| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are some of the smaller things in pathfinder that for some strange reason rub you the wrong way, drive you up the wall or simply grinds your gears?
For me, why is it that for animal companions that the wolf, not only starts bigger but GETS bigger then a bear? WHY IS THIS!!!!!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
why is moving diagonally so much work?
Why would anyone who uses something like Dimensional Door end their turn? Wouldn't they EXPECT the effects of dimensioning?! I can understand people taken with them since they may or may not expect it, but shouldn't there be like a Will or Fort save to avoid the disorientation??
Hey, you were speaking about small things and start with bigger wolf?!
Hey, you were speaking about small things and start with bigger wolf?!
For Druid animal companions, the wolf starts as a medium creature, while the bear starts as a small, when their advancement level hits, the bear becomes medium while the wolf becomes large. Sure the wolfs advancement takes 3 more levels to happen (7th instead of 4th like the bear) but still it drives me bats that the wolf is bigger then the bear
^That. Right there.
I don't understand why the whole "5 ft, 10 ft, 5ft, 10 ft" thing exists.
^That. Right there.
I don't understand why the whole "5 ft, 10 ft, 5ft, 10 ft" thing exists.
I think that it's because in a 5 foot square from corner to corner is 7.5 feet (I'm probably wrong but I'm just guessing)
The reason for the "5 ft, 10 ft, 5 ft" thing is that moving diagonally to, say, a location you could otherwise get to by moving 10 ft north and 10 ft west, will actually be a move of just over 14 ft.
If you like maths, a diagonal move functions as the longest side (the hypothenus) of a 90-degree-angled triangle where the two shortest sides are equally long.
Edit: Bah! Maths-ninjas..
Easily solved by using hex maps or staggered rows of squares.
For me, it's the same thing that's bugged me since 3.5: weapon sizes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The spear being a 2-handed-only weapon. Heck, even the longspear being a 2-handed-only weapon.
There's 4000 years of military history thrown out the window...
Because a 5ft by 5ft square has a hypotenuse of ~7ft. So if you travel diagonally, you're "Cheating" 2 feet out of a 5ft movement.
But then the other way around, aren't they now cheating you out of ~3 feet of movement? Or am I missing something?
I understand that they like to round to easy to divide numbers, but I would think cheating 2 feet of movement in your favor would be more "fair" than cheating 3 feet of movement NOT in your favor.
|
Because a 5ft by 5ft square has a hypotenuse of ~7ft. So if you travel diagonally, you're "Cheating" 2 feet out of a 5ft movement.But then the other way around, aren't they now cheating you out of ~3 feet of movement? Or am I missing something?
I understand that they like to round to easy to divide numbers, but I would think cheating 2 feet of movement in your favor would be more "fair" than cheating 3 feet of movement NOT in your favor.
Well, think about it this way:
Moving two squares diagonally is mathematically ~14 feet.
In Pathfinder, every other diagonal is 10 feet. So if you move two squares Diagonally, that's 15ft of movement game-wise. So it's just the 14 feet rounded up to meet the 5ft movement increments that characters use.
So if you move two squares diagonally, you're being cheated out of 1ft of movement. But if you are only moving one square diagonally, you're actually cheating 2ft. So I guess it averages out.
I dislike it because it makes the movement complicated, which disrupts game flow, and I often run tables of 6+ people, which is already time consuming.
That you have to have a class feature to be able to disarm magical traps. It appears that now you can, at least, see traps without that class feature.
Well, think about it this way:Moving two squares diagonally is mathematically ~14 feet.
In Pathfinder, every other diagonal is 10 feet. So if you move two squares Diagonally, that's 15ft of movement game-wise. So it's just the 14 feet rounded up to meet the 5ft movement increments that characters use.
So if you move two squares diagonally, you're being cheated out of 1ft of movement. But if you are only moving one square diagonally, you're actually cheating 2ft. So I guess it averages out.
Ohhhhh, I getcha.
Makes more sense why they did it now.
I dislike it because it makes the movement complicated, which disrupts game flow, and I often run tables of 6+ people, which is already time consuming.
I still agree with this though. Although if you're playing a game online like I am currently it does speed up matters for when you actually follow the rules since they give you a handy little yardstick.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reduction in popularity of the old stalwarts, the longsword, shortsword and greatsword.
Non-composite bows, why do they even exist?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Halflings. They're small, they bother me.
I generally don't like the animal companion rules as presented. The presence of a bunch of dinosaurs as clearly optimal choices annoys me, the balance seems very screwy between the different animals, and the bear gets shafted. (I played a dwarven druid with a war-bear mount, so the fact that they don't get Large annoys me to NO END. Because that was quite possibly my favorite character of all time.)
CMB and CMD doesn't work as well as I'd like it to. Large+ creatures, uber-high Strength scores, and gobs of Hit Dice means that the numbers break down more and more until no one can pull off cool maneuvers reliably enough to be a major tactic. Works fine at low levels or against humanoid opponents, though.
Acrobatics should be easier against large targets, not harder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things that are impossible when they should just be difficult. If that.
It shouldn't be impossible to use a longspear with one hand. just more difficult than doing it with two hands.
It shouldn't be impossible to trip a giant. Just very, very difficult.
Saying those things are impossible is like saying it's impossible for me to hold a sword because I'm not proficient with them.
Let me attempt those things. Give me a penalty or whatever, but let me try it! If I get to surpass the giant's hugenormous CMD, I deserve the right to be able to trip them.
Also: Absurdly long feat chains. Especially for combat maneuvers.
Full attacks.
Barbarians having d12 hit dice.
1st level wizards that can use wands of fireball.
Shield bonus not adding to touch AC (it's a shield...what do you mean I can't block a ray with it?)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Touch AC is a tricky thing sometimes. Okay, so bullets go through armor and you can't block 'em with a shield. Sure. But you mean to say I am capable of dodging them.?
Touch AC is a tricky thing sometimes. Okay, so bullets go through armor and you can't block 'em with a shield. Sure. But you mean to say I am capable of dodging them.?
You can deflect them with your hands as well, thanks to Deflect Arrows working vs firearms.
A lvl 8 monk hits harder than a longsword.
The environmental rules are real messy. For example, there are a bunch of things that are very similar to, but not exactly like, difficult terrain. I strongly suspect they were written before the term "difficult terrain" existed and were not important enough to update in 3.5/PF.
The underwater rules are particularly bad. Fishing with a harpoon or thrown spear is literally impossible, and doing it with a held spear requires freedom of movement. It is easier to stab someone in chest deep water if you are in chest deep water as well. Throwing a dagger or harpoon underwater is impossible, despite this often appearing in the artwork.
Oh, and an underwater crossbow is just a regular crossbow that is worse underwater, removing no penalties but reducing range.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I generally don't like the animal companion rules as presented. The presence of a bunch of dinosaurs as clearly optimal choices annoys me, the balance seems very screwy between the different animals, and the bear gets shafted. (I played a dwarven druid with a war-bear mount, so the fact that they don't get Large annoys me to NO END. Because that was quite possibly my favorite character of all time.
I hear you brother /bropaw
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Short swords don't do slashing damage, yet daggers do? WTH.
Longswords don't "pierce," despite having a sharpened, pointy end.
Duplicate threads
This isn't just rules we don't like, it's fluff stats rules and everything in between.
And also, as my initial post and title say it's the small things, the negligible things, that are driving us crazy.
Full attacks.
Barbarians having d12 hit dice.
They're a non-caster class, why can't they have that advantage ?
I was always disappointed that Antipaladins were Chaotic Evil. Lawful Evil always made more sense and seemed more interesting to me.
Touch AC is a tricky thing sometimes. Okay, so bullets go through armor and you can't block 'em with a shield. Sure. But you mean to say I am capable of dodging them.?
I think the idea is less "You see the bullet coming toward you and bend out of the way in Matrix bullet time" and more "you're constantly shifting around while fighting, which makes it difficult to aim directly at you (since by the time the attacker's aim is steadied in one location, you've shifted)". Remember that each space is 5 feet by 5 feet - that's a wide area to move around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a fan of the 'Chess board' mentality of the rules in general. Who is taking up 'how much' space? Who's blocking who... regardless of realistic sizes?
The 5-10-5 is really just an added annoyance. I'd rather the old Mage knight strategy of 'small tape measures and no lines on the maps :)
Seriuously... you grapple someone... but don't share the same SPACE as them?
Your class determines your skill set, not your background.
In this sense, I think fluff should be very significant.
A nice dm will allow you to trade skills or what not, but while I like that some classes get more skills than others, I'd prefer if it was less locked in, these are your class skills, that sort of thing.
So I changed it.
rolling a die for hp. Yeah, my fighter has fewer hit points than the wizard.
I once had the party necromancer catch up to my fighter/barb. Ridiculous.
If a 10th-level character had 1 level in each of 10 different classes, that character would likely be far worse off in terms of efficiency and what the character can actually do than if it had 10 levels in 1 class. That's the penalty (plus only getting 1 level of favored class bonuses).
The multi-class feature; you can take a lvl in a different class every time you lvl up. I have seen one person take 1 lvl cleric, 1 lvl monk, 1 lvl etc; and they have no penalties for doing so. (I believe she got up to lvl 10 in a home-brewed game before the game ended and each lvl was a different class!)
No penalties except for the fact that such a character is straightforwardly inferior to a single class character, due to only having level 1 class features (especially as many signature abilites, like rogue talents, rage powers, or a paladin's lay on hands only kick in at 2nd level), and the lack of more than two favored class bonuses, and that much only if one is a half-elf.
Pretty much the only advantage to trying to be a Level 1 Everything is that your saves end up being pretty insane. But since you can only cast first-level spells, your class features are all either weak or non-existent, and your BAB is awful because every 3/4 BAB or 1/2 BAB class doesn't give you anything at first level, that really doesn't matter - enemies can just ignore you because you can't do anything useful.
5-10-5 adds nothing to the game, only takes away.
|
Mechanically, there's not enough difference between Halflings and Gnomes. Being Small is where most of their relevant stats come from, and they both have a Charisma bonus and a Strength penalty. The only real difference is a few skill bonuses and which exotic weapon they treat as martial. For some reason I keep expecting Halflings to have a Wisdom bonus instead of a Charisma bonus.
Also, Paizo hands out racial Dex bonuses like candy. Go through the ARG and count how many races get a bonus to Dex, compared to how many get a penalty to it. Factor in humanlike races that get to put their +2 wherever they want and like 2/3 to 3/4 of them get a +2 Dex. Heck, Goblins get a +4!
The fact that the Eldritch Knight Spell Critical and the Arcane Armor feats (Training/Mastery) BOTH require a swift action to use...
Spell Critical ought to be an immediate action, dammit.
And +1 to the PrC Wizard spell gains problem. Seriously. Sorcerers don't get nerfed on spell acquisition, and are arguably advantaged viz-a-viz wizards anyway... but learning new spells becomes scroll/spellbook/research only when a wizard multiclasses? Bosh.