Your favorite thing that people hate


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 721 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I run into this a lot, not just here but also in my Pathfinder group. What are some of your favorite things in Pathfinder that most other people seem to not like (class, race, mechanic, rule, etc.)?

For me, it's the Kineticist. Obviously not everyone hates the Kineticist, but I do see a lot of moaning and groaning from people here and one or two in my group about the class being underwhelming, too complicated, or any other number of things. Being that it's currently my favorite class that I'm playing/have recently played, I don't really get that. They have at least decent utility depending on their chosen element, great mobility (they can fly indefinitely starting at level 6 as an aerokineticist!), and despite popular opinion have respectable (and most importantly, consistent) damage output. Oh yeah, and they have some pretty sick RP and fluff potential (don't mind me, I'm just over here altering gravity or throwing lighting at that guy AT WILL).


11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

1) CHARACTER BUILD: Hama. One of my favorite characters by far, absolutely love the character, but nobody else seems to. She's even been derisively referred to as little better than a Disney villain. :(

2) CLASS: Kineticist. I like them too, and also seem to encounter a lot of people who hate them, either for conceptual purposes, due to the burn mechanic, or think that they are overpowered.

3) PLAY STYLE: Spontaneous action declarations; essentially trying to do something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them" or "I take out my grappling hook and attempt to snag the flying peryton's antlers so I can pull it out of the sky." Such declarations are invariably followed by multiple complicated nigh-impossible checks from the GM, inevitably results in failure, and then gets me blasted by the other players with responses like "you can't trip multiple people at once" or "why didn't you just shoot the peryton with your arrows instead of acting like a moron?" Far too many people have the "just kill it" mentality and they miss out on a lot of roleplaying fun as a result. What's more, when faced with unusual requests, many GMs go overboard with their rules (decreasing the odds anyone else will try anything similarly fun or exciting ever again) or just plain shut it down.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
...something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them"...

Glorious Leader Gajolob Gorum and Jair mighty warriors invent "swarmbane tables" by flip over, squish many bugs. Is martial area-effect weapon. Much powerful. Who need fireball?


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Multiclassing. People seem to get so spooked by the drawbacks and the violation of supposed "optimization rules" that they won't touch it. Like, say, take a level of a martial class on a Cleric and you've still got Oracle level spells, plus benefits that can be substantial; yet supposedly you've ruined your spellcasting and crippled your character. Cost/Benefit analysis doesn't even seem to enter into it - it's just verboten!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Used to be the rogue for me, but then they unchained it and people got a lot less apprehensive, and also the kineticist was made.

Now it's definitely the kineticist. I don't care if they aren't optimal. They're FUN!

Have played with an electrokineticist, hydrokineticist, and telekineticist so far. I look forward to trying out more kinds.

I do have to agree with BadBird too though. I'm very prone to multiclassing.


Given this forum's reaction to it, warlock. My entire group was baffled by people insisting it was overpowered somehow, and were massively disappointed that the official pathfinder update (kineticist) was hamstrung.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Paladins. There's so much hate on the boards but they're seriously so good. I really don't understand the hate.

Also I agree with Badbird too, multiclassing is fun. I put a 1-level martial dip on almost all my 6/9 casters (BADWRONGFUN!)

Gajolob Gorum Tell me more of these powerful Table-magics? Are they something a Half-Orc Paladin could aspire to?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

My fav thing people hate is posting here.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

The NPC classes.

I think the adept, expert and warrior add real flavor to worlbuild.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

path of war (the whole thing). I love it. lots of people don't.

psionics. I love it. some people don't.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
3) PLAY STYLE: Spontaneous action declarations; essentially trying to do something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them" or "I take out my grappling hook and attempt to snag the flying peryton's antlers so I can pull it out of the sky." Such declarations are invariably followed by multiple complicated nigh-impossible checks from the GM, inevitably results in failure, and then gets me blasted by the other players with responses like "you can't trip multiple people at once" or "why didn't you just shoot the peryton with your arrows instead of acting like a moron?" Far too many people have the "just kill it" mentality and they miss out on a lot of roleplaying fun as a result. What's more, when faced with unusual requests, many GMs go overboard with their rules (decreasing the odds anyone else will try anything similarly fun or exciting ever again) or just plain shut it down.

The tough part about the players doing wacky stuff (at least for me) is that I want to let them do it because it's awesome, but if it's too effective the really awesome one time thing will become just another standard tactic. You let them knock over a table to flatten a charging bunch of goons and it works amazingly well, they'll want to do that every time there's a table nearby. Or, even worse, they'll start carrying around a table for the express purpose of flipping it at people.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Easy. When you post any build that is sub-optimal or that is driven by roleplaying choices, it causes the build oriented people to go crazy because it's not fulfilling their theory crafting or insistence on specialization as the only way to play.

Also Paladins. Paladins are awesome thematically and mechanically. The issue, I think, is that many people play them as Lawful Stupid rather then Lawful Good. They are a good class to boost your roleplaying skills, especially if you're a moral relativist or only see grey everywhere rather then black and white.

Also agree on Path of War, Psionics, Arcanum (aka akashics), monster classes, core only races (boring as hell. Oh look, it's the seventeenth version of an elven ranger or wizard with a bow, or the dwarf warpriest or half-orc barbarian. PASS!), and not using RAW 100% of the time for any discussion. Oh and animate dead/undead creation not being treated as an evil spell.

Lastly, the fighter and the rogue being subpar, and the summoner being overpowered. None of those have ever been true in any Pathfinder game I have played since the start. Apparently I must be just be lucky.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.

2 skill points/level.

Also, Evil spells being Evil actions. And 15 point buy.


Johnico wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
3) PLAY STYLE: Spontaneous action declarations; essentially trying to do something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them" or "I take out my grappling hook and attempt to snag the flying peryton's antlers so I can pull it out of the sky." Such declarations are invariably followed by multiple complicated nigh-impossible checks from the GM, inevitably results in failure, and then gets me blasted by the other players with responses like "you can't trip multiple people at once" or "why didn't you just shoot the peryton with your arrows instead of acting like a moron?" Far too many people have the "just kill it" mentality and they miss out on a lot of roleplaying fun as a result. What's more, when faced with unusual requests, many GMs go overboard with their rules (decreasing the odds anyone else will try anything similarly fun or exciting ever again) or just plain shut it down.
The tough part about the players doing wacky stuff (at least for me) is that I want to let them do it because it's awesome, but if it's too effective the really awesome one time thing will become just another standard tactic. You let them knock over a table to flatten a charging bunch of goons and it works amazingly well, they'll want to do that every time there's a table nearby. Or, even worse, they'll start carrying around a table for the express purpose of flipping it at people.

I love random actions like this despite my group constantly yelling at me for being an idiot. (This stuff has saved them multiple times and my int is 6 on my current character, so screw me. I am stupid) The GM usually finds a way to balance it out. Tables weigh a lot. What is your carrying capacity? Okay cool, you are exhausted when entering the fight, its a large 2H weapon, so take a minus to hit too. Grappling hook? Okay, sounds nice. That cost you a lot of gold, you aren't proficient in it, and you take AoO using it.

There are ways to balance random actions. They generally only work once anyways unless you are always bar fighting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Declaring minute and sometimes routine actions, mostly in character. A lot of players I've been with, for whatever reason, sort of step out of the RP role when talking about going here, doing this, checking this door, riding this lift etc. I think it really adds a lot to the experience if you RP your character outside of just dialogue with NPCs, which some players I've been with have been really reluctant to do.

I play mostly online and there have been many times where I describe a room in detail and while it's sort of assumed where the party goes next if there's only one way forward I always leave it up to the players to declare hey this is where we're going. I really enjoy that sort of agency but some of my friends are really passive about that kind of thing.


Table specific: Unchained Rogue, VMC, Fractional BAB.

Forum Specific: Burn.

Paizo Specific: Healing, defense, blasting, running and attacking effectively, cool melee s+#*, divine spontaneous casting.

Dark Archive

Synthesist Summoners. They're frequently a go-to for people calling out what an archetype shouldn't be (in terms of being overpowered), but they're one of my favorites, both in flavor and in mechanics.

I'll also n'th the Kineticist. It's my second favorite class, and I enjoy them a ton even if they aren't always the most optimal thing / have burn.


Ravingdork wrote:


3) PLAY STYLE: Spontaneous action declarations; essentially trying to do something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them" or "I take out my grappling hook and attempt to snag the flying peryton's antlers so I can pull it out of the sky." Such declarations are invariably followed by multiple complicated nigh-impossible checks from the GM, inevitably results in failure, and then gets me blasted by the other players with responses like "you can't trip multiple people at once" or "why didn't you just shoot the peryton with your arrows instead of acting like a moron?" Far too many people have the "just kill it" mentality and they miss out on a lot of roleplaying fun as a result. What's more, when faced with unusual requests, many GMs go overboard with their rules (decreasing the odds anyone else will try anything similarly fun or exciting ever again) or just plain shut it down.

I can see the balance worry though.

So you are using it to do a mass trip? Mass attack? Both?

If just a mass trip: it is a CMB attack with a -2 hit for each, -1 pass the first.
So if three people charge, you ready to flip, trip -2, Trip -3, trip -4.

Now at high levels, this might be too good, but it seems balanced at low levels.

So with grappling hook, you are trying a drag maneuver? Because Trip doesn't work on flying so can't be proned.


Metamagic feats...
I love the idea of them, but every player of a spellcaster I have suggested them to refuses to take them. Most of them appear to be worth the cost in terms of spell levels, and although the feat tax to gain them seems harsh, these same players are often complaining their magic users don't have anything "good" to spend their feats on...

Sovereign Court

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Haunts. Its like combining traps and puzzles which are two things that make most gamers cry.


Air0r wrote:

path of war (the whole thing). I love it. lots of people don't.

psionics. I love it. some people don't.

Not a huge fan of Path of War, though I don't mind it. I am a HUGE fan of psionics though, particularly Ultimate Psionics, though Occult Adventures isn't bad either.

I absolutely hate traditional spellcasting. I really dislike the mental image of some old bearded dude wiggling his fingers and spouting gibberish. I much prefer the image of someone closing their eyes and concentrating for a moment, and then something awesome happens.

The only thing I dislike about Occult classes is how underpowered they are compared to pretty much every class that was designed before them.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Oi! This is about things you like that other people hate, not the other way around.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MrCharisma wrote:

Paladins. There's so much hate on the boards but they're seriously so good. I really don't understand the hate.

Also I agree with Badbird too, multiclassing is fun. I put a 1-level martial dip on almost all my 6/9 casters (BADWRONGFUN!)

Gajolob Gorum Tell me more of these powerful Table-magics? Are they something a Half-Orc Paladin could aspire to?

The hate for Paladins isn't for any mechanics reasons. They're a solid class, most people aren't gonna dispute that. The hate for paladins exists because alot of people act like complete c-cks when playing them.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
MrCharisma wrote:
Gajolob Gorum Tell me more of these powerful Table-magics? Are they something a Half-Orc Paladin could aspire to?

Gorum yell divine inspiration in ear if only willing listen. Him send tiny swarm bugs to provide motiviation. Sword not work. Flail not work. Orc shot-put not work. Stomp on bug not work. Wizard casts burning hands then laugh at mighty warrior like him somehow superior because bugs burning. That how get idea. Need smush bugs, wipe smirk of wizard face, so invent flat weapon.

Can use tables, benches, sleds. Even work if rip door off hinge. << Remember if trapped in worked dungeon when swarms attack.

Half-orc good, paladin okay, but smite evil probably not work. Here secret technique:

Pick up heavy, flat object. May require teamwork for appropriate weight.
Drop heavy, flat object. Should do on top swarm, not own foot.

Is improvised area-effect weapon. Take standard -4 penalty attack, but do damage like club to swarm. Also, swarm take extra damage because spread out squishing.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

I also love fractional BAB and saves. Why in the world should a 2nd lvl Wizard have a BAB of +1 and the Warpriest 1/Inquisitor 1/Cleric 1, a 3rd lvl character is stuck at BAB +0?

Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?

I also have much love for Psionics and Path of War


2 people marked this as a favorite.
WabbitHuntr wrote:

I also love fractional BAB and saves. Why in the world should a 2nd lvl Wizard have a BAB of +1 and the Warpriest 1/Inquisitor 1/Cleric 1, a 3rd lvl character is stuck at BAB +0?

Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?

Because people hate fractions.


HyperMissingno wrote:
WabbitHuntr wrote:

I also love fractional BAB and saves. Why in the world should a 2nd lvl Wizard have a BAB of +1 and the Warpriest 1/Inquisitor 1/Cleric 1, a 3rd lvl character is stuck at BAB +0?

Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?

Because people hate fractions.

blasphemy


HyperMissingno wrote:
WabbitHuntr wrote:

I also love fractional BAB and saves. Why in the world should a 2nd lvl Wizard have a BAB of +1 and the Warpriest 1/Inquisitor 1/Cleric 1, a 3rd lvl character is stuck at BAB +0?

Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?

Because people hate fractions.

LOL...I truly believe that is why this is not widely adopted.. That and people were tired of all the multiclassing in 3.5 (which I loved)


Summoners. They're really flavorful and cool and while problematic for balance, so are many other things. I just use the "don't be a dick" rule and things work fine.

HeHateMe wrote:
The only thing I dislike about Occult classes is how underpowered they are compared to pretty much every class that was designed before them.

That's pretty much just the kineticist though. Psychic, Occultist, Medium, Spiritualist and Mesmerist are all solid as hell.

HyperMissingno wrote:


Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?
Because people hate fractions.

This, combined with a perception I see a lot that multiclassing is fundamentally cheesy.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:

Paladins. There's so much hate on the boards but they're seriously so good. I really don't understand the hate.

Also I agree with Badbird too, multiclassing is fun. I put a 1-level martial dip on almost all my 6/9 casters (BADWRONGFUN!)

Gajolob Gorum Tell me more of these powerful Table-magics? Are they something a Half-Orc Paladin could aspire to?

The hate for Paladins isn't for any mechanics reasons. They're a solid class, most people aren't gonna dispute that. The hate for paladins exists because alot of people act like complete c-cks when playing them.

It doesn't help when you have dick GMs either. Someone posted here that they had a GM that said flanking was outside the Paladin's code of conduct.

I had a GM that said I couldn't use lay on hands on a female because that would violate the code as well, since paladins are suppose to be chaste.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Animal companions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SorrySleeping wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:

Paladins. There's so much hate on the boards but they're seriously so good. I really don't understand the hate.

Also I agree with Badbird too, multiclassing is fun. I put a 1-level martial dip on almost all my 6/9 casters (BADWRONGFUN!)

Gajolob Gorum Tell me more of these powerful Table-magics? Are they something a Half-Orc Paladin could aspire to?

The hate for Paladins isn't for any mechanics reasons. They're a solid class, most people aren't gonna dispute that. The hate for paladins exists because alot of people act like complete c-cks when playing them.

It doesn't help when you have dick GMs either. Someone posted here that they had a GM that said flanking was outside the Paladin's code of conduct.

I had a GM that said I couldn't use lay on hands on a female because that would violate the code as well, since paladins are suppose to be chaste.

WOW, that is awful. Where did he think your character was putting his hands? Lol. Besides, I've never seen a paladin code in PF that mandated chastity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:

Summoners. They're really flavorful and cool and while problematic for balance, so are many other things. I just use the "don't be a dick" rule and things work fine.

HeHateMe wrote:
The only thing I dislike about Occult classes is how underpowered they are compared to pretty much every class that was designed before them.

That's pretty much just the kineticist though. Psychic, Occultist, Medium, Spiritualist and Mesmerist are all solid as hell.

HyperMissingno wrote:


Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?
Because people hate fractions.
This, combined with a perception I see a lot that multiclassing is fundamentally cheesy.

Not to derail this thread, but Spiritualist is extremely underpowered compared to Summoner. Even Unchained Summoner is way more powerful than Spiritualist. It's really too bad, cause I think the Spiritualist has so much flavor, but the Phantom is just terrible mechanically.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Five fourths of people don't understand fractions.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Martials.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I love prestige classes, which seem to have fallen pretty heftily out of favor. I try to fit one in any time I can.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Combat maneuvers. Yes, we know they're very rarely the optimal thing to do in battle and dealing damage is usually better. I understand it requires an investment of feats to make them even marginally worthwhile. Sure, sure.

But man, it sure kicks your battle scenes up a notch to run around disarming villains of their "with this, I'll rule the world" artifacts, bull rushing mooks off of cliffs, tripping giants, sundering Captain Platemail's armor, and overrunning hapless goblins.

Plus, on the other side of the DM screen, combat maneuvers are basically free style points when running games. Try it next time: Instead of your orcs just trying to deal damage all the time, set them up to effectively do a wide variety of combat maneuvers and see how your battles take a fun, narrative twist.

Liberty's Edge

On Topic:

I like Kineticist, Paladin, and most other Classes people don't like (except Rogue and Fighter, those are bad).

I like the fact that spells with an alignment descriptor effect your Alignment.

For that matter, I like Alignment itself. Super great shorthand for a character's likely moral compass.

Some days I feel like Pathfinder itself falls into this category. People complain so much and say they dislike the game so much, I wonder why they still play. It's not like there aren't alternatives.

Slightly Off Topic:

HeHateMe wrote:
Not to derail this thread, but Spiritualist is extremely underpowered compared to Summoner. Even Unchained Summoner is way more powerful than Spiritualist. It's really too bad, cause I think the Spiritualist has so much flavor, but the Phantom is just terrible mechanically.

Even if true, that'd still leave Occultist, Psychic, Mesmerist, and Medium as super solid.

Also, it's not really true. Phantoms are bad pure combat pets compared to an Eidolon, but that's because they're built as buffers/debuffers, not for raw damage. It's a different style, not necessarily a worse one. Zeal is a pocket Bard, for example.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is my favourite thread on these forums, since first arriving here about a year ago.

I am all over the spontaneous actions that consider the imagined situation, as opposed to mechanics. I try to encourage this as DM in all my games and find that many long term PF players have a hard time with it.

Agreed WRT combat maneuvers too. As DM, my monsters and NPCs are pretty in-character, which means they use all kinds of actions depending on the situation. They're not on the game to lower players' HP - they have their own motivations which means they take all kinds of crazy actions.

Also, manipulating RAW is a fave for me. Another one that many people here can't deal with. :).

In a PbF game I'm running right now, we have four medium creatures (2 PCs 2 enemy) in one 5' space, all wrestling, trying to push each other off a cliff, with one of the four trying to hang on to a rope that extends off the cliff. To keep it chaotic, everyone is declaring their actions at the same time. The action is awesome but impossible in standard PF rules.


APG Summoner including its archetypes Synthesist and Master Summoner.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I like the fact that spells with an alignment descriptor effect your Alignment.

I'd like this a lot more if there were f@#+ing reasons as to why aligned spells effected your alignment. Heck I'd accept something like "casting protection from good causes a good aligned NPC to miss an important attack" and similar stuff but the pathfinder devs just say "ooga booga booga you're lawful after three castings of protection fro chaos" and it pisses me off.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, the way Paizo handles controversial alignment issues tends to come off as "Don't worry GMs, you are free to build whatever explanations you want into your world to justify why our extremely narrow but incredibly vague view of alignment is right".

OT:Well, I find Dreamscarred Press stuff to be pretty good, so stick me in the Psionics/fightan magic club.

I also like the Hunter. It's not great, but it is a respectable pet class, even if it is pretty much a druid minus.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The fighter

I feel i can always bring my own flavor to it I usually have 3-4 differing concepts in mind and I know I can play there personality the way I want and I will still contribute by killin(g) things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:

The fighter

I feel i can always bring my own flavor to it I usually have 3-4 differing concepts in mind and I know I can play there personality the way I want and I will still contribute by killin(g) things.

Yeah, a bucket of feats is a bucket of options to go down paths people never do because it takes too many feats. I can't think of another class that can casually pick up Shaitan Skin by 11 with plenty of feats to spare for other things. Not to mention Abundant Tactics to grab more uses. Reflex-save-or-staggered bonus-WIS-damage Gorum's Swordsmanship greatsword Vital Strike Felling Smash!

It's also perfect for multiclassing, even before considering Gloves of Dueling.


Johnico wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
3) PLAY STYLE: Spontaneous action declarations; essentially trying to do something cool and thematic that isn't immediately covered in the rules. Things like "I attempt to flatten the charging group of enemies by flipping the bar table on top of them" or "I take out my grappling hook and attempt to snag the flying peryton's antlers so I can pull it out of the sky." Such declarations are invariably followed by multiple complicated nigh-impossible checks from the GM, inevitably results in failure, and then gets me blasted by the other players with responses like "you can't trip multiple people at once" or "why didn't you just shoot the peryton with your arrows instead of acting like a moron?" Far too many people have the "just kill it" mentality and they miss out on a lot of roleplaying fun as a result. What's more, when faced with unusual requests, many GMs go overboard with their rules (decreasing the odds anyone else will try anything similarly fun or exciting ever again) or just plain shut it down.
The tough part about the players doing wacky stuff (at least for me) is that I want to let them do it because it's awesome, but if it's too effective the really awesome one time thing will become just another standard tactic. You let them knock over a table to flatten a charging bunch of goons and it works amazingly well, they'll want to do that every time there's a table nearby. Or, even worse, they'll start carrying around a table for the express purpose of flipping it at people.

This is my issue with it. I love when players come up with out of the box tactics and ideas but have seen the issue first hand of "this was better than just hitting it, this is now our tactic".

The two examples I can think of are when a GM once allowed someone in a group to climb on top of a giants head (with various checks and rolls) and then stab their greatsword directly down into its skull getting a free critical hit.
This was an amazing and thematic moment when it happened and really made for a memorable encounter. However all future fights against massive enemies became as "I climb on it and stab for a free crit"

The other one (which is still just rules as they work really so I let it happen). The players summoned a force wall in front of a dragons flight path meaning it slammed into the wall and fell out of the sky.
This is now the standard tactic for the group vs dragons because it worked so well.

As for my own favourite thing people hate it's house rules or playstyles outside organised play.
I actually have a rather evil enjoyment of reading people rage about house rules others use at their personal tables, as if someone the otherside of the world playing differently to them is an attack on their person.

Liberty's Edge

HyperMissingno wrote:
I'd like this a lot more if there were f#$!ing reasons as to why aligned spells effected your alignment. Heck I'd accept something like "casting protection from good causes a good aligned NPC to miss an important attack" and similar stuff but the pathfinder devs just say "ooga booga booga you're lawful after three castings of protection fro chaos" and it pisses me off.

The rules are a little less restrictive than that. And I never said I was entirely on board with what spells had Alignment descriptors (I think there are a few issues there)...but the basic idea that some magic is, in fact, actively Evil due to drawing on dark powers and presumably making them stronger? That seems entirely reasonable to me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oooh! I'm with DMW, I love the alignment system and our group has no issues with it.

Although (off-topic,) we did once run a campaign set in the MtG Ravnica setting, and we ditched the alignment system in exchange for the colour wheel.

So instead of Protection/Magic Circle versus C/E/G/L, we had Protection/Magic Circle versus W/U/B/R/G, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HyperMissingno wrote:
WabbitHuntr wrote:

I also love fractional BAB and saves. Why in the world should a 2nd lvl Wizard have a BAB of +1 and the Warpriest 1/Inquisitor 1/Cleric 1, a 3rd lvl character is stuck at BAB +0?

Why can't everyone accept this CLEARLY better way as standard?

Because people hate fractions.

The more math the better!

Dark Archive

But Math is hard XD


Antipaladins. I love playing one esp. the Dread Vanguard archetype that lets you function as a quasi-bard to inspire courage-ish your party. I always wish you could get more out of the spread disease ability on it but since everything you fight is pretty much dead at the end it doesn't seem to work well as a player character ability.

1 to 50 of 721 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Your favorite thing that people hate All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.