Don't forget that the champion spirit bonus adds to fortitude saves, doing the math they're almost exactly on track with something with a good fortitude save.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Railroading players or arbitrarily banning this or that because of issues with "control" make for the worst GMs.
If a GM said:
"Please don't plan on gaming the system with constant back-and-forth retraining for crafting. It makes an absurd mockery of our collective narrative to play 'month-long retraining adventure' to upgrade some gear. Otherwise feel free to use retraining rules within the bounds of developing your character and/or altering decisions you now regret making."
would you feel that you were being 'railroaded' by 'arbitrary' GM diktat?
Since the "month-long retraining adventure" can quite easily be hand-waived and occur in less than 2 seconds of game time and a little record-keeping, yes.
Especially, if their base assumption for my use of the rules as they are written is "gaming the system", and an "absurd mockery".
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is 'Arbitrary' like, the new word for "My GM said I couldn't use a rules exploit to destroy game balance, and I'm sour about it", or something? It seems like I've been seeing talk of 'arbitrary' GM rulings more and more lately.
Well, something I like that a number of people apparently don't, then: I like a supposedly 'arbitrary' GM who knows how to put their foot down and says "No, I'm banning your convoluted exploitation of the rules" when a player is clearly just trying to be as overpowered as they can get away with.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since the "month-long retraining adventure" can quite easily be hand-waived and occur in less than 2 seconds of game time and a little record-keeping, yes.
Especially, if their base assumption for my use of the rules as they are written is "gaming the system", and an "absurd mockery".
So you want to secure your 'rules as written' rights, but are happy to suggest that the part of the 'rules as written' that involves a rather odious bit of narrative be hand-waived?
I have to admit, if you don't feel even the slightest bit absurd saying "Wait up, I'm going to put this whole adventure on hold for weeks while I re-learn to craft stuff for the third time, before spending weeks re-learning my fighting skills for the third time. You know, so that I can gain the benefit of some feats I don't want to have to have on my character sheet. If you don't like it, waive some of the rules", you wouldn't get on well with most of the people I know. You can hope a GM or group will just roll with what you'd like, but feeling entitled to it seems a little sketchy to me. Oh well, to each their own.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rules exploitation is only fun when you're mocking Paizo with it.
I dunno about that, d8 HD, 4 lvl casting, no hvy armor, that's hardly overpowering.A dedicated champion medium is basically fighter+ by itself, being able to throw marshal or guardian or whatever on top of that would just be a nightmare.I like Mediums. It's like playing a fighter that doesn't have to be a fighter during downtime. I don't see how anyone can play this as a caster.I really wanted to like mediums, but they're frankly such a mess. The Champion feels like half a melee character, and the 4 lvl casting certainly doesn't help.
If you could pick two spirits simultaneously instead of one, I think the class would be viable. But one spirit just doesn't give you enough.
That's because you aren't looking at the offensive math.
A 9th level Fighter with Str 22, a +2 weapon, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Power Attack probably hits at +18/+13 for 2d6+23. Or so.
A 9th level Medium, meanwhile, with Str 22, a +2 weapon, Power Attack, Spirit Focus, Heroism, and the Champion channeled hits for +18/+18/+13 for 2d6+23. Or so.
Haste adds an attack to both. At 11th, the Medium gets something that's almost Pounce while the Fighter gets nothing much.
Now, that does assume Heroism (which the Medium has on their spell list by that point), but spellcasting is one of the Medium's advantages, after all. The Fighter definitely has more Feats, but nothing that's as good as either a bonus attack or pseudo-Pounce.
The Medium's Saves are also a lot better (+1 Fort, +3 Will at 9th). Yeah, their AC suffers a bit (though Heavy Armor is only a Feat away), but they can get Displacement at 10th and more than make up for that (or they could be using Mirror Image rather than Heroism).
Yeah, that is actuality quite impressive, I gotta admit.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is 'Arbitrary' like, the new word for "My GM said I couldn't use a rules exploit to destroy game balance, and I'm sour about it", or something? It seems like I've been seeing talk of 'arbitrary' GM rulings more and more lately.
Well, something I like that a number of people apparently don't, then: I like a supposedly 'arbitrary' GM who knows how to put their foot down and says "No, I'm banning your convoluted exploitation of the rules" when a player is clearly just trying to be as overpowered as they can get away with.
Yeah, screw GMs for making arbitrary decisions about the games they arbitrate. Who died and made them the arbiter of the rules of Pathfinder?
A 9th level Medium, meanwhile, with Str 22, a +2 weapon, Power Attack, Spirit Focus, Heroism, and the Champion channeled hits for +18/+18/+13 for 2d6+23. Or so.
Haste adds an attack to both. At 11th, the Medium gets something that's almost Pounce while the Fighter gets nothing much.
admittedly the fighter does get one notable thing at 11th level: a third swing. otherwise, fighter doesn't got much else going for it here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is 'Arbitrary' like, the new word for "My GM said I couldn't use a rules exploit to destroy game balance, and I'm sour about it", or something? It seems like I've been seeing talk of 'arbitrary' GM rulings more and more lately.
Well, something I like that a number of people apparently don't, then: I like a supposedly 'arbitrary' GM who knows how to put their foot down and says "No, I'm banning your convoluted exploitation of the rules" when a player is clearly just trying to be as overpowered as they can get away with.
Game balance is a term used by role players to force others to play how they think the game should be played.
Another version of badwrongfun.
"convoluted exploitation" is apparently a new term for applying the rules as written.
You see, anyone can play this game. Especially when you are too closed minded to respectfully consider the merits of another's ideas.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's my favorite thing that people hate (demonstrated by this very thread).
Using rules as written.
Homebrew and 3pp.
Admittedly, they're not universally hated, but then again, nothing is...
Still, there's some great homebrew out there and 3pp companies that I think actually release better Pathfinder material than Paizo itself, but even so, many (if not most) GM and players still automatically disregard 3pp and homebrew as "broken" or "low quality" without even giving it a chance.
In all fairness, the reason for that is: For every dreamscarred press that's raising the bar, there's like twelve other 3PP guys lowering it.
You just got to be selective. :)
like the gravity elemental by the frog guys (incidentally that publisher is pretty well banned in my games until someone shows me they can do better.)
like the gravity elemental by the frog guys (incidentally that publisher is pretty well banned in my games until someone shows me they can do better.)Homebrew and 3pp.
Admittedly, they're not universally hated, but then again, nothing is...
Still, there's some great homebrew out there and 3pp companies that I think actually release better Pathfinder material than Paizo itself, but even so, many (if not most) GM and players still automatically disregard 3pp and homebrew as "broken" or "low quality" without even giving it a chance.
In all fairness, the reason for that is: For every dreamscarred press that's raising the bar, there's like twelve other 3PP guys lowering it.
You just got to be selective. :)
Word.
Here's my favorite thing that people hate (demonstrated by this very thread).
Using rules as written.
The problem is that often "rules as written" is as subjective as "rules as intended" because of vague wording or a misunderstanding of grammar (a misunderstanding by you, your "rules lawyer" or even sometimes the developers).
However, if you wanted to include this in this thread you'd say:
OPTIMISING MY CHARACTER TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE WITH LESS RULES-KNOWLEDGE THINK I'M CHEATING!
Perfectly valid and fun thing to post in this thread =D
(let's be honest, it is sometimes fun to unexpectedly one-shot the GM's over-hyped villain)
Not for the rest of the party, I say as someone that watched one dragon suffer from feeblemind and the other get hit with possession. I'll give that fight one thing though, it was helpful for me catching a little extra sleep.
Not for the rest of the party, I say as someone that watched one dragon suffer from feeblemind and the other get hit with possession. I'll give that fight one thing though, it was helpful for me catching a little extra sleep.
Well the title of this thread is: Your favorite thing that people hate ... so it seems like it fits perfectly!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's some more:
Combat-light adventuring (talking to NPCs, tracking down missing persons, coping with environmental hazards, that sort of thing).
Running a dedicated crafting character. Do you have any idea how much pull it gives you when you can whip up gear for everybody? "Oh, dear, I can't stomp face... But these wands everybody has? Those work just fine. So does ol' meatshield's custom armor."
Playing evil PCs who genuinely assist their good-aligned party.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, that is actuality quite impressive, I gotta admit.
Yeah, and the Medium gives everyone else in the party who uses a weapon +2 damage to boot.
I regret the lack of the original Medium with the Harrow based spirits, and think the ability to switch Spirits more easily on the fly or to play a non-Champion-based Medium would be really nice...but Champion Mediums are really solid combatants who can manage serious spellcasting or skill-based shenanigans when not in 'adventuring mode'. Adding another spirit overpowers them quite a bit by most reasonable standards.
admittedly the fighter does get one notable thing at 11th level: a third swing. otherwise, fighter doesn't got much else going for it here.
Sure. At -10. The Medium has his third swing at -0. Or can move and full attack without the extra swing. Either are much better options.
Let's cool it down a bit people, this is supposed to be a thread about differing opinions.
Unless you're actually playing together I can't see how the other person's view is really going to affect you (and if you are playing together, perhaps talking in person would be better ... or at least more efficient).
It looks to me like dysartes is a fan of:
RULE ZERO
(and while I get why people could/do have a problem with that rule, I also like it)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ooh, here's a contentious one:
I like...
*unoptimized party members* and "frivolously" wasting party gold on cool/weird stuff.
Our whole group does - all the gold we tend to save from crafting doesn't go into more/better gear, it goes into cool/weird stuff we want to do.
In WotR, we spent absurd amounts of gold
In Iron Gods, we've spent absolutely ludicrous amounts of gold helping NPCs and buying/crafting cool stuff that doesn't matter most of the time.
I've no doubt that when I start running my Jade Regent campaign that our group is going to spend absurd amounts of gold on the caravan.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like being able to bump very old threads whose topics are just as relevant today as they were when the thread was created.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
In all fairness to Quintain, I see the point he's making. The rules exist as a sort of code of conduct for everyone involved. It explains what is and is not allowed in the game. Anyone can arbitrarily decide that they don't like someone else doing something that's legal in the rules. As a GM, there's no real difference between my banning retraining Leadership or banning Skill Focus on the grounds that I think it's unfair or not up to whatever my individual preferences for roleplay is (such as suggesting that you're not "focused" enough for Skill Focus if you keep retraining it, or some other contrived reasoning).
If the rules aren't tight enough, the player shouldn't be treated as being a jerk for playing by the rules. Treating someone like a villain for playing by the rules is probably one of the most asinine, and unfortunately most common, things that we gamers frequently do.
Now I'm not saying that the rules are perfect. They are far, far from perfect. They get further from perfect with each progressively lower quality book Paizo publishes (much to my chagrin). However, choosing to play by those rules means choosing to play by those rules. If a group wishes to change a rule, let it be discussed. Rule 0 has its place but that places is not about making arbitrary decisions so much as it opens up the option to change things at all.
Most importantly, a GM should be clear on why they are interested in changing a rule (or why their house rule exists if set previously), and be willing to explain why that is. Further, they should be willing to re-consider these things as new points or evidence are presented.
If I had a copper piece for every game that was made more unbalanced because of a GM trying to balance a game without understanding the ripple effects, I'd buy every person who visits the Paizo forums in a day a soda, every day, for a year.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This ^
Oh, and it is much more fun to make the rest of your party awesome enough to steamroll the GMs BBEG than to do it yourself.
My current characters are a cryptic and a tactician who have contributed very little to actual damage when it comes to combat, but instead contribute battlefield control so that other members of the party in the damage dealer role can be most effective.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Many people might not hate it, but my gm dislikes them so that's enough. I f!$%ing love playing the knowledge monkey who knows everything. I get to play tactition, warn everyone of the dangers they're facing, and boost their rolls!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This ^
Oh, and it is much more fun to make the rest of your party awesome enough to steamroll the GMs BBEG than to do it yourself.
My current characters are a cryptic and a tactician who have contributed very little to actual damage when it comes to combat, but instead contribute battlefield control so that other members of the party in the damage dealer role can be most effective.
This is actually the mindset behind the famous "god wizard" style of play.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like it when my players make an homage characters. I like seeing their take on characters and what not. Don't get me wrong, some do get a little boring, I've seen my fair share of Raistlins and Drizzts but there are folks that come up with fun ideas.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
probably doing things with my ability scores that are keyed to other ability scores. I love building the guy who rolls Int on every skill check (Empiricist), runs all of combat with his Dex (Swashbuckler), or soaks up all the bad times with his Cha (Undead Oracle/Paladin).
I really want to see more X to Y ability conversions, even though a great deal of people whine about "That doesn't make sense!" or "but MUH IMMERSION". Look, mechanics are important and having parity in those mechanics is also nice. I want my damn Recurve Bow (Str to Hit & Dmg) and I want bows to do Dex to hit & Dmg, and i want Str to attack with thrown weapons and strength to acrobatics and fort saves, hell I WANT STRENGTH AND CON CASTERS TOO.
I love me the ability score shenanigans.
I'm fine with more X to Y as long as it involves charisma or strength getting to do more things, maybe wisdom.
Most importantly, a GM should be clear on why they are interested in changing a rule (or why their house rule exists if set previously), and be willing to explain why that is. Further, they should be willing to re-consider these things as new points or evidence are presented.
This would be the most important point. There's a huge difference between "I wish my GM wouldn't make knee-jerk rulings that don't make a lot of sense and complicate things for us" and "My GM/group doesn't let me have everything that I want, so they're awful because that's my right by RAW!"
On the topic of gaming the retraining system, the most likely response from my group to an assertion of RAW 'rights' would be "Well, a lot is going down in the next three weeks. If you want to sit-out multiple sessions because your character is away on a re-retraining expedition... have fun?" I don't think I'd call that being punitive or treating them like a villain; it's just applying the game-world system as written, and maybe making a point along the way about exercises in narrative absurdity.
I'm fine with more X to Y as long as it involves charisma or strength getting to do more things
Have to agree here. It's bizarre how easy it is to replace strength/charisma functionality with something else while there's basically nothing vice versa.
maybe wisdom.
But that's already a god stat. I'd rather see ways to get wisdom stuff traded out. There's a trait for int to heal but other than that there's really no way to exchange wisdom based stuff.
Ehhhh, it's not that impactful unless you're a cleric or a class with poor will saves. Since it's rare I play a class that has a poor will save it's usually in danger of being dumped.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"frivolously" wasting party gold on cool/weird stuff
Yes! My first CotCT group had a female monk from Isger who'd left the sisters of the Golden Erinyes to worship Shelyn- she ended up starting an orphanage in Korvosa with a lot of her share of the loot.
I've had characters who collect birds, I've seen/been in parties that opt to keep, not sell, the art treasures they find... good times. We had a guy in... I want to say it was our all-evil Council of Thieves group, anyway, he started funding an artist- paying this young guy to develop his skills as a painter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is actually the mindset behind the famous "god wizard" style of play.This ^
Oh, and it is much more fun to make the rest of your party awesome enough to steamroll the GMs BBEG than to do it yourself.
My current characters are a cryptic and a tactician who have contributed very little to actual damage when it comes to combat, but instead contribute battlefield control so that other members of the party in the damage dealer role can be most effective.
In 5th Edition, I made a Life cleric that mostly buffed and healed.
In one fight:
Wizard: My cone of cold does 43 points of damage!
Rogue: My sneak attack does 64 points of damage!
Ranger: My arrows do 24, 22, and 12 points of damage!
Barbarian: My greatclub does 20, 24, and 30 points of damage!
Eldritch Knight: I do 16, 19, 10, 12, 15, 18, and 18 points of damage!
My Cleric: I do 6 points of damage.
But I was also giving them +1d4 to all their attack rolls and saving throws, and healing all of them for 25 points each round.
:-D
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like it when my players make an homage characters. I like seeing their take on characters and what not. Don't get me wrong, some do get a little boring, I've seen my fair share of Raistlins and Drizzts but there are folks that come up with fun ideas.
I love playing homage characters, though I try to stay away from really well known fantasy characters like Raistlin and Drizzt. In 4E I played a Warlord that was completely inspired by R Lee Ermy's Gunnery Sargeant Hartman in Full Metal Jacket. So much fun.
I also played a Fighter once that was basically a mix of Clint Eastwood's characters in Heartbreak Ridge and Unforgiven.
Hmm I thought I was the only person who loathes this design feature. Guess you learn something new everyday.I really want to see more X to Y ability conversions
There's literally dozens of us! Dozens!
I wouldn't mind most of them if they replaced the bonus, but not the penalty.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like rolling for stats.
I prefer to play non-core races (and typically classes)
I prefer settings that aren't dominated by humans.
I actually like alignment.
I like making decisions for character advancement based on things that have happened to that character in the campaign. Once made a wizard take a few levels of fighter after nearly being killed by a creature that managed to get too close (later became an eldritch knight).
I don't make decisions based on the numerical boost it gives.
I like dealing non-lethal damage and taking prisoners (and possibly redeeming or converting them) over slaughtering everything that pops into my field of vision. <-- This has gotten me some looks and a few derisive comments (including some from a so-called paladin).
I actually like companion features (animal companions, eidolons, leadership).
As for the whole 3rd Party comment mentioned: I think it still has that terrible reputation due to the massive amount of molten poop pumped out during 3rd edition's lifespan, where there might be 1 good thing in a sea of 30 bad ones. There are still a number of terrible 3rd Party books done for Pathfinder, but there seem to be more gems compared to 3rd edition.
Spending enough of my wealth-by-level to have a decent AC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spending enough of my wealth-by-level to have a decent AC.
In my campaigns people learn to appreciate this very quickly. A popular build theory is speccing offense and the extreme cost of defense, but then complain that the game becomes rocket tag.
My players have learned that a solid line of defense can allow you to survive long enough to beat damn near anything they put their minds to.
|
|
Spending enough of my wealth-by-level to have a decent AC.In my campaigns people learn to appreciate this very quickly. A popular build theory is speccing offense and the extreme cost of defense, but then complain that the game becomes rocket tag.
My players have learned that a solid line of defense can allow you to survive long enough to beat damn near anything they put their minds to.
Oooh, I like this one, too. And yeah, keeping AC up is totally doable if you're willing to put in some effort.
Oooh, I like this one, too. And yeah, keeping AC up is totally doable if you're willing to put in some effort.Spending enough of my wealth-by-level to have a decent AC.In my campaigns people learn to appreciate this very quickly. A popular build theory is speccing offense and the extreme cost of defense, but then complain that the game becomes rocket tag.
My players have learned that a solid line of defense can allow you to survive long enough to beat damn near anything they put their minds to.
Bolding for emphasis. My points exactly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not even much effort. Stacking AC is probably the easiest thing to raise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, something people commonly forget to consider is that +AC is passively +crit-resistance since you have to confirm critical hits. So not only does AC help you avoid taking damage in the first place, it can prevent those auto-hits from being critical hits. :D
It's not even much effort. Stacking AC is probably the easiest thing to raise.
My players have just reached level 13 in our Skull and Shackles game, and most can still only get hit on a natural 20.
I just don't understand people who say AC is useless, or that it falls behind, at high levels. It just isn't true. Even as save effects become more common, traditional attack rolls are remain the most prevalent form of attack you will face. If your AC isn't keeping up, then your group has a low level of system mastery, or you as the GM aren't giving the PCs enough treasure, or something else is going on.
Fact of the matter is that the system is set up so that keeping up your AC is expected for all levels of play.