Pathfinder Rules You Don't Like


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 442 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
beej67 wrote:
Quote:
But yes, a level 5 item crafter who happens to have 43000 gp can spend over a month making an item that will cast wish exactly once.

This is broken.

The word you are looking for is "unbalanced". "Broken" is when it doesn't work.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's never good when you start arguing semantics.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
It's never good when you start arguing semantics.

My job never gets any proper respect. :/


Blue Star wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Quote:
But yes, a level 5 item crafter who happens to have 43000 gp can spend over a month making an item that will cast wish exactly once.

This is broken.

The word you are looking for is "unbalanced". "Broken" is when it doesn't work.

actually broken's original slang use was for unbalanced things in mmo's. then it changed into 15 different meanings.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
My job never gets any proper respect. :/

When you have to start arguing the meaning of words, you've already lost the argument. The fact that you can still win in court after that point is irrelevant.

Also, your job has people like Sebastian in the field. How can you claim respect after that? :P


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
My job never gets any proper respect. :/

When you have to start arguing the meaning of words, you've already lost the argument. The fact that you can still win in court after that point is irrelevant.

Also, your job has people like Sebastian in the field. How can you claim respect after that? :P

Spoiler:
What do you call 500 lawyers at the bottom of the Gdańsk Bay*? A good start.

*or any sufficiently deep water reservoir available locally, I heard version with San Francisco Bay, multiple rivers or just plain "ocean" and "sea"


Blue Star wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Quote:
But yes, a level 5 item crafter who happens to have 43000 gp can spend over a month making an item that will cast wish exactly once.

This is broken.

The word you are looking for is "unbalanced". "Broken" is when it doesn't work.

I would like to offer a third option:

It is a "Pathfinder Rule I Don't Like." Hence, thread. Etc. I don't like any rule that lets a 5th level fighter turn money into The Greatest Power Available To Fistandantalus. There may be some game worlds that can absorb that kind of wonkyness, but many can't.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
When you have to start arguing the meaning of words, you've already lost the argument.

I have a degree in maths/philosophy. We cant start an argument until we've argued about what the words mean first.

Silver Crusade

The other rule that I just loath is the Wealth by level chart I feel it handcuffs the GM and makes for weak magic items. As for what is a good stat I feel that a 16 before Racial mods is a good stat


Lou Diamond wrote:
The other rule that I just loath is the Wealth by level chart I feel it handcuffs the GM and makes for weak magic items. As for what is a good stat I feel that a 16 before Racial mods is a good stat

i would prefer less number bloating across the board, PC and monster alike. both on attributes, and on static bonuses.

but to do that, a lot of the bonuses would have to be rewritten. attack bonuses and AC should drop drastically

as should hit points and damage

skill check bonuses, saving throw bonuses and Number based DCs.

the magic item system shouldn't be a sole source of numeric bonuses. while stats and hit points would scale with level.

i would like a +3-+5 to actually mean something.


beej67 wrote:
Oh, which brings up the only other majorly broken thing I forgot about. Leadership. Way too easy to get way too many benefits. The cohort should be stricken from the feat.

I am always fascinated how different people can see the same thing.

I have always wanted to cut the vast horde of followers (mini army of meat shields) and did not have an issue with the cohort. Different folks, different views. Fun.


if we have lower numbers across the board. we can have that chance where that otherwise helpless child with the crossbow scores a crit and kills the politician.

i would like superhuman feats to be accomplishable, but i would like such things as a crit to not only be rare, but special enough to create glorious moments such as the above example where the child kills an experienced politician with a crossbow via a lucky crit or that lucky swing of the sword kills the dragon.

basically, crits would only happen on a natural 20, wouldn't need confirmation, and instead of the absurd multiplied damage, be treated as a coup de grace that bypasses appropriate immunities.


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

if we have lower numbers across the board. we can have that chance where that otherwise helpless child with the crossbow scores a crit and kills the politician.

i would like superhuman feats to be accomplishable, but i would like such things as a crit to not only be rare, but special enough to create glorious moments such as the above example where the child kills an experienced politician with a crossbow via a lucky crit or that lucky swing of the sword kills the dragon.

basically, crits would only happen on a natural 20, wouldn't need confirmation, and instead of the absurd multiplied damage, be treated as a coup de grace that bypasses appropriate immunities.

Shields up!! Here they come!


Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

if we have lower numbers across the board. we can have that chance where that otherwise helpless child with the crossbow scores a crit and kills the politician.

i would like superhuman feats to be accomplishable, but i would like such things as a crit to not only be rare, but special enough to create glorious moments such as the above example where the child kills an experienced politician with a crossbow via a lucky crit or that lucky swing of the sword kills the dragon.

basically, crits would only happen on a natural 20, wouldn't need confirmation, and instead of the absurd multiplied damage, be treated as a coup de grace that bypasses appropriate immunities.

Shields up!! Here they come!

magic would be nerfed as well and would utilize a spell point system in my ideal system.

the level cap would also be drastically lower.

i could tweak a pathfinder base to accomodate that.

Race? what race? instead of picking a race, you would pick a set of passive traits that mimic some of the bigger racial abilities and customize your own package

weapon proficiencies? doesn't matter. the weapons would be customizable as desired.


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:

if we have lower numbers across the board. we can have that chance where that otherwise helpless child with the crossbow scores a crit and kills the politician.

i would like superhuman feats to be accomplishable, but i would like such things as a crit to not only be rare, but special enough to create glorious moments such as the above example where the child kills an experienced politician with a crossbow via a lucky crit or that lucky swing of the sword kills the dragon.

basically, crits would only happen on a natural 20, wouldn't need confirmation, and instead of the absurd multiplied damage, be treated as a coup de grace that bypasses appropriate immunities.

Shields up!! Here they come!

magic would be nerfed as well and would utilize a spell point system in my ideal system.

the level cap would also be drastically lower.

i could tweak a pathfinder base to accomodate that.

Race? what race? instead of picking a race, you would pick a set of passive traits that mimic some of the bigger racial abilities and customize your own package

weapon proficiencies? doesn't matter. the weapons would be customizable as desired.

Play Savage Worlds.

Also note that many of your goals are also being attempted by D&D Next--they have an open playtest running now.


Spell Resistance.


Clustered Shots.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Astral Wanderer wrote:
Josh M. wrote:
How so? And if so, how would it be a problem?
Kitsune Knight wrote:

I personally enjoy videogames. If making Pathfinder more like a videogame makes it more fun for me and my group, then I will do what I can to apply those changes. Honestly, I'll never understand this sentiment that those who choose a different style of game are somehow "doing it wrong".

I'll avoid telling you that if you like paper videogames you've got 4th ed. for that.

Ups, sorry, I didn't.

This is funny, because I love video games, even MMO's, and I hated 4e. But, I won't get down on anyone else for liking it, though.

Sorry if I didn't fit your stereotype.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Heh. I like 4E and can't stand computer games. I must be doing it wrong too. :p


danielc wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Oh, which brings up the only other majorly broken thing I forgot about. Leadership. Way too easy to get way too many benefits. The cohort should be stricken from the feat.

I am always fascinated how different people can see the same thing.

I have always wanted to cut the vast horde of followers (mini army of meat shields) and did not have an issue with the cohort. Different folks, different views. Fun.

I think in terms of both game flow and combat flow, it's much easier to storyline the actions of a vast hoard of newbs (as they guard the castle or whatever) than it is to have a player basically take two complete actions during his turn. It not only bogs the game down, it's a completely overpowered feat choice, because you can take that one feat slot and custom build your own 'featmonkey' full of feats you'd like but can't afford, such as crafting or whatever. (see above) Plus, there's the whole Shield Other thing that just gets disgusting.

Aha! Shield Other. That's something I'd dump. Shield Other Chains are gross, I'd strike the spell entirely, or at least cut the duration into rounds/minutes instead of hours. Particularly paired with Leadership.

I get a cleric cohort. He casts "shield other" on me. My cleric cohort gets a cleric cohort. He casts "shield other" on him. Gross.

I had a NPC paladin squad I built, who all had Shield Other on each other in a big ring, and at least one if not two would quick channel every round. It was basically impossible to take any of them down.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Heh. I like 4E and can't stand computer games. I must be doing it wrong too. :p

Well, you're in the right thread for "doinitwrong"-ness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
beej67 wrote:
It not only bogs the game down, it's a completely overpowered feat choice, because you can take that one feat slot and custom build your own 'featmonkey' full of feats you'd like but can't afford, such as crafting or whatever. (see above) Plus, there's the whole Shield Other thing that just gets disgusting.

I never let my players custom build their cohort, I build one for them with a motivation to follow a PC, or if they want to hire a more specific cohort I build three of them and they can conduct job's interviews. One of the most fun cohort we had was a magma mephit bard and aristocrat, who basically runed errands and business talks for his boss, he also enjoyed disguising himself. He never fought.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My group has always had a more relaxed stance on cohorts. We let the players roll up their cohort, but with an understanding that it has to play like a regular character; no magic item vending machines allowed.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

The Leadership feat can be very abusable if you don't have good GM oversight. The cohort is a friendly, loyal NPC, not a robot slave that does everything exactly how the player wants. If you let the player design a character who is useless on their own but only hooks to their PC like a puzzle piece no wonder issues come up.

I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on the custom item issue. To me, complaining that custom items can be broken is like complaining that custom spells can be broken - yes, but that's why GM oversight is explictly built into the system.

You declare that the 5th level guy making a luck blade is broken, but you give no reasons why. This is a guy who's entire life is built around crafting - he's probably spent 2/3 of his feats and maybe a trait on it. He's spent all the expected wealth of an entire party of his level, and 40 days of downtime, just to get a single 9th level spell once. The group will use the spell and now they have one crappy magical sword to try and survive adventures. No armor. No potions. No masterwork weapons. Nothing else. I think I'd be hard pressed to find a PC group willing to make that trade. Obviously this changes as they gain levels but even once they have money most groups would rather have stat boosters, save boosters, and other basic magical equipment first.

I can understand the "videogame" argument, although that's not exactly the word I would choose. When most people say "videogamey" I see an effect or rule that pulls me out of my imagination/mindspace and flaunts the fact that I'm playing a game. Every time a game uses squares instead of actual distances, for example. It's a fine line because I like games with rules, I just want those rules hidden behind a veneer of plausibility.

Shadow Lodge

I don't mind Leadership, but (outside of PFS style play) I tend to take a "yes, but. . . " or "what will you give me <DM> for it in the game" sort of attitude, and also have a clear, if you can do it, so can the NPC's, so their abuse of it is completely up to you.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Oh yeah, mutually assured destruction is the best way to police rule abuses. >:)


Beckett wrote:
I don't mind Leadership, but (outside of PFS style play) I tend to take a "yes, but. . . " or "what will you give me <DM> for it in the game" sort of attitude, and also have a clear, if you can do it, so can the NPC's, so their abuse of it is completely up to you.

So when one PC takes Leadership and then all the NPCs take Leadership, what happens to all the other PCs? Or are they acceptable casualties in your war with the first PC?


Besides druids, I don't care for the more cartooney stuff that has appeared in PF; animated objects, Pit spells, gravity bow, that bard spell Summon Instrument... a few of these things are a little too Looney Tunes for an rpg.


Owly wrote:
Besides druids, I don't care for the more cartooney stuff that has appeared in PF; animated objects, Pit spells, gravity bow, that bard spell Summon Instrument... a few of these things are a little too Looney Tunes for an rpg.

These things were in 3.5 for many years before PF came along. I believe most were from 3pp's though.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
The other rule that I just loath is the Wealth by level chart I feel it handcuffs the GM and makes for weak magic items.

Good thing Wealth by Level isn't actually a rule. (It's a guideline, like the table of monster stats by CR.)


Serum wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Quote:
But yes, a level 5 item crafter who happens to have 43000 gp can spend over a month making an item that will cast wish exactly once.
This is broken.
Only if you don't follow the guidelines, and allow said crafter to gain 43000gp.

I have to agree; where is this level 5 character getting 43000 gp from?

Shadow Lodge

Josh M. wrote:
Serum wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Quote:
But yes, a level 5 item crafter who happens to have 43000 gp can spend over a month making an item that will cast wish exactly once.
This is broken.
Only if you don't follow the guidelines, and allow said crafter to gain 43000gp.
I have to agree; where is this level 5 character getting 43000 gp from?

Sorry, I deleted my post. ryric's argument was a much more interesting and informative read on the subject.


A +1 weapon going through the damage reduction of a great wyrm.

Bring back the +'s!!!!!

Dark Archive

BigNorseWolf wrote:

A +1 weapon going through the damage reduction of a great wyrm.

Bring back the +'s!!!!!

I generally never agree with BNW - I agree with BNW.

-

The pluses were a way to stage level appropriate challenges for players - as in "you should have this + to ride". So that high level pally really needs that +5 Holy Avenger more than a +1 weapon with 4 damage enhancements on it.

Can't blame PF for this one though - was a bit of a missed opportunity on their part, but they just ported over 3.5.


To each his own, as the new pit spells are one of my favorite things about Pathfinder.


Auxmaulous wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

A +1 weapon going through the damage reduction of a great wyrm.

Bring back the +'s!!!!!

I generally never agree with BNW - I agree with BNW.

Methinks you might have a vested personal interest in that one, your scaliness :)


Auxmaulous wrote:

Can't blame PF for this one though - was a bit of a missed opportunity on their part, but they just ported over 3.5.

Considering PF actually made DR even less useful than it was in 3.5, I feel some blame can rightfully be placed there :)

Assistant Software Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I removed some edition warring and the replies to it.


Not overly happy with PF weapons and armor. One handed wepaons suck outside of a few exotics like the falcata and dervish dancer feat. Schimitars, Falcata, Falchions, Greatswords, and longbows seem to be the only weapons PCs choose for some reason.

Same thing with armor. Chain shirts, breastplates and full plate with mithril versions are the only armors that seem to exist beyond level 2.

Silver Crusade

Zardnaar wrote:
Not overly happy with PF weapons and armor. One handed wepaons suck outside of a few exotics like the falcata and dervish dancer feat. Schimitars, Falcata, Falchions, Greatswords, and longbows seem to be the only weapons PCs choose for some reason.

Unless you're a cleric, then you might be using something else. Fighters might not use longswords anymore, but we clerics of Iomedae sure like 'em!


Doesn't really matter what weapons clerics use though because most of the damage is gonna be static modifiers piled on top of the base damage, but yes Clerics are kind of an exception.

I made up some new feats for my PCs and they are using daggers and rapiers (dex to damage type feats and weapon focus+quickdraw in a single feat for daggers only etc).

Shadow Lodge

Auxmaulous wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

A +1 weapon going through the damage reduction of a great wyrm.

Bring back the +'s!!!!!

I generally never agree with BNW - I agree with BNW.

-

The pluses were a way to stage level appropriate challenges for players - as in "you should have this + to ride". So that high level pally really needs that +5 Holy Avenger more than a +1 weapon with 4 damage enhancements on it.

I hated the minimum + to get through DR. It just enforced WBL and what's more forced players to spend that wealth on the least interesting enhancement available - a big base enhancement. PCs should not need a minimum '+' magic item to fight level-appropriate monsters. I think the system where +3 to +5 weapons bypass material or alignment DR is intended to offer an alternate incentive to invest in the base enchantment rather than piling on extra dice of damage - YMMV on whether it succeeds.

Shadow Lodge

Roberta Yang wrote:
Beckett wrote:
I don't mind Leadership, but (outside of PFS style play) I tend to take a "yes, but. . . " or "what will you give me <DM> for it in the game" sort of attitude, and also have a clear, if you can do it, so can the NPC's, so their abuse of it is completely up to you.
So when one PC takes Leadership and then all the NPCs take Leadership, what happens to all the other PCs? Or are they acceptable casualties in your war with the first PC?

That's kind of a large jump to that conclusion. If I misread your intentions, I apologize, it just reads as snark. What I am saying is that if they abuse it, then I have no problem letting NPC's abuse it right back at them, because essentually the players are setting the standard. If they do not abuse a thing, then there is no issue. If it is one player, then in my experience those other players are either A.) right there with the one abusing something, which is basically telling me that they want a high powered/superhero style game or B.) are much more likely not having fun and want the above player/character to stop ruining their fun. I am really not sure where you get this idea that I'm out to punish players, either all of them, or just the ones that do not abuse somthing, when someone else does. The key is that I go out of my way to actually help them (and myself) have fun. If one (or more) players are doing something that is preventing that, I try to adjust the game, (for example start to threaten their followers/cohort in the game with drama or whatever).

Shadow Lodge

Weirdo wrote:
I hated the minimum + to get through DR. It just enforced WBL and what's more forced players to spend that wealth on the least interesting enhancement available - a big base enhancement. PCs should not need a minimum '+' magic item to fight level-appropriate monsters. I think the system where +3 to +5 weapons bypass material or alignment DR is intended to offer an alternate incentive to invest in the base enchantment rather than piling on extra dice of damage - YMMV on whether it succeeds.

I like that it made mosters more unique and versatile, gave a reason for players to seek out actual Enhacemnt bonuses rather than more properties as soon as possible, and because it made the game more gritty and threatening. What 3.5 did was exceptionally bland, and then how PF made that aspect even worse. The original intent (3.5) was because too many people complained that they couldn't invest all their monies into a single weapon and had to buy backup silver, cold iron, or whatever gear. This was the vocal minority that played organized play, for the most part, and actually very much was done because of WBL issues, further breaking them. The other side is that it actually enforces the lone wolf style of play rather than goups relying on each other, especially how PF made it so that spells do not grant this benefit.


The "Fighter" class existing as anything but an NPC class (Warrior). From both a crunch and fluff prospective. Only a bunch of +x and bonus feats here and there are boring class features and thus a boring class on the crunch side, while the tone (really high fantasy) and mechanics of the game are that EVERY PC should have supernatural (though not necessarily Su) abilities, while Fighters don't (Rogues also have this issue, though they have actual class features, even if most of those features suck).


the most anoying rule they can made was that +3 on char class skills
i dont like that.

i hate and deactivate a lot of feats that simply make the game slower:

two-weaponfighting (if you want a second attack, then make it at -2/-2, but you need to take the other 2whf)
dodge (anyone can do it but give a penalty of -1 vs the others attackers, so, improved dodge... +2 vs dodged one or dodge two guys)
whirlwind attack (all can do, but it relies on str mod decreassing per attack)
cleave... any one can do a cleave if they want
weapon finesse... when i played vampire, i loved the system... so...
exotic weapon (now they buy an a proff. with skills)
dex mod to the total ft a char can move
more roleable skills...
spellcasting back to the 2nde with timecasting
a wiz/sor and alike can cast a second standar action spells when they has a second bab +6/+1 (+6 the max spell level he can make and +1 the max second level he can cast)

and thats all fits for the stories i tale to my pcs.
actualy im trying with gestalt rules... look so good.

we´re not a hackslashers but we want more things to do with our chars options.

we´re tired from all the same spells from ever... all spells do the same, or emulates the effecto for spells wich do the same to others.

races


ohhh i hate the dr vs anything system!!
versos good nor evil, lauful chaotic, silver, gold, neutral, ivory, mithril, adamantine, magic, axiomatic fanzy sh"#$t, /-...? ¬¬... seriously?

maybe the good one was the X/epic... that was just fine
i mean, ill never will play so far... again. so boring


Not a rule I don't like, but there's this guy who appears to hate the Random Height and Weight Table.

Grand Lodge

Icyshadow wrote:

Alignment restrictions on Monk and Barbarian.

Yes, I went there. Oh, Always Evil Assassin I also don't agree with.

Oh if there weren't alignment restrictions I would be monkbarian-ing it up sooo much right now...

Also, I also like the assassin prestige class and do not like that I can't play one in society and even some home games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Icabello wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Alignment restrictions on Monk and Barbarian.

Yes, I went there. Oh, Always Evil Assassin I also don't agree with.

Oh if there weren't alignment restrictions I would be monkbarian-ing it up sooo much right now...

Also, I also like the assassin prestige class and do not like that I can't play one in society and even some home games.

I played an Assassin once, but the Death Attack just wasn't very usable; takes too long to power up and has a pretty easy save, and then to make it even worse, they made an advanced Ninja trick that does the same with only one round of concentration >.<... you aren't missing much.

That said, I disagree with alignment restrictions and alignment mechanics in general, especially those concerning Paladin. "Ha ha, you did something morally ambiguous so now you get to lose your class features!"

201 to 250 of 442 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Pathfinder Rules You Don't Like All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.