Pathfinder Forums Memes that Grind Your Gears


Gamer Life General Discussion

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,247 << first < prev | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | next > last >>

HyperMissingno wrote:
Speaking of links it grinds my gears when I see people improperly link thins on this site. There's a formatting option in the freaking textbox people, click on the show button!

Oh god yes.

It wouldn't be so bad if the page didn't insert a space into the url so you couldn't even cleanly copy/paste it.


thejeff wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
Speaking of links it grinds my gears when I see people improperly link thins on this site. There's a formatting option in the freaking textbox people, click on the show button!

Oh god yes.

It wouldn't be so bad if the page didn't insert a space into the url so you couldn't even cleanly copy/paste it.

So true![/ http ://paizo. c om/thr ea ds/rz s2s0 ns &page= las t?Pathfi nder-F orums-Me a mes-that-Gr in d-Your- Gea rs]

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

The space is actually something that the forum software does itself. Try posting a long url without tags yourself.


Not sure if this counts as "Forum Meme" but it irks me that boobs is fine for the word filter, titties is fine for the word filter, but "t*%#" is not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
Not sure if this counts as "Forum Meme" but it irks me that boobs is fine for the word filter, titties is fine for the word filter, but "t#!+" is not.

Did you try to type Titanic is totally sinking, and it was blocked?

PS:To anyone reading this watch the bolded letters not the phrase.


teats.


sugartits.


sugar-t+%$.

I typed t i t s.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Not sure if this counts as "Forum Meme" but it irks me that boobs is fine for the word filter, titties is fine for the word filter, but "t#!+" is not.

Did you try to type Titanic is totally sinking, and it was blocked?

PS:To anyone reading this watch the bolded letters not the phrase.

Yeah.

How am I supposed to have a conversation about birds now?

Including great t$%&?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Not sure if this counts as "Forum Meme" but it irks me that boobs is fine for the word filter, titties is fine for the word filter, but "t#!+" is not.

Did you try to type Titanic is totally sinking, and it was blocked?

PS:To anyone reading this watch the bolded letters not the phrase.

Yeah.

How am I supposed to have a conversation about birds now?

Including great t&$~?

Stick with the breasted nuthatch. It's a double-entendre you can both enjoy and see in black and white.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tufted Titmouse?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I get annoyed by "RP purists" who believe that having a character that can effectively survive combat means you are being MIN-MAXing munchkin buzzkill...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PIXIE DUST wrote:
I get annoyed by "RP purists" who believe that having a character that can effectively survive combat means you are being MIN-MAXing munchkin buzzkill...

that eats babies.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:
I get annoyed by "RP purists" who believe that having a character that can effectively survive combat means you are being MIN-MAXing munchkin buzzkill...
that eats babies.

USUALLY I can tune that out. However, it does Grind my Gears when a "RP purist" turns out to be terrible at roleplaying.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:
I get annoyed by "RP purists" who believe that having a character that can effectively survive combat means you are being MIN-MAXing munchkin buzzkill...
that eats babies.
USUALLY I can tune that out. However, it does Grind my Gears when a "RP purist" turns out to be terrible at roleplaying.

Your not ROLE playing unless your character has a 12 str as a fighter and has profession baker and has soem OCD quirk about straightening bags of flour...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PIXIE DUST wrote:
137ben wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:
I get annoyed by "RP purists" who believe that having a character that can effectively survive combat means you are being MIN-MAXing munchkin buzzkill...
that eats babies.
USUALLY I can tune that out. However, it does Grind my Gears when a "RP purist" turns out to be terrible at roleplaying.
Your not ROLE playing unless your character has a 12 str 3 in all ability scores as a fighter commoner and has profession baker and has soem OCD quirk about straightening bags of flour...

Fixed that for you!

....wait, was that a "fixed that for you", or was that me stating that "fixed that for you" is a Pathfinder Forum Meme that Grinds my Gears?

Maybe it was both?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

People who believe that if you miss a plus one here or there in character creation and have a less than perfect 'build', you can't survive combat?

Or the concept that if a feat or ability isn't universally useful, it's totally useless?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The idea that a feat can't be bad unless it's literally useless.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Gnome hate.

Seriously, so many people hate Gnomes.

I guess really, this can apply to hatred of any race, but man do Gnomes get it the worst for whatever reason. (Strangely, I see a lot of it for Half-Elves, too.)


EntrerisShadow wrote:

Gnome hate.

Seriously, so many people hate Gnomes.

I guess really, this can apply to hatred of any race, but man do Gnomes get it the worst for whatever reason. (Strangely, I see a lot of it for Half-Elves, too.)

I think it's a holdover from D&D, where gnomes were just the other short race with no real flair, just kinda a mix between halfling and dwarf.

I hated D&D* gnomes, but I like what they did with Pathfinder gnomes. They aren't just crappy dwarf wannabes like they were in D&D. They're an actual race of their own with actual subtext and uniqueness.

*I didn't mind Dragonlance gnomes, which had personality and the tinker thing going, but Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and all the other gnomes were terrible.


I just dislike the shorty races...

idk, Gnomes, halflings, dwarves... never been a fan...


PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike the shorty races...

idk, Gnomes, halflings, dwarves... never been a fan...

and Pixies


Ironically enough I like Fey :P.

Fairies I love... but the "Normal" short races I am not huge on...


PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike... Gnomes

I like Fey :P

Huh?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike the shorty races...

idk, Gnomes, halflings, dwarves... never been a fan...

It's the movement speed. Tactical movement is just too valuable.

Think on this. slow speed is -1 RP, but a fixed feat "fleet" would be 2 RP. There is a clear disconnect there.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike... Gnomes

I like Fey :P

Huh?

Well gnomes are now Quasi-Fey. They are not true fey anymore. And when it comes to Fairies I like... like... FAIRIES, like the traditional fairy (Pixie, Sprite, Brownie, ect.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike the shorty races...

idk, Gnomes, halflings, dwarves... never been a fan...

It's the movement speed. Tactical movement is just too valuable.

Think on this. slow speed is -1 RP, but a fixed feat "fleet" would be 2 RP. There is a clear disconnect there.

Halfling can trade sure footed for +10 speed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I only play as dwarves and halflings:-)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:

I just dislike the shorty races...

idk, Gnomes, halflings, dwarves... never been a fan...

It's the movement speed. Tactical movement is just too valuable.

Think on this. slow speed is -1 RP, but a fixed feat "fleet" would be 2 RP. There is a clear disconnect there.

I wonder if that is to balance that since most Small races are 20ft/round, you have to spend the extra point to get the speed but also the +1 to AC and attack rolls?

thegreenteagamer wrote:

I think it's a holdover from D&D, where gnomes were just the other short race with no real flair, just kinda a mix between halfling and dwarf.

I hated D&D* gnomes, but I like what they did with Pathfinder gnomes. They aren't just crappy dwarf wannabes like they were in D&D. They're an actual race of their own with actual subtext and uniqueness.

*I didn't mind Dragonlance gnomes, which had personality and the tinker thing going, but Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and all the other gnomes were terrible.

I suppose. I actually liked gnomes even in the 3.5 days - one of my first characters ever was a Gnome Cleric of Garl Glittergold. It really seems like most of the hatred is just that they're silly or childish for whatever reason, but I suppose I can understand the hatred for not really doing any schtick particularly well.

Actually I really wish, as Gnomes were the traditional Bard choice from 3.5, that Pathfinder had saved the CHA bonus for them alone and given Halflings INT. +DEX/INT makes halflings the best small race for rogue, magus, wizard, alchemist, witch, investigator, etc. +CON/CHA makes gnomes a great fit for sorcerer, Paladin, cavalier, bard, summoner, and Oracle.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I wrote this for another thread, but it fits perfectly here:

I wrote:

There is also a mythological creature called drow, but they have even less in common with D&D drow than mythological dark elves.

Honestly, I roll my eyes whenever I hear someone complain about drow violating the 'tradition' established by Gygax in the 1970s. Especially if it is accompanied by comments like "why even call them 'drow' if they aren't similar to the drow in previous stories?"
Good question: you should have asked that to Gygax. Or maybe ask Greenwood, he might know. Gygax went against centuries of folkloric tradition by making a fantasy specieces called 'drow' which bare no resembles whatsoever to the previous drow of folklore. That isn't actually a problem, of course--mythology changes over time and from culture to culture. What really grinds my gears is the notion that because one fantasy author decided to radically alter drow, suddenly no one else is allowed to, and all future references to creatures called drow must precisely match those by that one fantasy author, because he was the last person allowed to alter fictional races. And don't even think about using pre-Gygax literature for inspiration.

When Baker was developing Eberron, one of the conditions WotC gave him was that he needed to include the 'traditional' D&D races, including drow. They didn't need to match Faerun drow, but there needed to be a species with the name 'drow'. Baker ended up with something very different than Greenwood: instead of evil matriarchal dark elves who live underground and revere spiders, Eberron drow are neutral dark elves who live in the wilderness above ground, revere a scorpion god, and have no gender-hierarchy. Also, they are the same species as normal elves, just a different race (the real world meaning of race) due to being separated for 40,000 years.

And people complained. They complained that Baker had dared to describe a creature called drow which wasn't identical to a previous author's description. They complained that drow had 'always' been evil matriarchal dark elves who live underground and revere spiders, and that the 'traditional' drow were clearly superior. The same complaints apply to Gygax's drow, which broke even further from prior lore, but the hypocritical defenders of supposed traditional fantasy never seem to direct their complaints at Gygax when he broke with tradition--their complaints are only directed at later authors.

If WotC were to release a new campaign setting in which drow are similar to their folkloric namesake, I'd bet that the same people would be complaining about Special Snowflake 'new' drow destroying the 'traditional' drow.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A forum meme that Grinds my Gears is when someone whines about how terrible one or more guides/handbooks are when they have never read any such guides.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate it when someone creates a topic about something, such as undead mystics, then steadfastly refuses to define what a mystic is. Is it a homebrew somewhere, a third party product, or a class in an upcoming Pathfinder rulebook?

This isn't Twitter! You can give a brief description of the thing. Only then can I offer suggestions about how you might create and play an undead mystic.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay here's one that's been bothering me lately. None of the individual statements in this meme Grind my Gears, it's just when they are all given together by the same person.

In one thread, the following exchange occurs:
Person A: I don't think <game element> was written very well.
Person B: Who do you think you are, critisizing Paizo?!? Paizo is a huge sucess and makes MONEY off of Pathfinder! Unless you've made your own game and sold it and ran Paizo out of business you can't criticize them!

Which is certainly a valid, if unpopular, belief. Until the next thread, when we get the exchange

Person B: 4e kills kittens, and is the worst thing ever! It's a complete failure on every possible level!
Person C: Didn't 4e make money?
Person B: Exactly, it was a total cash grab! They threw away any pretense of making a FUN game that is actually GOOD, and instead made a horrible game to line their own pockets!

Skip a few subfora over to a discussion about non-RPG media, and you hear

Person B: R. A. Salvatore is the worst author ever! Drizzt is terrible!
Person B: Magic: the Gathering is an evil cash grab for a s~@+ty game!
Person B: J. K. Rowling is a talentless hack who can't write her way out of a paper bag!
Person B: George Lucas is worse than Hitler! The Star Wars prequels were the worst movies ever made!
Person B: Twilight Fanboys ruin everything, and Stephanie Myers is just a crappy fanfiction writer!

Whatever you think about their respective qualities, there is one thing shared by Pathfinder, D&D 4e, Magic: The Gathering, the Drizzt books, Harry Potter, Star Wars: the Phantom Menace, and the Twilight Saga: they all made money. As it happens, D&D 4e and Pathfinder are in a very different league than the other things I mentioned, because they have not made nearly as much money as Magic: TG or Drizzt, which in turn have not made nearly as much money as the Star Wars prequels, the Twilight franchise, or the Harry Potter franchise. But they all did make money. If money-making is all it takes to become immune to any and all criticism, then all of those things are immune to criticism. If anyone can be fairly criticized regardless of profitability, then Paizo, Pathfinder, and anything else you personally happen to be a fan of are no exception. You can't have it both ways.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:

Okay here's one that's been bothering me lately. None of the individual statements in this meme Grind my Gears, it's just when they are all given together by the same person.

In one thread, the following exchange occurs:
Person A: I don't think <game element> was written very well.
Person B: Who do you think you are, critisizing Paizo?!? Paizo is a huge sucess and makes MONEY off of Pathfinder! Unless you've made your own game and sold it and ran Paizo out of business you can't criticize them!

Which is certainly a valid, if unpopular, belief. Until the next thread, when we get the exchange

The companies that sell cigarettes make a lot of money. So do crack dealers. Not only is that not a valid belief, IT'S A TRAP!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Goth Guru wrote:
The companies that sell cigarettes make a lot of money. So do crack dealers. Not only is that not a valid belief, IT'S A TRAP!

While I agree with you, what I meant to say (but evidently didn't say clearly enough) is that Person B's first statement is not inherently-contradictory. It is internally consistent, even if though most humans won't agree.

It only becomes inconsistent when Person B starts criticizing other entities which make money.
The use of the phrase 'valid belief' was a mistake on my part.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I used to smoke cigarettes, started in high school, quit 18 over 18 years ago.

It was actually incredibly easy for me, haven't even thought about it:-)


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

Murderhobos.

'E-cigarettes are okay'

Folks who 'white knight' an argument in a thread, but completely miss the point that the person they're championing for was trying to hit.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@137ben.

It's always bothered the certain level of hypocrisy in the hobby. If it's a rpg company or rpg a gamer likes they are above reproach and the greatest thing to the hobby since sliced bread. If it's the opposite then the rpg company they hate killed their favourite puppy while being a greedy money grubbing company. I have seen similar behaviour here and elsewhere. Quite a double standard IMO.

Another thing that grinds my gears. That a rpg company dare to make money. Most rpg companies are not non-profits nor should they be. Of course if one starts a company one wants it to be profitable. Who starts a business and goes "I took out a loan at a bank while investing some of my life savings in this business. I really hope it's not profitable".


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

I think where the breakdown occurs is the distinction between 'making a solid honest profit with cushion for development or unseen future costs' and 'swimming so hard in cash that they have several swimming pools filled with nothing but it and no improvements to the game/system as they do that'.

The one is a respectable, understandable, responsible sort of thing. The other is the stereotype that makes pretty much anyone grind their gears.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really hate it when people make a bunch of f@&+ing aliases.

Especially when they do it specifically to post in some stupid f*~+ing thread.

Man do those people piss me off.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
memorax wrote:

@137ben.

It's always bothered the certain level of hypocrisy in the hobby. If it's a rpg company or rpg a gamer likes they are above reproach and the greatest thing to the hobby since sliced bread. If it's the opposite then the rpg company they hate killed their favourite puppy while being a greedy money grubbing company. I have seen similar behaviour here and elsewhere. Quite a double standard IMO.

Another thing that grinds my gears. That a rpg company dare to make money. Most rpg companies are not non-profits nor should they be. Of course if one starts a company one wants it to be profitable. Who starts a business and goes "I took out a loan at a bank while investing some of my life savings in this business. I really hope it's not profitable".

Tammy doesn't care about profits.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So what if it's a "respectable" amount or swimming pools full of cash. I don't get the sheer dislike by some individuals of a company or a person making a lot of money and profit. If I had a company the more money the better. You think those who work at Paizo are going "damn were making too much money and were not losing any sleep. Were bad people". Another thing that grinds my gears. The disconnect people have between making money and thinking its a bad thing. It's as if some forget they live in one of the more profit oriented, consumer driven, capitalist areas of the world.

I just can't take anyone seriously who expects a person or company to make less money. It's absurd at the least and incredibly naive at worst IMO.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Tammy doesn't like swimming pools.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
memorax wrote:

So what if it's a "respectable" amount or swimming pools full of cash. I don't get the sheer dislike by some individuals of a company or a person making a lot of money and profit. If I had a company the more money the better. *snip* Another thing that grinds my gears. The disconnect people have between making money and thinking its a bad thing. It's as if some forget they live in one of the more profit oriented, consumer driven, capitalist areas of the world.

I just can't take anyone seriously who expects a person or company to make less money. It's absurd at the least and incredibly naive at worst IMO.

One does not work for one of the employers that cuts corners on employee pay/benefits to make MOAR money, does one? One can work all the hours and all the overtime one wants?

One can make a respectable profit while remembering that EVERYONE that goes into making a profit should benefit from the process. Screwing one's workforce so that one can have a fourth house in Cancun? That's where a lot of people get ground gears.

Making money? Sure. Making obscene money by screwing over the people giving it to one either in the form of work or exorbitant prices? Get out. And don't claim 'greed is good' and makes jobs. Because it doesn't.

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,247 << first < prev | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Pathfinder Forums Memes that Grind Your Gears All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.