Something wrong with Pathfinder updates. Really.
Sorry for my english, it is not my native language.
Maybe, I don't understand some new features, but why you need to nerf old features NOW? There were a lot of updates in Pathfinder RPG, but there always was an ERRATA sign. Now there is no even signs.
For example:
- Litany of Sloth - 3 years we were playing this spell WITHOUT Saving Throws. Now I can see it on Pathfinder OGC with "will negates" without ERRATA sign.
- Mutation Warrior - it was mutagen on first level, now it is on 3rd.
- Wild Whisperer - without Large or Huge wild shape, before it was like 4 levels later.
Fix of orcish witch doctor...
Here is a question: why? If it is all about balance - it's nice, but when a new shiny swashbuckler is in game - where is a balance? Come on. :) Or other hybrid classes with new feats, what is much more powerful then "core" classes.
Yes, you can say: you can ban it at your table or keep classes at their first rules editions, and we do so. But new updating character generating programmes are based on new rules. Something is missing, somewhere it is ignored.
And, maybe, one more question: if there is ONE PLACE on this site or other Pathfinder sites that will give me the latest infromation of such errata - can you, please, show me this place?
Thanks!
Quoted from the Pathfinder Reference Document:
The Pathfinder Reference Document contains all errata to the Roleplaying Game line of products as of 9/30/2015, and errata from the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Technology Guide as of 12/16/2014. For detailed errata PDF documents, please visit the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Free Resources page.
Simple: Pathfinder Society. See, the game masters of this organized play section of Pathfinder aren't allowed to house-rule or deviate from the established script in any given module. So, when players find an inventive and powerful combination of items or feats or whatever that Paizo has made perfectly usable and available, instead of tweaking things in the module to match the capability of any given group they nerf the entire set of 'problematic' spells and abilities into the ground. It's like how PvP ruined everything else in WoW "because muh balance!"
Also, check the top-right side of the page. The link that says "Help/FAQ" will take you to an FAQ page. Along the right-hand side are links to their various hard-cover books for which they've published errata of one kind or another.
And don't worry, your English is just fine.
Balance? Come on.
We are talking about druid, that can not wild shape into elemental. INSPIRATION, so he needs also a high INT ability. He recieves ability to wild shape into large animal 4th levels later.
But no, hi is nerfed. And litany of sloth is nerfed. Like Titan Mauler was nerfed, and then unnerfed again :)
It's not about balance. Balance ended for me at Advance Class Guide.
Duelist prestige class allowed you to parry after full attack only, instead of attacks, swashbuckler can do it mostly for free instead of AoO. From first level. And gets improved critical on 5th level for free. And damage from DEX (inflation of damage from DEX on game now, i think. It's not a good idea to be stron at all). Or a possibility to take a feat that allows you to get sacred bonus to saving throws from CHA, like paladin, when you are ORACLE, for example. Just one feat.
I'm confused about "fixing" those things, thant works pretty well.
Even old things, that work bad (Cavalier's charge from order of the Swrod with 400+ damage, for example, or rain of bombs from Alchemist) still exist.
Swashbuckler being overpowered seems to me a novel opinion on this board.
Ok, forget about swashbuckler.
Cavalier (Order of the sword) + Beast Rider (Griffon, for examle).
All ability scores to STR. Then give a good belt to your companion.
+40 and more on attack roles, 200+ damage with lance.
Add mythic here, and you will think about balance like I did ;)
For me disbalance is not in the game (because GM creates a game and can fix it, CR does noot work at all, so we need to do it by ourselves), it's in the PARTY.
And when somebody takes corebook fighter (or rogue, or barbarian), and somebody takes hybrid class (or advanced class guide archetype or feats) - I can not just make a good fighting encounter, because enemys will kill them, or one hybrid character will be the first sword in every battle.
And when somebody takes corebook fighter (or rogue, or barbarian), and somebody takes hybrid class (or advanced class guide archetype or feats) - I can not just make a good fighting encounter, because enemys will kill them, or one hybrid character will be the first sword in every battle.
Here are some approaches:
1) If both players are happy with the situation, it's ok. Not everyone wants to be Mr Most Damage.
2) Give the Core fighter / rogue / barbarian more powerful items.
3) Give him a more important role at roleplay, e.g. he is the lost prince or attractive to the women.
4) Ask him to modify the character, help him with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Swashbuckler being overpowered seems to me a novel opinion on this board.
It'd be a novel opinion anywhere.
Simulacrum doesn't get change because it's outside the normal levels that PFS runs. It's as simple as that.
It'd be a novel opinion anywhere.I prefer the term "hilariously incorrect" myself. Why can't we just let the Swashbuckler rest in peace rather than spitting on its grave?
Simple: Pathfinder Society. See, the game masters of this organized play section of Pathfinder aren't allowed to house-rule or deviate from the established script in any given module. So, when players find an inventive and powerful combination of items or feats or whatever that Paizo has made perfectly usable and available, instead of tweaking things in the module to match the capability of any given group they nerf the entire set of 'problematic' spells and abilities into the ground. It's like how PvP ruined everything else in WoW "because muh balance!"The problem with this approach is that it's done specifically for PFS, which is very much not the typical game you'd play with your buddies. I would not entirely disagree with this approach if it didn't seem like their choices in errata were so utterly sporadic, such as the adjustments to weapon cords and abundant ammunition, yet Simulacrum is still a thing that exists.
And you are completely capable of NOT using it in your home game.
PFS is basically the game they intended for the rules to be. It is Golarian, and if the rules aren't working as they want them too, it is actually their game to change. They just let us use them.
Way too often posters complain about changes Paizo makes, as if they are messing with their game. They aren't, they are adjusting their game, you just happen to be using their rules. If you don't like them, don't use them. If you are playing PFS, you literally signed up for it, to use someone else's rules with specific circumstances and rulings. Even above and beyond the "normal" rule set (PFS restrictions etc).
I imagine PFS drives A LOT of business. And home games are free to do what they want regardless. What is the point in complaining about it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And you are completely capable of NOT using it in your home game.
PFS is basically the game they intended for the rules to be. It is Golarian, and if the rules aren't working as they want them too, it is actually their game to change. They just let us use them.
Way too often posters complain about changes Paizo makes, as if they are messing with their game. They aren't, they are adjusting their game, you just happen to be using their rules. If you don't like them, don't use them. If you are playing PFS, you literally signed up for it, to use someone else's rules with specific circumstances and rulings. Even above and beyond the "normal" rule set (PFS restrictions etc).
I imagine PFS drives A LOT of business. And home games are free to do what they want regardless. What is the point in complaining about it?
Then why don't they at least leave the initial, un-nerfed version some of us were enjoying on the PRD somewhere? When they change it, they change it EVERYWHERE. If you don't own the books, good luck finding the correct wording of the original spell/item/feat/whatever. You might be in a game and bring up the PRD or d20pfsrd to reference something, only to find that the element in question is now very different and doesn't make sense anymore. Thus, you're forced to rewrite part of your character / adventure as part of this change you didn't even know happened.
I would not entirely disagree with this approach if it didn't seem like their choices in errata were so utterly sporadic, such as the adjustments to weapon cords and abundant ammunition, yet Simulacrum is still a thing that exists.
Wait, abundant ammunition changed? What happened there? There doesn't appear to be an FAQ entry for it.
Might as well mention- the mutagenic warrior thing was because the original version was kinda wonky as far as archetypes go.
The mutagen replaces a 3rd level ability (armor expert), and most of its later abilities stay in line with the replaced ability. So they just pushed the benefit to stay in line with the rest of the archetype.
Sure, there might have been someone doing or asking abotu something, and the devs though "huh...yeah, that is kinda weird...."
Honestly, I hardly think of it as much of a nerf. Unless you were only dipping fighter, then this shouldn't be too much of a concern. At level 1 and 2, fighters are fairly 'good' by the sheer virtue of having full BAB and decent weapons. Not barbarians levels, but not "well, I shot my spell, might as well grab the crossbow" level of wizards.
And honestly...mutagens seem like a hassle first two levels. 10 min/level, but 60 min to make them. So you might not find much room to use them more than 1 or 2 times a day. At least with 30 minutes, I can get fairly well into actual work.
I am not too sure if this is a problem with nerfs, and more sloppy editing when they first released the things.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then why don't they at least leave the initial, un-nerfed version some of us were enjoying on the PRD somewhere? When they change it, they change it EVERYWHERE. If you don't own the books, good luck finding the correct wording of the original spell/item/feat/whatever. You might be in a game and bring up the PRD or d20pfsrd to reference something, only to find that the element in question is now very different and doesn't make sense anymore. Thus, you're forced to rewrite part of your character / adventure as part of this change you didn't even know happened.
Maybe if you ask nicely, they'll refund the fees you've been paying to use the PRD. :)
Maybe if you ask nicely, they'll refund the fees you've been paying to use the PRD. :)
Then why don't they at least leave the initial, un-nerfed version some of us were enjoying on the PRD somewhere? When they change it, they change it EVERYWHERE. If you don't own the books, good luck finding the correct wording of the original spell/item/feat/whatever. You might be in a game and bring up the PRD or d20pfsrd to reference something, only to find that the element in question is now very different and doesn't make sense anymore. Thus, you're forced to rewrite part of your character / adventure as part of this change you didn't even know happened.
Y'know, I get that you're joking, but that's actually not a bad idea. Fees for certain Pathfinder content, that is. Put Golarion-specific and softcover material online behind a pay-wall and make money off of those that might want to read the material but don't want to buy a book or manage yet ANOTHER entry in their already ginormous PDF library. At $3-5 a month, Paizo could make some decent money this way. Hell, Marvel comics is doing something like this and it's apparently working well for them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And you are completely capable of NOT using it in your home game.
PFS is basically the game they intended for the rules to be. It is Golarian, and if the rules aren't working as they want them too, it is actually their game to change. They just let us use them.
Way too often posters complain about changes Paizo makes, as if they are messing with their game. They aren't, they are adjusting their game, you just happen to be using their rules. If you don't like them, don't use them. If you are playing PFS, you literally signed up for it, to use someone else's rules with specific circumstances and rulings. Even above and beyond the "normal" rule set (PFS restrictions etc).
I imagine PFS drives A LOT of business. And home games are free to do what they want regardless. What is the point in complaining...
What's the point in complaining about people complaining about it? What's the point in anyone ever expressing any displeasure ever?
Once they put it out on the market as a product with customers to keep happy they gave anyone who shells out money to them the right to complain whenever they want to. If this was a hamburger and some waiter came along and switched out your patty while you were eating it because their 'Burger eaters club' had decided beef was unpalatable because it was stealing attention away from the lettuce you took off your burger because you don't like it you wouldn't be all 'Well it's the restaurant's burger I guess I'ma eat this.' Your fine with the changes ? That's awfully nice for you but how about you let people with problems and displeasure express it and if it bothers you that much I guess you just stay off threads that *obviously* contain posters complaining about that sort of thing rather then drop in on them just to condescend to people who have a different viewpoint from yours... But... First world problems amirite?
@ Cerberus7 - The PRD is the official rules.
Paizo hosting multiple versions of the official rules on their own website seems like a terrible idea. Especially when the PDT has judged the prior rules to be errors.
And so the PRD represents the rules that Paizo is putting into print at this time, and which you would get if you buy a current Paizo product.
WotC did something similar with 4E - once they changed something, the D&D Insider Rules Compendium changed to reflect it and the old version was gone. (Though 4E rules actually changed at a faster pace - there were often monthly errata updates to the D&D Insider Tools. And then of course 4.5 (Essentials) happened, and big chunks of 4E got rewritten at once.)
3.5 was functionally an edition change that overhauled huge stretches of the system.
Though I wonder if they actually had to the leave the 3.0 SRD up because of contractual obligations - there was a LOT of 3rd party material that had been published under 3.0.
Frankly, none of Pathfinder's erratas are on the scale of the 3.0 to 3.5 jump.
I suppose that if Pathfinder actually puts out a second edition, then it would make sense for Paizo to leave the final PRD online for archival purposes, and start a second PRD for the new edition.
Great news for me: crane wing was nerfed, now it just adds 4 dodge bonus from one attack. Ok, say NO for stopping cavalier's charge -_-
I'm just talking about "hey, can we just make a thread, where new features of the game an errata will be discussed?". Maybe, even a forum.
We really need a thread, where game developers can find some information about REAL disbalance in game, to nerf that needs to be nerfed, not titan mauler or wild whisperer, or crossbows, or litany of sloth :)
3.5 was functionally an edition change that overhauled huge stretches of the system.
Though I wonder if they actually had to the leave the 3.0 SRD up because of contractual obligations - there was a LOT of 3rd party material that had been published under 3.0.
Frankly, none of Pathfinder's erratas are on the scale of the 3.0 to 3.5 jump.
I suppose that if Pathfinder actually puts out a second edition, then it would make sense for Paizo to leave the final PRD online for archival purposes, and start a second PRD for the new edition.
As a big user of it back in the 3.0 and 3.5 days, d20srd.org is a spiffy site, but it's actually a fan site owned and created by Jans Carton and not affiliated with Wizards (you can check the notes at the bottom of the site).
In my view there are two issues which make me think the current approach is the best way to go.
First is the relative sizes of the two groups. Paizo need to weigh the benefit derived by those fans who'd like to see archived copies of every printing of every rulebook and multiple versions of the PRD versus the inevitable confusion caused by more casual gamers trying to look something up.
However, I suspect there's professional pride involved also. Regardless of how the changes are received on the forums, Paizo clearly think the most up to date version of the rules is superior and the 'official position' as to how Pathfinder is supposed to be played. I can imagine not wanting to appear to be endorsing what they consider an inferior product (perhaps 'inferior' is too strong, I can't think of avbetter label..).
The way I'd think about it, if RAW (or even RAI) was meaningful to me, the most up-to-date, official position would be the only one that mattered. If I regarded the published rules as more of a toolset to start building my game from then multiple interpretations/options would be nice, but not really a great drama, since my table already has rules ambiguity to resolve anyhow - which printing is right for us seems no more important than whether we use magic item availability rules or not.
Having said that, a historical, not particularly obvious, section of our downloads giving access to every printing from when we purchased a PDF onwards doesn't seem like a big deal, to me. I don't think that would cause much confusion and would hopefully involve minimal ongoing work for the tech team. Although I grant that setting it up from here might be a big deal.
As a big user of it back in the 3.0 and 3.5 days, d20srd.org is a spiffy site, but it's actually a fan site owned and created by Jans Carton and not affiliated with Wizards (you can check the notes at the bottom of the site).3.5 was functionally an edition change that overhauled huge stretches of the system.
Though I wonder if they actually had to the leave the 3.0 SRD up because of contractual obligations - there was a LOT of 3rd party material that had been published under 3.0.
Frankly, none of Pathfinder's erratas are on the scale of the 3.0 to 3.5 jump.
I suppose that if Pathfinder actually puts out a second edition, then it would make sense for Paizo to leave the final PRD online for archival purposes, and start a second PRD for the new edition.
I don't know why you assumed d20srd.org was being referred to. It is more popular from what I can tell than Wizard's SRD.
However, WotC still hosts the official Revised System Reference Document (3.5) and...last I checked they also hosted the original SRD, but I don't have its location saved 'cause I only play 3.5 and WotC keeps reorganizing their website.They also still host the 4th Edition System Reference Document, but it's not the same thing people normally mean when they talk about SRDs (it has an extensive list of terminology that you are allowed to reference when publishing under the revised GSL, but not the actual rules of the game.)
Neat! I didn't actually know that was still there.
Hey, Chris...could you please PM/e-mail me copies of the two posts of mine you deleted from this thread? I normally archive my posts on this forum, but I forgot to save those two before you had deleted them. (I'm not sure where to ask you since you don't seem to receive PMs).
(And don't worry, I have THIS post saved:))
Thanks.
Emailing community@paizo.com is a reliable way to reach Chris/Liz.
Having said that, I think anyone with moderator privileges can still see your posts, so it probably doesnt need to be them specifically, if that helps.