...You understand the problem with saying that 5e fixes MCD by giving the Fighter spellcasting, right?
Problem (well, one of the problems) with 5e is that their answer to the disparity is entirely subtractive. They tone down the power of casters but don't bring up martials to be any more interesting; a 5e martial looks utterly bland next to a PF Barbarian built only with the core line, not even getting into splatbook options.
5e caster's aren't toned down, they just no longer depend on cheese. They have fewer more powerful spells and can't have as many of them active at the same time. Spells are also crafted not to completely invalidate skills, mainly through the concentration mechanic preventing combo-ing.
5e martials can do more. You don't need 13 int and 3 feats to fail at tripping. You have a good chance to trip foes at level 1 through level 20. Martials also get improved action economy over casters. Your high level fighter is going to be roughly two rounds ahead of the caster for a serious combat, while the caster is dropping one of their high level spells and then some cantrips or damage.
5e's flaw and strength is it's improvised action/skill system. The intent is to just try to do things and let the rules/DM decide what happens. If you want to play with just safe explicit mechanics, you'll be bored. This also highlights 5e's subjective nature. It's a less interesting game to theorycraft or make builds for, but I personally have more fun playing it. All the classes do more not less, even if their builds aren't as stimulating as PF's.
...You understand the problem with saying that 5e fixes MCD by giving the Fighter spellcasting, right?
Yes, and do you understand the problem with having a narrow view of what it means to be a fighter?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, and do you understand the problem with having a narrow view of what it means to be a fighter?
"A great warrior who is not a spellcaster" doesn't seem very narrow to me.
Whether you give the fighter the ability to teleport by punching through the dimensions or performing a ritual out of a book - the effect is the same. It's all magic whatever you want to call it. I know which I would prefer though, based on my fantasy influences and traditions.
Yes, and do you understand the problem with having a narrow view of what it means to be a fighter?"A great warrior who is not a spellcaster" doesn't seem very narrow to me.
We are talking about ritual magic, not spells cast during combat.
...my group once did this crazy experiment where rogues got to use d8's instead of d6's for sneak attack dice. It was crazy.
...didn't solve nothin' tho'....
Whether you give the fighter the ability to teleport by punching through the dimensions or performing a ritual out of a book - the effect is the same. It's all magic whatever you want to call it. I know which I would prefer though, based on my fantasy influences and traditions.
And yet many here have repeatedly said neither of those is what we are looking for.
We are talking about ritual magic, not spells cast during combat.
I'm relatively sure spellcasting is spellcasting. It doesn't matter if it's not in combat, it's still casting spells....
I mean god. Is it that hard to think people might want a decent fighter to still look like a fighter. Rather than "Fighter who casts spells" or "Fighter who is a mage but is reflavoured".
Problem (well, one of the problems) with 5e is that their answer to the disparity is entirely subtractive. They tone down the power of casters but don't bring up martials to be any more interesting; a 5e martial looks utterly bland next to a PF Barbarian built only with the core line, not even getting into splatbook options.5e caster's aren't toned down, they just no longer depend on cheese. They have fewer more powerful spells and can't have as many of them active at the same time. Spells are also crafted not to completely invalidate skills, mainly through the concentration mechanic preventing combo-ing.
5e martials can do more. You don't need 13 int and 3 feats to fail at tripping. You have a good chance to trip foes at level 1 through level 20. Martials also get improved action economy over casters. Your high level fighter is going to be roughly two rounds ahead of the caster for a serious combat, while the caster is dropping one of their high level spells and then some cantrips or damage.
5e's flaw and strength is it's improvised action/skill system. The intent is to just try to do things and let the rules/DM decide what happens. If you want to play with just safe explicit mechanics, you'll be bored. This also highlights 5e's subjective nature. It's a less interesting game to theorycraft or make builds for, but I personally have more fun playing it. All the classes do more not less, even if their builds aren't as stimulating as PF's.
So a return to the old days, when you decided to do something and the GM .. or DM in those days .. decided what happened. The more things change.
The problem is that, at least going by these and other boards, many players dislike allowing the GM that sort of power over them and their actions. The idea is good, but you have to have trust and a degree of cooperation that is sadly lacking at some tables.
Regardless, this isn't about the good or bad old days or even 5E, which has its own problems now and undoubtedly as it grows. It's about, at least from the OP, dealing with this in Pathfinder.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...this one time, at martial camp...
Trust... Cooperation... GM power... You would think from some of the forums that these things were anathema. Why trust the DM when you can mandate a rule for every eventuality?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Trust... Cooperation... GM power... You would think from some of the forums that these things were anathema. Why trust the DM when you can mandate a rule for every eventuality?
Well to be fair, in order to cut down on table variation. Add into that the age-old tale of someone getting burned once to often by that darn GM or that darn player and you can see where it starts to fall apart.
Having a rule for many eventuality gives many players a sense of comfort in knowing what they can do and feeling a bit more in control of the situations they encounter.
@Aelrynith: Yeah, I know about as much about Hercules as I could gather from that show he did what came on after Xena on Saturday mornings here in Sweden as a kid. I just grasped at what I thought, vaguely, might be some kind of universal reference.
Yeah, I probably should at that, read up on my European mythology, that is. I''ve only done courses on Norse Mythology, Egyptian Mythology and Folklore at uni, so my knowledge of that stuff is pretty sketchy. I do have to say though, that I think us Scandinavians have our own version of the M/CD. I mean, Tor (or Thor, as I suppose the yanks call him) is the ultimate barbarian. If you need someone killed, shouted at or drunk under the table, he's your guy. He's not really a min-maxer though, more of a beer'n'pretzels kinda guy. Oden (Odin, Othinn, take your pick, he has like 200+ other names) on the other hand, oh boy. No wonder people up here didn't so much worship as cautiously appease him. One of his Old Norse names ("Ygg", whence whe get "Yggdrasil", the "steed of Ygg") means "fear" after all. There's an optimized wizard if I ever saw one. Every story about this dude is about him going on some quest to level up and get another magic item/pet/miscellaneous other upgrade....
...what were we talking about?
Greek myths are extremely easy to find. Actually, a lot of Egyptian myths 'borrowed' Greek myths and just changed the gods involved.
as for Odin...if you read some REAL legends books on Odin, he was originally just another bloodthirsty nature deity you satiated by hanging defeated warriors from oak branches. His eight-legged horse, Sleipner? That's a euphemism for the legs of the four men who carry a dead warrior in a coffin or on his shield. Odin was a bloodthirsty god of death in battle, through and through.
Find a book on Greek mythology, and just sit down and read the stuff.
as a bonus, you'll suddenly recognize all those characters Kratos kills in the God of War series, and realize where all those classic monsters in the game actually come from. Probably half of the classic monsters are straight out of Greek myth.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am aware of Oden's origins within Germanic mythology. I was talking primarily about the role he had in viking society. That dude was a tricksy powergaming munchkin sonofab&*&# if ever I clapped eyes on one. Which is obviously suitable, because that's what you'd expect out of an iron age king. I'm not familiar with these God of War games whereof you speak (aside from recognizing that they exist), but I'll have a look.
EDIT: Oh, wait, I should've clarified, my bad, apologies. I've only done a course on, like, you know, Ancient Egypt before the rise of Greek civilization.
Wasn't ancient Egypt around 2,000 years before the Dark Age of Ancient Greece.
Problem (well, one of the problems) with 5e is that their answer to the disparity is entirely subtractive. They tone down the power of casters but don't bring up martials to be any more interesting; a 5e martial looks utterly bland next to a PF Barbarian built only with the core line, not even getting into splatbook options.5e caster's aren't toned down, they just no longer depend on cheese. They have fewer more powerful spells and can't have as many of them active at the same time. Spells are also crafted not to completely invalidate skills, mainly through the concentration mechanic preventing combo-ing.
5e martials can do more. You don't need 13 int and 3 feats to fail at tripping. You have a good chance to trip foes at level 1 through level 20. Martials also get improved action economy over casters. Your high level fighter is going to be roughly two rounds ahead of the caster for a serious combat, while the caster is dropping one of their high level spells and then some cantrips or damage.
5e's flaw and strength is it's improvised action/skill system. The intent is to just try to do things and let the rules/DM decide what happens. If you want to play with just safe explicit mechanics, you'll be bored. This also highlights 5e's subjective nature. It's a less interesting game to theorycraft or make builds for, but I personally have more fun playing it. All the classes do more not less, even if their builds aren't as stimulating as PF's.
So a return to the old days, when you decided to do something and the GM .. or DM in those days .. decided what happened. The more things change.
The problem is that, at least going by these and other boards, many players dislike allowing the GM that sort of power over them and their actions. The idea is good, but you have to have trust and a degree of cooperation that is sadly lacking at some tables.
Regardless, this isn't about the good or bad old days or even 5E, which has its own problems now...
If this was a game quality discussion we could hash out the nuances of this approach.
For C/M problems this approach tends to open up more possibilities to those that have the best access to improvisation. In 5e, martials have the best access to this through skills and better action economy.
This was my last attempted at addressing C/M within PF(I'm most proud of my homebrew fighter rewrite)
If I did it now, I may focus more on unchained action economy and automatic bonus progression.
|
A lot of the feats you need to make martials viable are just basic combat rules in 5e. You don't need anything to get a full move and full attack, you just do.
5e really isn't a "build" game, it's a play at the table game. Lots of AD&D assumptions are reimagined in a cleaner way. All the skills you think you need? Most times, your character can just do it, with varying degrees of success. All the feats you think you need? Just do it.
3x exists for people that want character building to be what defines your character. 5e exists to let what your imagination comes up with at the table to be your character. 5e is just cleaned up old school play. Pathfinder is a continuation of build play. Both are fun, 5e just works better for people with less preo time and less need for the sheet to define the character. Different games for different approaches.
|
|
As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a huge barrier to having well reasoned conversations about this kind of thing is that a lot of people have blind faith in RPG developers. If the developer for a game tells them something about their game is true (like, for example, martials and casters are more balanced here, or that your character can do X thing effectively) they'll take that at face value and not question it... even when cursory analysis of the rules tells you that their claims are blatantly false.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?
I did say this and other boards. But to answer your question, people come here and post all sorts of things here, from exclaiming the accolades of 5E to openly telling the very company hosting the forums how much they suck. Very little gamers do surprises me anymore.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?
Not sure about that. All signs point to 5e tanking pretty hard. Their release schedule is barren, the entire D&D department is less than two dozen people (a lot of people got culled in their seasonal downsizing), all of their products are constantly going on sale, and WotC hasn't announced any concrete numbers. It's highly reminiscent of 4e's release, and it was stunningly tiny compared to the numbers 3e boasted.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?I did say this and other boards. But to answer your question, people come here and post all sorts of things here, from exclaiming the accolades of 5E to openly telling the very company hosting the forums how much they suck. Very little gamers do surprises me anymore.
When a lot of people put a ton of work (and paid real money for the soft cover Beta test), then were told the "we just fixed it at the table" faction won (as in, the beta test was a pointless waste of time and money), I think people earned the right to complain a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When a lot of people put a ton of work (and paid real money for the soft cover Beta test), then were told the "we just fixed it at the table" faction won (as in, the beta test was a pointless waste of time and money), I think people earned the right to complain a bit.As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?I did say this and other boards. But to answer your question, people come here and post all sorts of things here, from exclaiming the accolades of 5E to openly telling the very company hosting the forums how much they suck. Very little gamers do surprises me anymore.
A bit, perhaps. It's been years, however, and some of the same people (and new ones) are doing the same old complaining. I was here, I paid my money, I have my beta test copy. Sometimes you don't get everything that you want. Sometimes you make your own happiness.
That is what we're doing, theoretically, on this thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Grenades do at most 3d6 damage (which scales into worthlessness) and explode after 1d3 rounds. It's trivial to just walk 10 feet away from them while they're sitting on the ground and be totally unaffected, too, since you get at least a full round of actions before they explode.
It's an old debate, but that doesn't mean that there isn't anything of merit left to say. It's this or go back to discussing how paladins fall or why people dislike alignment or how to best play Batman/a jedi/whatever.
|
As to most people on these boards not wanting that type of play, well, they're on the boards of a company publishing the most recent iteration of 3x. So, that's kind of like saying "water is wet". Judging from sales and meetup posts, a lot if people like kicking it old school, so why would they post on forum discussions of a new school game?Not sure about that. All signs point to 5e tanking pretty hard. Their release schedule is barren, the entire D&D department is less than two dozen people (a lot of people got culled in their seasonal downsizing), all of their products are constantly going on sale, and WotC hasn't announced any concrete numbers. It's highly reminiscent of 4e's release, and it was stunningly tiny compared to the numbers 3e boasted.
5e is the fastest seller in all four of the LFGS I visit. Pathfinder books aren't being stocked in two of them any more since they have so much old stock that just wont shift.
Mind you, that could be due to the PDF availability of Pathfinder.
Interestingly, two of those FLGS have games running regularly. More 5e running that Pathfinder.
In Brisbane, as far as I know, there's only one place running PFS. I had set up about 4 pathfinder groups at my local game shop. Two of them are still going, which is really cool, but the other two swapped to different systems completely. One is 5e the other is something I don't remember.
5e seems to be doing fine. I believe the slow release rate is deliberate to tell the truth. And for my group we're very happy since it actually gives us plenty of time to finish campaigns before the next release. Also, there's plenty of stuff released for free on their site, including new races etc for Eberron and other stuff.
I wouldn't go around sprouting the game is tanking without hard evidence. I'm not saying its selling amazing, but my local gaming scene has it kicking other roleplay games all over the place in terms of local sales and games being played. That's slightly more evidence than "their release rate is slow so they must really be in trouble"
|
|
ok dude, level 10, core +apg races, any paizo, 62k gold, no more than 25% on one item.
Leadership is banned
LETS RUMMMMBLEEEE
Change that to anything Paizo releases as free rules on the Paizo sites PRD.
D20pfsrd releases stuff from AP's and setting books that aren't actually free play. Not sure how they keep getting away with it honestly.
Anyho, if this is a challenge on the rules Paizo releases as core game, it shouldn't include setting only content. Since the rules cater for all settings, not just Golarion.
Doubt that will change much in what you're hoping to achieve, but it removes blood money at least. Probably a whole bunch of other stuff that can abused easily when taken out of context and setting as well.
Whether you give the fighter the ability to teleport by punching through the dimensions or performing a ritual out of a book - the effect is the same. It's all magic whatever you want to call it. I know which I would prefer though, based on my fantasy influences and traditions.And yet many here have repeatedly said neither of those is what we are looking for.
We are talking about ritual magic, not spells cast during combat.I'm relatively sure spellcasting is spellcasting. It doesn't matter if it's not in combat, it's still casting spells....
I mean god. Is it that hard to think people might want a decent fighter to still look like a fighter. Rather than "Fighter who casts spells" or "Fighter who is a mage but is reflavoured".
Fair enough, suit yourself. Ritual casting is an option for fighters, it is not mandatory.
14 more points and I could have pronounced a winner.
A shame really.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a huge barrier to having well reasoned conversations about this kind of thing is that a lot of people have blind faith in RPG developers. If the developer for a game tells them something about their game is true (like, for example, martials and casters are more balanced here, or that your character can do X thing effectively) they'll take that at face value and not question it... even when cursory analysis of the rules tells you that their claims are blatantly false.
Are you talking about this thread? The assumption in this thread is overwhelmingly that the designers have created a problem that did not exist (or at least was lessened) in previous versions like 1e and 2e.
|
|
how long is the span of the battle, is this head to head arena style combat, or a no rules just kill the other guy.ok dude, level 10, core +apg races, any paizo, 62k gold, no more than 25% on one item.
Leadership is banned
LETS RUMMMMBLEEEE
How about as a random stumble across each other while both doing some sort of dungeon crawl. There's a few different sites that generate random dungeons and the critters that live in them. That way, you are prepared for your crawl, and just happen to meet a rival Player trying to steal the same stuff you are.
I can generate one from DonJon if you like and want to keep it more secret. This means things like pre prep for what's in there is more real than just fight an arena.
Alternately, do an arena built for magic where people can watch safely.
So arena is surrounded by walls of force, dimensional anchor is in play as part of some sort of hallow effect for example. You can teleport etc within the arena area itself, but can't leave the confines of the battle space. Things ported in are dimensional locked until destruction as well.
The arena is scattered with terrain to look like some sort of ruins in a forest clearing. Difficult terrain, walls for height, stairs running inside ruined towers for height, the occasional force wall as remnants of some sort of remnant magical rooms etc.
Certainly an open bare arena of infinite distance etc sounds pretty rubbish. Do something more in line with how this might play out in a setting.
I'm sure we could wrangle up a map even.
|
|
Change that to anything Paizo releases as free rules on the Paizo sites PRD.D20pfsrd releases stuff from AP's and setting books that aren't actually free play. Not sure how they keep getting away with it honestly.
I'm not sure what you mean by "free play", but d20pfsrd uses exclusively Open Gaming Content. They "get away with it" by adhering to the terms of OGL and the Pathfinder Compatibility License.
Paizo has released almost all of their rules as Open Gaming content--the only exception I know of is the Coeurl, and that was because they got one-time permission to publish it from the copyright holder.
Paizos rules are all open content.
Paizos content about Golarion are not. You'll find anything not setting specific on the PRD for this website. If it's not on the PRD then Paizo consider it Golarion specific.
CWheezy seems to be setting this up in complete advantage for a wizard. Take everything, even feats and spells only used by rune lords or other rare things. Open arena of barrenness. At least he's set a hard top of 50 feet.
Let's set a hard time of 3 minutes prep since it's an arena as well. You step in with just you and carried equipment. Have three minutes to prep in the arena, then combat starts.
Plenty of time for buffs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ugh, how many times do we have to explain that a character's ability to 1v1 another character is besides the point and that debate helps exactly no one
Ugh, how many times do we have to explain that a character's ability to 1v1 another character is besides the point and that debate helps exactly no one
More, we're so close.
So................close.
Ugh, how many times do we have to explain that a character's ability to 1v1 another character is besides the point and that debate helps exactly no one
If this was the only way to have a viable character we'd have no dedicated support monkeys like myself.
|
|
Ugh, how many times do we have to explain that a character's ability to 1v1 another character is besides the point and that debate helps exactly no one
Meh, this is just two guys testing their character building stuff. If they have fun let 'em go. No one thinks it's going to fix anything or prove a point one way or the other