| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
GM: "I appreciate it when my players track Wealth-by-Level (WBL) and correct me when I haven't provided them with enough treasure."
I actually asked my Excel-savvy player to code up a Wealth calculator for the spreadsheet character sheets my group uses (since we all play online via MapTools, all our character sheets are up on Google Drive) so I could better keep track of what kind of cash and gear all my players had >_> because for a while in my Kingmaker game they were painfully far behind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I know that a lot of GMs really are concerned about WBL. But there are always at least two player-posted, "This AP sucks! It doesn't give me WBL!" threads for every, "Do I need to add treasure to this AP?" thread.
As I've posted elsewhere, WBL makes me wince because many players treat it as an absolute right, rather than a general order-of-magnitude guideline.
I figure if I'm between 0.5x and 2x WBL, I'm doing just fine... and some of the APs have PCs at far less than that at certain points, then make up for it later.
It all works out in the end...
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I am sorry for all my activities on these boards lately. I am really not a black magic specialist, and if your marriage needs help, you will be better off asking a relationship therapist."
"My, Pathfinder is such a simple game I'm beginning to wonder if we ever needed messageboards in the first place!"
"Aasimars are the worst race, by far."
"The classes are so well balanced, there is no reason to play one class instead of another."
"I think they should change the feat progression back to 3rd edition's 1 for every 4 levels. It's not like there's much use in having a bunch of extra feats anyways."
GM: "I appreciate it when my players track Wealth-by-Level (WBL) and correct me when I haven't provided them with enough treasure."
Heh. I actually force my players to track their WBL, and give themselves new items (or upgrade existing ones) if they're under par. The only catch is that if they go over budget when finding new stuff, they lose the excess.
"I think they should change the feat progression back to 3rd edition's 1 for every 4 levels. It's not like there's much use in having a bunch of extra feats anyways."
Actually I think they should go back 2nd editions feats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"The commoner class is really lagging behind the power curve of newer classes. I sure hope the Advanced Class Guide gives us a shiny new alternative!"
Commoner has been b0rken since 3.0, long just part of the designers' inherent "Linear Experts, Quadratic Commoners" bias. I'm gonna preemptively ban the Advanced Commoner Guide before Paizo even considers writing one.
Wait, what was 2nd Ed's system?
There weren't any. (I really hate the whole idea of feats.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Heh. I switched from D&D to Runequest back in '78 because we hated the whole, "If you're high enough level, you can fall off a cliff into a river of lava, wade out, and be fine," aspect of D&D, while Runequest was extremely appealing with its whole, "You get better at what you use," advancement track and its vast assortment of available skills.
So I love the skill system in Pathfinder, because it harkens back to my RQ days while still allowing you to build PCs who can level mountains.
But yeah, the feats definitely have a "feast or famine" feel to them as some PCs have all their feats booked up for "essential" feats to be effective at what they do (my life oracle, for example), while other PCs can take "whatever seems cool" at the moment because their class abilities more than make up for "wasted" feats (my barbarian, for example). And while virtually all of the skills show up at some point during an AP, there are many feats that are just pointless, and others that you pretty much have to take in order to be effective. (Power Attack, anyone?)
Honestly, I'm still loving Pathfinder, but yes, after getting through 3 full APs over the last 3 years and still having to look up rules on a weekly basis, you realize just how arcane some things are...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"why does that orthos person have so many avatars? they never add anything to the discussion."
>.>
Patrick Curtin has more than I do
<.<
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Here, by popular request, is my highly detailed house-rule system on gourmet cooking in Pathfinder..."
You really don't know my group if you believe THAT'S never come up.
I have to provide full menus for both the Blue Bunyip and Rusty Dragon.
*SIGH*
Makes me drool.
well maybe i shouldn't base my rules interpretation on what gives me the biggest mechanical advantage...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, really, I shouldn't have the win. I don't deserve it, and will now stop posting in this thread.
Isn't the fact that whatever you post in here is now posted on the messageboard, pretty much contradict the point of this thread?
I think we count as irregular, by any definition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the fact that whatever you post in here is now posted on the messageboard, pretty much contradict the point of this thread?I think we count as irregular, by any definition.
I use the bathroom every day, and am therefore regular by at least one definition.
You know, I think this axe has been sharp enough for a while now; I better stop grinding it.
I have something useful and relevant to say about this thread and here it is:
"That reminds me of this over-saturated current meme/cat video/pop culture reference... I'll just link to it yet again- {rolls natural 20 on Will save} -Nah, I think we're all sick of it by now. Sorry to bring it up."
"I brought up a point in high post thread and the idea was determined to be ridiculous by nearly every poster in that thread. I'm not going to make my own thread now about this idea and try to prove how awesome/accurate/right I am!"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I just discovered that our GM has interpreted one of the rules far too leniently, and as a result my fellow players and I have been trampling encounters using a method that wouldn't actually work. I shall draw the correct, more stringent interpretation to my GM's attention forthwith, and no doubt my fellow players will applaud my sense of fair play."
I've done this one. I don't think I posted about it, though.
And nobody was upset with me because I do the same regardless of who benefits from the incorrect ruling. Being known as fair and impartial defuses a lot of anger on this kind of thing...
"Oh look! A new option! This will most certainly enhance our games, and does not look like Balance Armageddon at all!"
"Our party has nothing but bards in it. Please advise."In an amusing bit of synchronicity, I'm currently playing in an all Bard party. Working out okay so far. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"That is so interesting, I never thought about how the paladin code of conduct could interact problematically with various views of real world morality. Thank you so much!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I'm sorry, I didn't intend to completely misrepresent your position. In fact, the only thing your opinion and my misrepresentation have in common is sentence structure. Once again, I'm sorry."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never have to worry about my wallet/purse/bank account because nothing in the Paizo store ever tempts me.
Oooo, a whole cave full of fluffy squeaky bats! I must hug them and pet them and squeeze them and call them George! SQUEEEEEEE!
Yay, another awesome thing happened to me today! Thanks, Cosmo!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Although the official clarification ended up favoring my personal interpretation of the rule, I have to admit that the other interpretations were equally valid a priori and people could have supported them by an honest reading of the text and not because they were filthy rules abusers".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Tammy didn't do it"