| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.
That's why they nerf martial options such as CW into uselessness while giving casters things like Dazing Spell. It's also why we still have what... 15 Hexes that don't even specify their range... Including the rules-clusterf##% that is Icy Tomb.
Which is disappointing... I'd like to think that they at least care about having clear and concise rules.
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.
I think this sadly is pretty much accuarate.
...even though they care enough about it make a living our of it ...
Dude, I have a degree in Linguistics and parsed this more than 10 times. I still have no idea what you were trying to say. Please try again.
Edit: @manimal, Thank you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.
That's why they nerf martial options such as CW into uselessness while giving casters things like Dazing Spell. It's also why we still have what... 15 Hexes that don't even specify their range... Including the rules-clusterf*!+ that is Icy Tomb.
Which is disappointing... I'd like to think that they at least care about having clear and concise rules.
May I just remind everyone that Paizo is active and listening to feedbck on the boards? That's why there are the playtests and FAQ options. That's why you see Jason and JJ and SKR others post in various threads, even ones that DON'T bear their names which are pretty much part of their job descriptions now. They can and do listen and talk with us, we just don't always agree with them.
I believe the problem is that they're not the same behemoth that WotC grew to be, so they don't have sufficient people to throw at every problem they encounter. IIRC, Sean has touched on this, albeit in a somewhat sarcastic manner, in the past. Which is fine (the Paizo being small, not the sarcastic bit), WotC got so big they eventually decided they didn't care what their player base with D&D liked, they weren't gonna listen or support it thoroughly. Paizo doesn't do that; in fact, they do the opposite. 4Es online character generator tool was great, right up until WotC intentionally trashed it. The PRD, otoh, has been made completely free to use and has options from almost every hard-bound book they've done. Paizo has their own problems, but I don't think complete apathy towards player concerns and interests is one of them. When you put out as much content every year as they do, things fall through the cracks. Having minor screw-ups that require errata isn't a symptom of a company that has tossed the very idea of balance aside, it's a sign of being human. For all I can see, the lack of ranges on witch hexes might be one of the worst cases of "Do now, fix later" from them, but that's not a game-ending problem.
Also, let's not turn this into another Crane Wing rehash. Much as I opposed that change, it'll just get Chris to come back here and lock the thread for going off the rails one too many times.
Now, all that said: Paizo, I meant what I said earlier. Your priorities for errata DO seem a bit...off. We love house-ruling your game, but it'd be great to see how these options are supposed to work in the base system. If we could see less of the "Let's take something that doesn't need changing and nix it somewhat" and more of the "This spell doesn't specify you can't hit an entire country with it when it really should", that'd be awesome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...even though they care enough about it make a living our of it ...Dude, I have a degree in Linguistics and parsed this more than 10 times. I still have no idea what you were trying to say. Please try again.
He left out a 'to' and said 'our' instead of 'out'. I hope that degree wasn't expensive. =P
He left out a 'to' and said 'our' instead of 'out'. I hope that degree wasn't expensive. =P...even though they care enough about it make a living our of it ...Dude, I have a degree in Linguistics and parsed this more than 10 times. I still have no idea what you were trying to say. Please try again.
Apparently... I need coffee.
That's pretty much what I said in a previous post, Cerberus Seven.
Paizo does make amazing books... But they also often publish some awful errata.
Instead of (often unecessarily) nerfing stuff, I think they should focus more on clarifying how things like Icy Tomb works. I pretty much ignore all errata about things like CW and TWF with a 2-handed weapon and armor spikes, because I think they reduce the game's variety and players' fun. But that's easy. There is still a clear rule on how that stuff works, even if its a house-rule.
But when there are rules that I have no idea how they are supposed work (e.g.: Icy Tomb), that's more of a problem, since different players and GMs can have completely different views on how it should work.
Personally... Since I'm not sure how Icy Tomb works, I'd say it has a Range of 30ft and the effect lasts for 1 round per Witch level (after that, the magic ice simply melts) or until someone (the victim or someone else) manages to break (or dispel) the ice prison (usually through a Strength check), whatever happens first. Attacks to the ice prison also work, but they deal half damage to the entombed creature as well.
Might even make add an improvised rule about fire-based attacks dealing extra damage to the ice without increasing the damage dealt to the entombed creature...
|
That's pretty much what I said in a previous post, Cerberus Seven.
Paizo does make amazing books... But they also often publish some awful errata.
Instead of (often unecessarily) nerfing stuff, I think they should focus more on clarifying how things like Icy Tomb works. I pretty much ignore all errata about things like CW and TWF with a 2-handed weapon and armor spikes, because I think they reduce the game's variety and players' fun. But that's easy. There is still a clear rule on how that stuff works, even if its a house-rule.
But when there are rules that I have no idea how they are supposed work (e.g.: Icy Tomb), that's more of a problem, since different players and GMs can have completely different views on how it should work.
Personally... Since I'm not sure how Icy Tomb works, I'd say it has a Range of 30ft and the effect lasts for 1 round per Witch level (after that, the magic ice simply melts) or until someone (the victim or someone else) manages to break (or dispel) the ice prison (usually through a Strength check), whatever happens first. Attacks to the ice prison also work, but they deal half damage to the entombed creature as well.
Might even make add an improvised rule about fire-based attacks dealing extra damage to the ice without increasing the damage dealt to the entombed creature...
Careful Lemmy asking for clear and concise errata is now considered whining and complaining dont you know.
Well, balance is an illusion anyway. It's only maintained by constant adjustments. Now, changing the weight you're balancing constantly exacerbates the situation, but that doesn't make it any more of an illusion.
I would say it deiferently. Balance is not a thing per se, it is attitude, it is a constant and never ending work. As in (more or less) the words of some poet whose name I do not remember, It is like the horizon, you walk taoward it but you can never reach it, and you ask then what is the point of it? the answer is that it help you to walk.
Why the heck did the weapon cord / free action thing come up, anyways? I didn't follow the debate that closely. Where did they get the data from that stated this was all sorts of broken? More PFS bringing it to their attention?
Yup... Because of a single character build, Paizo decided to nerf every martial class out there... Kinda like when they pretty much broke mounted combat as a whole just out of fear of AM BARBARIAN.
-.-'
Yup... Because of a single character build, Paizo decided to nerf every martial class out there... Kinda like when they pretty much broke mounted combat as a whole just out of fear of AM BARBARIAN.
-.-'
Well, to be fair they then let them pounce with weapons in the same FAQ.
To be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
The problem is not weapon cord though, the problem are weird mechanics for guns and other ranged weapons in general that make then need a voley of shots in order to be viable.
Well, to be fair they then let them pounce with weapons in the same FAQ.Yup... Because of a single character build, Paizo decided to nerf every martial class out there... Kinda like when they pretty much broke mounted combat as a whole just out of fear of AM BARBARIAN.
-.-'
"Let".
Nothing in the wording of Pounce says it can only done with natural weapons. all they did was not nerf it into uselessness.
To be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
Ahem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPw
See, when people take the time to PRACTICE, and customize their equipment, they CAN do all sorts of crazy stuff. Just because a dev can't do it, (Or is possibly jealous of people who can) is no reason to penalize the FANTASY characters that could. Why not go full bore and say that since wiggling your fingers cannot make lightning or acid fly out, magic will be nerfed too?
Well, now give him two ancient gun that he need to reload afther every shot and we will have a proof for weapon cord in PF!
Well, to be fair they then let them pounce with weapons in the same FAQ.Yup... Because of a single character build, Paizo decided to nerf every martial class out there... Kinda like when they pretty much broke mounted combat as a whole just out of fear of AM BARBARIAN.
-.-'
"Let".
Nothing in the wording of Pounce says it can only done with natural weapons. all they did was not nerf it into uselessness.
That was the kind of FAQ that was more a ruling than a clarification, they removed the original intention (natural weapon) of the rage power in order to allow manufactered weapons.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your characters are literally superhuman after a certain point. It's mind boggling to me that a PC at the height of physical perfection being able to accomplish seemingly impossible tasks is silly, but making people trip balls with rainbows from your hands isn't.
That was the kind of FAQ that was more a ruling than a clarification, they removed the original intention (natural weapon) of the rage power in order to allow manufactered weapons.Well, to be fair they then let them pounce with weapons in the same FAQ.Yup... Because of a single character build, Paizo decided to nerf every martial class out there... Kinda like when they pretty much broke mounted combat as a whole just out of fear of AM BARBARIAN.
-.-'
"Let".
Nothing in the wording of Pounce says it can only done with natural weapons. all they did was not nerf it into uselessness.
However, not even the Bestiary version of Pounce says anything about being limited to natural weapons.
Paizo should stick to clarification FAQs and avoid rules-changing FAQs as much as possible. It'd be best for all parts involved.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm... Wasn't really familiar with this hex before reading this post, and yeah it definitely seems like there's a lot that could be clarified about this hex. It's seems easy enough to decipher what it is meant to do, but the presentation just seems... sloppy. It kinda reads like an sub-par RPG superstar entry, that would have been picked apart and summarily rejected. Cool idea, but terrible execution.
I tend to feel a lot of FAQ candidate threads are borne from willful ignorance, but if anything needs some errata, this certainly does.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.
Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
To be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
The problem is not weapon cord though, the problem are weird mechanics for guns and other ranged weapons in general that make then need a voley of shots in order to be viable.
Yeppers. But the change didn't affect any martial PC's in any games I have played in. And since spellcasters could use weapons cords also (and I have seen theorycrafted builds where they rapidly switch out rods/wands/staff and still keep a hand open for spellcasting, i dunno why everyone is claiming its' such a huge nerf to martials.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
You can't care about balance and ignore things like 25% of witch hex, let dazing spell slide, but come down like a ton of bricks on crane wing.
What they care about is PFS, the actual Pathfinder RPG is an afterthought.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeppers. But the change didn't affect any martial PC's in any games I have played in. And since spellcasters could use weapons cords also (and I have seen theorycrafted builds where they rapidly switch out rods/wands/staff and still keep a hand open for spellcasting, i dunno why everyone is claiming its' such a huge nerf to martials.To be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
The problem is not weapon cord though, the problem are weird mechanics for guns and other ranged weapons in general that make then need a voley of shots in order to be viable.
I don't see that as really a nerf to spell casters. At all. For the most part casting is a standard action so you can afford to spend a move getting the appropriate tool out, as opposed to the martial guy who needs to full attack or suck.
Also changing it from a swift to a move action lets your caster get of a quickened spell now in the same turn he used his cords.
Just because a dev can't do it, (Or is possibly jealous of people who can) is no reason to penalize the FANTASY characters that could. Why not go full bore and say that since wiggling your fingers cannot make lightning or acid fly out, magic will be nerfed too?
Where is the cite that "Just because a dev can't do it" they changed weapon cords?
Everytime I see crud like this, it turns out some one is taking some comment WAY out of context.
Ahem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPwTo be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
*gobsmacked*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just because a dev can't do it, (Or is possibly jealous of people who can) is no reason to penalize the FANTASY characters that could. Why not go full bore and say that since wiggling your fingers cannot make lightning or acid fly out, magic will be nerfed too?Where is the cite that "Just because a dev can't do it" they changed weapon cords?
Everytime I see crud like this, it turns out some one is taking some comment WAY out of context.
Jason tied his mouse to his wrist and attempted to grab it. After a few minutes he decided the action wasn't swift enough and decided it should be a move action.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
Yeah, it's pretty harsh. But "harsh" is not the same as "untrue" or "rude". I'm just saying it as I see it.
And honestly... Paizo could use a little more harsh (but civil) criticism to counter the unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related I see in this forum.
Yeppers. But the change didn't affect any martial PC's in any games I have played in. And since spellcasters could use weapons cords also (and I have seen theorycrafted builds where they rapidly switch out rods/wands/staff and still keep a hand open for spellcasting, i dunno why everyone is claiming its' such a huge nerf to martials.
Changing it to a move action actually benefits casters, since now they can cast two spells and still get to change rods between them. All that said...
Oddly enough, I think the weapon cords errata ended up being a good change, although for completely wrong reasons.The ruling was made to counter TWF-Gunslingers... I GMed for one of those and never had any problem dealing with him, despite the fact that it was a pretty optimized character. Simply staying in melee or out of him (very short) range was easy enough.
What made the combat ruling a good thing is the fact that it rewards combat maneuvers a little bit more. Seriously, if you put 2~3 feat into being good at disarming someone, it should at least cost your target more than 1sp and a swift action to recover... Changing it to a move action at least makes it so that maneuver-focused characters can at least deny their enemies a full attack.
What made the combat ruling a good thing is the fact that it rewards combat maneuvers a little bit more. Seriously, if you put 2~3 feat into being good at disarming someone, it should at least cost your target more than 1sp and a swift action to recover... Changing it...
I'd rather houserule that disarm successes also snap the weapon cord. Of course I also ignore any bad Paizo errata. In my games if anyone rolled a witch I'd go in and change the unfinished hexes to be consistent with other hexes.
|
|
And honestly... Paizo could use a little more harsh (but civil) criticism to counter the unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related I see in this forum.Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
Was "unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related" directed at me?
Jason tied his mouse to his wrist and attempted to grab it. After a few minutes he decided the action wasn't swift enough and decided it should be a move action.Just because a dev can't do it, (Or is possibly jealous of people who can) is no reason to penalize the FANTASY characters that could. Why not go full bore and say that since wiggling your fingers cannot make lightning or acid fly out, magic will be nerfed too?Where is the cite that "Just because a dev can't do it" they changed weapon cords?
Everytime I see crud like this, it turns out some one is taking some comment WAY out of context.
Cite? I mean cite that this was why they changed the rule? Because the insane stuff a gunslinger could do with that is why they changed the rule.
Was "unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related" directed at me?And honestly... Paizo could use a little more harsh (but civil) criticism to counter the unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related I see in this forum.Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
It could be directed at a multitude of people on this forum. If you think it describes you then it likely does.
|
|
What they care about is PFS, the actual Pathfinder RPG is an afterthought.Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
Oh, come on. With all due respect, that's a pretty ridiculous, or at least somewhat naive thing to say ...
Cite? I mean cite that this was why they changed the rule? Because the insane stuff a gunslinger could do with that is why they changed the rule.Jason tied his mouse to his wrist and attempted to grab it. After a few minutes he decided the action wasn't swift enough and decided it should be a move action.Just because a dev can't do it, (Or is possibly jealous of people who can) is no reason to penalize the FANTASY characters that could. Why not go full bore and say that since wiggling your fingers cannot make lightning or acid fly out, magic will be nerfed too?Where is the cite that "Just because a dev can't do it" they changed weapon cords?
Everytime I see crud like this, it turns out some one is taking some comment WAY out of context.
What insane stuff? You mean full attack? Who cares if a gunslinger full attacks? Everyone can full attack.
And honestly... Paizo could use a little more harsh (but civil) criticism to counter the unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related I see in this forum.
I have seen very little [i]civil [i/] criticism posted here, and if the criticism was more civil maybe you'd get less defending. heck, I said this needed to be answered. I even went to the original Rules Question thread and hit the FAQ button.
But whinging on about weapon cords (which hasn't nerfed anyone but insane gunslinger builds I can see) and crane wing (which was causing problems in PFS) and making rude comments about the devs is NOT helping and NOT civil.
*gobsmacked*Ahem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPwTo be fair, dual wileding gunslingers are silly and weapon cord for 11 shots in six seconds is uber silly.
Awesome. Yeah I'm definitely gonna say that superhuman gunslingers using older weapons can reload a single shot much faster and achieve that.
As for the rest of the thread. I am disappointed that stuff like Crane Wing gets errata but Dazing Spell remains a ridiculously powerful option that trivializes encounters.
The FAQ rate has gone down hasn't it?
Here's my citation btw https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1382/06/1382065661218.pn g
Was "unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related" directed at me?And honestly... Paizo could use a little more harsh (but civil) criticism to counter the unhealthy amount of blind fanboyist defense of all things Paizo-related I see in this forum.Truth is, Paizo doesn't care about balance. At best, they care about the illusion of balance... From their PoV, something being overpowered or underpowered doesn't matter nearly as much as if they seem to overpowered or underpowered.Sorry, but that's pretty harsh. I also happen to disagree with you - I think Paizo cares a great deal about game balance, but balance is a very difficult thing to maintain ...
Is there room for improvement? Sure, always. All in all, though, I think Paizo does a pretty great job on that front.
Gives Marc secret "blind paizo fanboy" handshake. ;-)
Here's my citation btw https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1382/06/1382065661218.pn g
Where does that lead?
Where does that lead?Here's my citation btw https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1382/06/1382065661218.pn g
JB's facebook post about tying a mouse to his hand and trying to get it back in his hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where does that lead?Here's my citation btw https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1382/06/1382065661218.pn g
Ok, I downloaded the image and reposted to imgur for you. http://imgur.com/udT2MDa
JB's facebook post about tying a mouse to his hand and trying to get it back in his hand.Where does that lead?Here's my citation btw https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1382/06/1382065661218.pn g
So? Did he say that's why he changed the rule?