Confessions That Will Get You Shunned By The Members Of The Paizo Community


Gamer Life General Discussion

51 to 100 of 4,499 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I was going to say something like:

I eagerly grant any player (not just rangers) favored enemy bonuses against 'anything that wears a kilt' and often will grant paladins smite against such enemies as well.

But the eidolon thing sounded much creepier.


Vincent Takeda wrote:

I was going to say something like:

I eagerly grant any player (not just rangers) favored enemy bonuses against 'anything that wears a kilt' and often will grant paladins smite against such enemies as well.

My GM did this. I got great use of beduiling gift and handling out kilts...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I hate playing wizards. I've always been and always will be a sorcerer man, and I'd be willing to play a witch cause they awesome fluff.

I have no problems with monks or fighters or rogues at all. In fact, while I don't like playing them because I prefer the flare of magic, but I'd play, say, a barbarian in a heartbeat if given cool enough fluff to work with.

I don't like ninjas more than rogues. The only difference I see between the is fluff. When i want to play Durzo Blint, I pull out a ninja. When I want to play Gonff the Mousethief, I pick up a rogue. Mechanics has nothing to do with it.

I love the summoner unabashedly, and would make any concessions the DM asked me to make to play what is essentially a Digidestined.

I like blasting spells. I enjoy Web and Glitterdust and summon spells and whatnot, but they just don't have the same oomph as melting someone's face with an empowered scorching ray...

I don't like how some of the APs run, and have abandoned them besides their miscellaneous articles as a result.

I have no problems with overuse of exotic races, and have no problems with my players using them.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I hate Guns in my fantasy.
I hate "Easternisms" in my fantasy.
I think DPR is one of the stupidest concepts in RPGs.
I think Feats are one the worst additions to D&D.
I think D&D 3.0 is better than either 3.5 or Pathfinder.
I think AD&D 2.0 is better than D&D 3.0.
I think AD&D is better than AD&D 2.0.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like the sheer amount of splat abilities put out by paizo and the feeling of power creep in traits, feats and spells.

Liberty's Edge

17 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm .... let's see ...

I HATE when people use dopey abbreviations in forums ('prolly' instead of probably, 'pally' for paladin etc)

Bad grammar and poor spelling in forum meassages makes me nuts!

I also HATE gamer/forum slang like glass cannon, meat shield, skill monkey and healbot

I am positively baffled by people who play the same race and class EVERY time they make a new character

I like that paladins are lawful good and can't stand arguments that they should be allowed to be other alignments

Plenty of Third Party Pathfinder material is every bit as good as Paizo's stuff and people who refuse to give it a try really bug me

I can't stand rude, argumentative, combatative people who clearly treat others much worse in online forums than they would in person

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

1. I love splat books, and hate adventure paths.
2. I don't care for golarion as a campaign setting.
3. I wish we would have gotten epic instead of mythic.
4. I get tired of the same old power creep and rules bloat arguments and see no proof for the existence of either.
5. I think pushy elitist GM's with a my way or the highway attitude, are whats really destroying the hobby.
6. I wonder what happened to just sitting around the table and having fun.

I'm not looking to start a fight, everyone has the preferences and should feel free to express them, it's just how I feel sometimes.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I love fighters and rogues, and no, I don’t multiclass or use archetypes.

I HATE dinosaurs, unusual races as PC's (catfolk, Kenku, etc.), Eberonn, and Steampunk.

I loathed Rise of the Runelords. The pace and plot threads worked terribly in my opinion and I hope

Spoiler:
Karzoug drops a meteor on Sandpoint and/or it gets pulled into the mists. Insert Domain Lord Bruthazmus.

The following classes are banned when I DM: Gunslingers, Summoners, Ninja, and Samurai. If the latter two were being used in a different thematic flavor (like a desert shadow cultist, or elven devotee of the sword for example) that’s fine. What actually happens is the table having to listen to your horrendous anime "accent". Double NO for Ninja aspirants who don’t know who Sho Kosugi is.

Paladins will always be Lawful Good to me, and should be played as if they were the epitome of military officer. If this engenders confusion, watch Band of Brothers for details, particularly for Captain Winters.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

I am destroying the hobby by not automatically allowing any race any player wants to play. The one wookie rule is awesome.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I greatly dislike Golarion (goblins included) and generally don't like adventures set in Golarion (incuding adventure paths). I ESPECIALLY hate rules being introduced in such. (Especially important rules.)

I generally prefer 3pp to Paizo products. Their products are smaller, more focused, and often times of at least equal quality.

I hate it when people try and read more into abilities then claim the ability is broken. Seriously, just read what is written there and do what it says, no more, no less.

I hate it when people try and act like races designed with the ARG are inherently balanced. The ARG race builder is horrible for balance. (Though it is a good starting place for ideas.)

I think Paizo sometimes makes terrible decisions and will ignore them at will.

I know the limitations of Pathfinder and despite that I actually like the majority of it and think people who don't should play a different game rather than ranting about it on the forums.

If we are in a debate, I don't think it is my job to coddle you or try and make you feel that your ideas are good and have worth. That's your parents' job. The fact that we are debating something generally means I feel you are wrong.

I hate it when people ask a rules question, get an answer they don't like, then want to argue or complain about it. Or act like because we tell them the rules we're anti-fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zombie Ninja wrote:


I'm not looking to start a fight, everyone has the preferences and should feel free to express them, it's just how I feel sometimes.

Yeah a thread were every post is correct!!

Golarion is really high powered, at least 1 in 20 can cast spells and PCs can have permanent magic items often before they reach 2nd level.

Give up with the Lovecraft 'homage'...the setting is nothing like that

There are 300+ gods, some walk the earth, some were men just a few years back, their weakest clerics can cast water creation all day long......enjoy that its not grim and gritty and have the peasants played like the world they live in.

APs....great in theory but meh in practice...do the authors know each others email addresses?

PCs are way more important than NPCs. Give the PCs choices, that is the heart of a rpg

Do not give the PCs illusion of choice. Make the choice count for something

The Power Creep has been insane and very fast

A feast, where the food is poisoned, how original!

Ditch the factions in PFS, increase choice and consequence, and let that be reported.

3PP is good. They can pitch outside the box...you can quibble on their spells, feats, classes etc but the adventures are often top notch

I like the Cover. This is not a 5-star review

I hate the cover. This is a not a 1-star review

I dont like RoTRL

That will do for now

Shadow Lodge

I don' tthink the Slumber Hex is overpowerd and combat ending, especially since it only lasts rounds per level and is disspelled when the target takes any damage.

I don't like color spray.

I don't like Black Tentacles.

I don't like obscuring mist unless its used to make an escape.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vincent Takeda wrote:

I like my eidolons to be young, sexy, perky and willing.

Do I win?

You should meet our summoner vincent, the only person I've known who WANTED the cursed belt of gender switching.

So, for my own:

I've never played in RL, only through roll20 (haven't been here for long)

I really dislike elves. No elves please.

I'm generally sick of the medieval fantasy setting. Gosh darn it, how hard is it for you to send me to mesoamerica? Or the crossroads of the world? Anywhere in asia/africa? Or at the very least keep us out of dungeons/caves/etc.

I enjoy the profusion of feats/traits/classes. It allows me to create a character I feel is mechanically unique. Although I will agree there's potential for abuse, I'd rather convince other players not to be inconsiderate rather than give us less choice. (same goes for the race builder)

I hate the way the game makes it absolutely necessary to have magic items. A level 20 non-caster is unfortunately rubbish without items, and I think that should not be the case.

Though this wont get me in trouble I expect, the high level spells should get some limits. More of them should get high material cost/long casting time to make sense for me.

I've never DMed but it sounds awesome. (I'm DM-ing my first game, in Dungeon world, in 2 weeks. super excited)

If I do DM, I'm likely to be very intolerant of inconsistent player behavior. Please, play the character. That's also the only excuse there should be to kill a player. That, or just being consistently unwise. I dont think somebody should be annihilated for a few bad dice rolls.

I also dislike vancian spell casting. I think sorcerers and wizards should be mechanically identical (though I do think wizards should get something extra, since high charisma is infinitely more useful that high intelligence in any kind of role-playing). I also think 4e did it relatively well with at-will/encounter/daily spells. Wizards are still useful after running out of dailies. (Note: this is the best example I've found. It makes low-level character have more spells, high-level less, so I would reduce the power differences a bit :http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=17 )

I like the rogue, but I find the mechanics of the game (IE, hit points) makes it impossible for them to do their best (IE, stabbing them in the throat while flat footed would KILL ANY HUMAN).

I also hate experience points. I believe levels should only be gained at significant plot points/ players doing something awesome.

I love the roll-playing vs role-playing pun.

I love myconids. I will never willingly kill a myconid.

I enjoy making very un-optimal characters, but I've yet to find a game where I could play one. (sad)

Well, that's what I've got for now and I've only been playing for a couple of months. Cant imagine how I'll feel in a couple of years.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like Tieflings.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

I HATE not being able to wear metal armours with my druid. HATE IT!!!!

You can kill all the animals both beautiful and wild, wearing their rotting hide for protection. You can also go off chopping down all the trees you see, to char and twist and fashion them into mockeries of nature for your own personal protection.

But whenu mine ores and craft ingots out of solid ground, hurting no living thing, melt it down and craft metallic armor and the moment you put it on, you're no longer a druid.

Druid Logic: you can wear stuff as long as something died to craft it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kittenological wrote:

Druid Logic: you can wear stuff as long as something died to craft it.

I totaly agree with you, but I dont like druids enough to care much unfortunately.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I hate halflings

I love gnomes

I like multi-classing for flavor


gourry187 wrote:


I like multi-classing for flavor

This made me think of another thing: I dont like how multiclassing works. One or two level dips can be useful, but just in a mechanical sense. Any kind of long term multiclassing just makes you utterly rubbish in combat from what I can gather. I wish d&d 2.0 multiclassing still existed.


williamoak wrote:
I enjoy making very un-optimal characters, but I've yet to find a game where I could play one. (sad)

If I start GMing Roll20 games again, you'd be welcome to play one in one of my games. We generally have very unoptimized groups.

Although, there may be some elves :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I play DnD Next's organized play campaign and love it.


In_digo wrote:
williamoak wrote:
I enjoy making very un-optimal characters, but I've yet to find a game where I could play one. (sad)

If I start GMing Roll20 games again, you'd be welcome to play one in one of my games. We generally have very unoptimized groups.

Although, there may be some elves :P

Well, PM me if you have the chance. I have far too much time on my hand right now.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Kretzer wrote:
I also think Organized play is not healthy for the game...it should be a great tool to bring new people into the game...instead it becomes the only game in town for people.

This, more or less. It should be healthy and be a primary point of entry for new players. In my experience, it's the only way I've been able to get some people to pretend like they were paying attention to the game for more than an hour in a given day.

Generally, 3pp is a decided good thing.

@Williamoak: Good luck GMing!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Elusive Trout wrote:
I think every party should get teamwork feats so that they have an incentive to keep their fellows alive.

I personally think Teamwork feats should be on a system where they are given to the party as a whole, rather than making people burn Feat slots for something that they have no guarantee other characters in the party will have, thus making them useless.

Have a "Party Level" that goes up the more adventures you spend together. So that it actually seems like the party is becoming a closer knit group.

I love the soulknife for being a Non-caster Psionic. It is the only reason I have psionics books.


Fig wrote:


@Williamoak: Good luck GMing!

Thanks fig! While I havent seen it in play yet, but I feel like DMing taps into my interests of acting, storytelling, and improv. Especially the improv.


I'm against any ability that lets you add a stat other than strength to melee weapon damage.

I'm against any ability that lets a melee character full attack and move more than a 5 foot step. *cough* pounce *cough*

There isn't a single book (not even the CRB) that I allow at my table without changes.

I enjoy high level games.

I love spelljammer and desperately want to see good rules for space galleons in pathfinder.

Golarion does very little for me as a setting.

- Torger

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I really do not like Golarion as a setting. Aroden is kind of boring, Prophecy is cool, the Pathfinder Society is not, things like that.

In PF, the game seems to be based on the "No, but you could have done this instead" rather than the much cooler "Yes, but. . ." philosophy.

I think that 3.5 was better, (more balanced, and allowed for more options), but that doesn't mean PF is bad. I just think that most of the time for every improvement here, they had to steps back there.

While I like some Archtypes, they are not nearly as good as Prestige Classes, and I also think that the way they have been used was not so great. I think that all classes should have pretty close to the same amount of Archtype options, but barring that, the Cleric, Fighter(Paladin Ranger), Rogue, and Wizard(Sorcerer) should be the primary focus.

I don't like the concept of Oracles.

Epic before Mythic. Mythic is cool, but people have been requesting Epic at the top of the list since before Pathfinder was it's own game system.

A lot of what others have said and I favored, but don't want to make a list.

Kill all Catfolk.


zero_traveler wrote:


Have a "Party Level" that goes up the more adventures you spend together. So that it actually seems like the party is becoming a closer knit group.

Ilike your thinking. I think it fits well with the nothion that levels should only be gained at important plot points.


williamoak wrote:
zero_traveler wrote:


Have a "Party Level" that goes up the more adventures you spend together. So that it actually seems like the party is becoming a closer knit group.

Ilike your thinking. I think it fits well with the nothion that levels should only be gained at important plot points.

Haha, the point of the Party level being to Grant said teamwork feats to the whole party.

Claus here has been adventuring with Smythe for YEARS now, and just knows instinctively to pull his buddy out of the way of that incoming arrow.

Likewise, Smythe seems to know just when to duck so as not to be cut in two by Claus' Whirlwind attack.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hunter the Vigil had a mechanic sort of around that concept. You got a separate Team XP that allowed you to devote points to a shared group pool. Things from a base of operations, to unique tactics (powers), and things like that. The cool thing though, was that that's all it could be used for, not for increasing your individual character. If a new character showed up, (like someone died and made up a new one or a new player joined) they didn't get access to any of this until they both trained with the group a while and started to buy in.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like rogues.

I don't think Trapfinding is useless.

I hate DMs that change the mechanics of the game to the point where my character plays completely differently from what I had in mind from when I spent 1-2 hours making him, and really hate when they homebrew damage types that are non resistable and do X00 points of damage a round.

I hate when DMs are so bad that someone in the group is forced to play a dedicated healer without wanting to be one.

I hate when DMs try to please everybody and are pushovers that let other people at the table be bigger munchkins than I ever would want to be... sure your lvl 9 alchemist can make a bomb that does 260 (two-hundred sixty) d6.....

I hate Stormwind fallacy.

I never do voices or change my modern vernacular when I play characters; only when I DM, so a lot of my characters sound like cocky @$$holes.

I hate point buy systems, and I hate when all things are compared to it to determine balance when obviously I am trying something other than point buy because I didn't like how it balanced.

I have never played 4e.

Paladin is my favorite class, and I don't think it would be bad for the game if their alignment was "any good" and I still don't think it would be bad if they could use their smite on anything they judge to be doing wrong. That army of orcs is pillaging, and raping, too bad they are all CN...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love high stats, and high powered characters - even in low levels.

I love splatbooks.

I hate the "fear of death" in a game, I prefer a "fear of failure" - death is not the only fail state. I've never killed a character in over 20 years.

Spelljammer is the best setting. Golarion is a close second.


zero_traveler wrote:


Haha, the point of the Party level being to Grant said teamwork feats to the whole party.

That's quite a good idea, but sometimes, I get the impression that the feats are designed for the NPCs. Often, the require 2 people with similar builds to function. Some, like bodyguard, are quite nice however.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Mhoram wrote:

Spelljammer is the best setting. Golarion is a close second.

I agree on spelljamer. Planescape, Eberron and the Forgotten realms are all equally in second for me, though I've only played them in video games (and not P&P).

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1) I hate psionics and I'm glad Paizo doesn't have a psionics book and hope they never come up with one.

2) I hate furry PC races. I generally dislike non-standard PC races unless the campaign is specifically built around non-standard PC races.

3) I don't think monks are broken. When FoB was ruled to work like TWF, I didn't see a problem with that.

4) I like wizards, and like universalists.

5) I think martial/caster disparity arguments are made by whiny people who are not happy with their life.

6) RAW as a rules argument is a myth (actually, that's not an opinion, that's a fact).

EDIT 7) My suspension of disbelief of magic, dragons, and giants is not broken by applying real-world understanding of gravity, physics, death, or other comparable real-world topics to the gaming world.

Liberty's Edge

11 people marked this as a favorite.

I think what is actually holding the hobby back from having a broader audience is that many of the stereotypes about gamers having poor social skills and poor hygiene are too often true.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like the ranger. I think favored enemy is too broad and you'll hardly ever use it without aspell to change it.

I hope the Battlerager is med BAB and 6th lvl spells, not full BAB and 4th lvl spells. I hate classes with 4th lvl spells.

I think the cleric needs to have more.

I think most domain abilities suck.

I don't care for divine casting.

Im an atheist when it comes to believing in the god wizard.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

In a world where magic is reliably reproducible, it will become an analogue for technology. Thus, magic item shops and custom magic item creation services will be the norm. And I love that.

In a world where each character class is so customisable that no two PCs need to be alike (c.f. 1st ed, where the only difference between fighters was the name), I hate it when each persons idea of what a paladin should be becomes the idea that any other way of playing one is wrong.

I loathe point-buy.

I love martials.

I love PrCs.

I hate that people invoke RAW to insist that something should be run in a way that doesn't make sense when there is an equally valid interpretation of the RAW which does make sense.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

(I didn't know we could do lists.)

I love Paladins! And I've never had one fall!

I call Pathfinder D&D.

I don't know what vancian spell casting is.

I don't know why someone would have multiple flies that you would point out as being down.

I consider myself to be a better gamer than you.

I like exotic races for me but not when you use them.

I hate when someone compares any PC class to commoner.

I have not played any RPG other than D&D.

I love when people use my full fake name on the forums.

I'm not sure what the point of this list is anymore.

I like to agitate people but don't consider myself to be a troll.

I constantly make jokes (and quote Monty Python) during games and will stop the game to tell you about the great movie/book/whatever I just saw/read/whatever.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
I hate that people invoke RAW to insist that something should be run in a way that doesn't make sense when there is an equally valid interpretation of the RAW which does make sense.

I want this on a T-Shirt.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I actually WANT the classes to be unbalanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had some more ideas:

Balanced players are always more important than a balanced game system.

At least once, I want to try an all-dwarf party campaign. Seriously. And dwarves in the discworld sense, where female and male are functionally identical in appearance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think the summoner is broken.

I love 3pp.

I hate breaking the game down into math. Role playing should be a balanced experience (25% combat, 25% role play, 25% story progression, 25% character progression) and character concept, development, and style is everything.

I hate color spray and don't think black tentacles is the best spell ever.

I hope Paizo NEVER makes an artificer. I think alchemist is close enough.

I like guns in my fantasy, as well as eastern styles characters (samurai for example) so long as it fits the concept.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that many PFers would ultimately be happier playing 4e, but I find comments to the effect of "Go play 4e if you want game 'balance'!" to be incredibly narrow-minded.

Rynjin wrote:
I like Eberron. I think it's a cool setting. Unfortunately, it's associated with 4E, so I may as well have just shoved rabid weasels down my underpants.

*whispers* Eberron began in 3.5.


Another one: I'd love to play pre-made setting (Eberron, Planescape, etc.) but I dont think I'd ever want to GM in one.

51 to 100 of 4,499 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Confessions That Will Get You Shunned By The Members Of The Paizo Community All Messageboards