckles do what, if you don't mind me asking? I found them an interesting addition for Cleric's as well, so that's why I ask.
It's still 1d3 and whatnot. Nothing's changed for anyone else but monks IIRC. The only change was that they were clarified not to do monk unarmed damage since they counted as a weapon.
edit-I just checked the PRD to be sure. It STILL says they do unarmed damage there. sigh...
|
|
Mikaze, when I sit down to rewrite 3.5 to my liking, I will dedicate it to you and all my fellow monk loving friends.
<3
So, what exactly is your issue with Monks?
Or rather let me ask, in your opinion, how should the class be built to be a (more) funtioning class?
Hey T. How is life?
A lot of the issues have (situationally) been alleviated by Ultimate Combat, but the Core monk still has problems IMO.
Please keep in mind that I love monks. I love the idea of monks.
They are still the most MAD class in the game. Even the Paladin has had this eased up, but monks still need STR, DEX, CON, and WIS.
It's frustrating when almost everyone tells you that if you want to build an effective monk, you need to pump STR and not worry about DEX. Monks scream DEX to me. I want my monks to be flowing, agile battle dancers. Not built like Rambo. We have a monk in our Jade Regent game that makes that work, he's pretty much Bolo Yeong. But not everyone wants that for their monk.
Monks are generally supposed to have mastered their bodies into living weapons, yet they still don't have full BAB. This leads to other classes being better at punching people than they are.
Monks have no means to enhance their unarmed strike directly without using a means that is overpriced and capped at +5 total enhancement. The monk, whose strength is supposed to come from his training, ascetic discipline, and within is left dependant upon magic gear just as much as everyone else, if not more. If they had some form of ritual that they could perform themselves, not with the aid of a caster, to enhance themselves, it would be great. It would fit their flavor. And it could be priced to be equal with standard equipment progressions everyone else uses.
The AoMF being overpriced keeps getting explained as if the monk was a two-weapon fighter, so of course he should pay 2.5 times as much as everyone else. But that isn't true. Unarmed strike is an abstract weapon. The monk's special thing is getting the freedom to describe that unamred strike as being with his head, elbows, fists, knees, feet, whatever. But it's still just one weapon. It doesn't matter if the monk has one arm, no arms, or seven arms; his flurry of blows is going to be a standard number no matter how many limbs he has. So why the overcharging?
And before brass knuckles were taken away again, why should the only option for monks to enhance their unarmed strike at a fair price take away their aesthetic freedom(flurry of blows is reduced to punch-punch-punch-punch) and a hunk of metal that takes away the flavor of a true bare-handed fighter who is his own weapon?
Ultimate Combat and Qinggong Monk helped with some of this(though we're still lacking good-aligned Qinggong powers while we have evil ones for some reason), but the core monk itself still suffers.
edit-There's also the monk's fast movement and flurry of blows being at odds with each other. Monks alleged combat maneuver mastery falls short against monsters too often as well.
|
|
Something you might have overlooked, though, from UC, is the Feat Crusaders Strike. Lets you Flurry with a deities favored weapon. . .
So, right now, Brass Knuckles do what, if you don't mind me asking? I found them an interesting addition for Cleric's as well, so that's why I ask.It's still 1d3 and whatnot. Nothing's changed for anyone else but monks IIRC. The only change was that they were clarified not to do monk unarmed damage since they counted as a weapon.
edit-I just checked the PRD to be sure. It STILL says they do unarmed damage there. sigh...
It's still in the PRD for two reasons:
1) From what i have understand only the pathfinder rpg line goes into the PRD and the adventurer's armory isn't on the pathfinder rpg line.2) APG hasn't received any new errata yet because it hasn't gone to a new printing, when it does go for a new printing then a new errata for APG will come out and the APG brass kuckles will be changed to match the ones in the adventurer's armory, and then the PRD will be updated.
|
|
It's still in the PRD for two reasons:
1) From what i have understand only the pathfinder rpg line goes into the PRD and the adventurer's armory isn't on the pathfinder rpg line.
2) APG hasn't received any new errata yet because it hasn't gone to a new printing, when it does go for a new printing then a new errata for APG will come out and the APG brass kuckles will be changed to match the ones in the adventurer's armory, and then the PRD will be updated.
And this is why i dislike Paizo's errata. . . :)
And this is why i dislike Paizo's errata. . . :)It's still in the PRD for two reasons:
1) From what i have understand only the pathfinder rpg line goes into the PRD and the adventurer's armory isn't on the pathfinder rpg line.
2) APG hasn't received any new errata yet because it hasn't gone to a new printing, when it does go for a new printing then a new errata for APG will come out and the APG brass kuckles will be changed to match the ones in the adventurer's armory, and then the PRD will be updated.
Although i understand that Paizo's policy of getting errata out is somewhat inconviencing, i am thankful that they put out errata and even incorporate them in the .pdf files and in later printings.