Paizo hires you and your first task is:


Homebrew and House Rules

201 to 241 of 241 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Farael the Fallen wrote:
I would immediately order that Paizo stop using the D&D 3.75 edition that they have been using and make them create their own unique rpg.
And lose a huge chunk of their fans and customer base, including me. I'd not buy into even a PF 2e. After over 30 years of gaming I've spent all the money I plan to spend on new editions. I'll keep supporting the current edition, but if it changes we'll just keep going with what we have.

And they're already making a new unique RPG. In a way that doesn't alienate their existing fans.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
deuxhero wrote:

Core Fighter

Core Monk
Core Rogue

There, now nobody insists a good class isn't balanced because absolutely rubbish classes can't compete (purely through fault of their own)

Core Fighter: Actually not so bad now that the Weapon Master's Handbook and Armor Master's Handbook unchained it. Bump the skill ranks per level up to 4 + IntMod (maybe even 6 + IntMod), fix old archetypes that almost but not quite work with Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training so that they actually work with Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training, tweak the Stamina system so that it isn't so prone to running out of steam, and we can call it good.

Core Monk: Before you remove this, first port the archetypes over to Unchained Monk (which currently has only a handful of archetypes).

Core Rogue: First, let Unchained Rogue use all Core Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents that don't have the same names as Unchained Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents, and update archetypes of other classes that use Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents to use the Unchained versions (straightforward for ones that get access to the whole list, but more work for ones that get partial access). Also go through the Core Rogue archetypes with a fine-toothed comb to make sure that none of them break when moved over to Unchained Rogue (I think this is true for the great majority, but I wouldn't swear that it is true for all of them).

Headfirst wrote:

{. . .}

For the record, this thread wasn't started to complain about Pathfinder. It's about cutting features, which is a very healthy part of any game's design. Note that there's a follow-up thread to this about adding stuff to Pathfinder. Not nearly as many responses in that one, though, for whatever it's worth.

For what it's worth, that thread is a LOT newer . . . .

Grand Lodge

UnArcaneElection wrote:
For what it's worth, that thread is a LOT newer . . . .

You're right, it's about 15 hours newer. You... got me? I don't know how to respond to this. Anyway, I wasn't really trying to illustrate a correlation or anything.

Grand Lodge

Cyrad wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
The game uses "to hit" and "attack roll" inconsistently, but they are in fact synonyms.
That's not true. "To hit" is not a game term in Pathfinder RPG. Any instance of the term in an official publication is a typo. Likewise with calling Strength and Intelligence "attributes" instead of ability scores. These mistakes tend to appear in homebrew material and 3pp publications.

Okay man, sure. :)

Anyway, the point is, the system could easily be simplified way down and rely on a handful of highly situational modifiers instead of clogging up character sheets with four calculations, two of which rarely get used for most characters.

Dark Archive

UnArcaneElection wrote:
deuxhero wrote:

Core Fighter

Core Monk
Core Rogue

There, now nobody insists a good class isn't balanced because absolutely rubbish classes can't compete (purely through fault of their own)

Core Fighter: Actually not so bad now that the Weapon Master's Handbook and Armor Master's Handbook unchained it. Bump the skill ranks per level up to 4 + IntMod (maybe even 6 + IntMod), fix old archetypes that almost but not quite work with Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training so that they actually work with Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training, tweak the Stamina system so that it isn't so prone to running out of steam, and we can call it good.

Core Monk: Before you remove this, first port the archetypes over to Unchained Monk (which currently has only a handful of archetypes).

Core Rogue: First, let Unchained Rogue use all Core Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents that don't have the same names as Unchained Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents, and update archetypes of other classes that use Rogue Talents/Advanced Talents to use the Unchained versions (straightforward for ones that get access to the whole list, but more work for ones that get partial access). Also go through the Core Rogue archetypes with a fine-toothed comb to make sure that none of them break when moved over to Unchained Rogue (I think this is true for the great majority, but I wouldn't swear that it is true for all of them).

Headfirst wrote:

{. . .}

For the record, this thread wasn't started to complain about Pathfinder. It's about cutting features, which is a very healthy part of any game's design. Note that there's a follow-up thread to this about adding stuff to Pathfinder. Not nearly as many responses in that one, though, for whatever it's worth.

For what it's worth, that thread is a LOT newer . . . .

And about ripping features from other games and with a title that finishes itself in the first post.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Gulthor wrote:
It's amazing how many of you would deliberately kill the game and ensure Paizo goes the way of White Wolf and Guardians of Order.

You seriously think any of us would succeed?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Gulthor wrote:
It's amazing how many of you would deliberately kill the game and ensure Paizo goes the way of White Wolf and Guardians of Order.
You seriously think any of us would succeed?

I am kind of curious on this however their is so much hate on Paizo expressed on their own boards. I wonder why are they even playing pathfinder and posting on the Paizo forums?

Making helpful suggestions and stating thing you don't like and things you do is great feedback saying I would get rid of the entire staff and every product they made makes no sense to me.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Vidmaster7 wrote:

I am kind of curious on this however their is so much hate on Paizo expressed on their own boards. I wonder why are they even playing pathfinder and posting on the Paizo forums?

Making helpful suggestions and stating thing you don't like and things you do is great feedback saying I would get rid of the entire staff and every product they made makes no sense to me.

If you see someone you love doing something wrong, is it hate to point that thing out and tell them its wrong?

(Regardless of if it actually is wrong, just that you see it as wrong.)

Most of us joined because we were loyal Paizo customers, because we liked the products they put out. Liking something doesn't mean blind adherance to it. An opinion is not a static thing. Eight years later, things can change. That doesn't mean we aren't a member of this community anymore. We have bonds, relationships with other forum members, that keep us here even if the original impetus to join is gone.

But yes, there are some extremists in every community that say very hurtful things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:

I am kind of curious on this however their is so much hate on Paizo expressed on their own boards. I wonder why are they even playing pathfinder and posting on the Paizo forums?

Making helpful suggestions and stating thing you don't like and things you do is great feedback saying I would get rid of the entire staff and every product they made makes no sense to me.

If you see someone you love doing something wrong, is it hate to point that thing out and tell them its wrong?

(Regardless of if it actually is wrong, just that you see it as wrong.)

Most of us joined because we were loyal Paizo customers, because we liked the products they put out. Liking something doesn't mean blind adherance to it. An opinion is not a static thing. Eight years later, things can change. That doesn't mean we aren't a member of this community anymore. We have bonds, relationships with other forum members, that keep us here even if the original impetus to join is gone.

But yes, there are some extremists in every community that say very hurtful things.

see like I said I don't see a problem with saying oh I don't like this or I would of done this differently that's good feedback overall when done correctly. Saying you think all the creators should go away (like saying hey i really like LOTR just wish someone else would of wrote it.) or pathfinder is terrible (with no narrowing factors or suggestions of improvement) seems silly to me.

I mean i've not been posting on this forum for very long but i've already noticed an undertone from some (NOT ALL!!) of pure contempt.

On this positive side of this thread so far most people don't seem to want things completely removed more so altered. (aside from the ones I have to assume are jokes since I posted my joke one of removing all literature entirely)

The Exchange

Maneuvermoose wrote:
Theliah Strongarm wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Theliah Strongarm wrote:

1) Actually, adding a Book called Ultimate Creation Guide.

2) That's it.
you're never going to stop are you? :P
Not really. And you'll never stop me! HAHAHAHAHA!
The first thing I'd remove would be Theliah Strongarm!

Hey! That's getting personal! ;)

Grand Lodge

To clarify the intent of this thread:

This is not about hating Pathfinder or its developers. It's about removing problematic, confusing, or unnecessary features from the design. This is actually very healthy for a game, in exactly the same way that constantly piling on features is bad for them.

Streamlining systems, cutting redundancies, and reducing bloat are all things that will keep Pathfinder lean and healthy, not destroy it.

If you want to contribute to this thread, please stay on topic, don't try to argue with the opinions of others, and refrain from outright insulting Pathfinder or it's developers.

Community & Digital Content Director

Removed a handful of posts. Some of these included "edition war bait", personal jabs, or commentary that is off-topic for this specific thread.

The Exchange

Seriously, though, I would rather like to see a book presented in full in the same way the publishers and writers did with the Class Builder. (And anyone else involved in the process, especially editors).
That is what I would personally try to add, even if it's only wishful thinking. *sigh*


1) Items that give static bonuses to stats, saves, to-hit, or AC. Also all items whose primary feature is "cast x spells y times per day".

2) Filler feats that only provide situational bonuses to a stat. Feats should always open up more options or increase overall capability, more numbers under specific circumstances do neither.

3) The "you cannot be as cool as the NPCs" syndrome. When non-boss NPCs have access to tools or abilities that the PCs cannot get access to even though it wouldn't be imbalanced or overpowered to give those abilities to the PCs. This includes when PCs are given a purposely gimped and underpowered version of the same thing. See the heaven drakes in hell's vengeance and compare to the drake rider archetype.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Headfirst wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
The game uses "to hit" and "attack roll" inconsistently, but they are in fact synonyms.
That's not true. "To hit" is not a game term in Pathfinder RPG. Any instance of the term in an official publication is a typo. Likewise with calling Strength and Intelligence "attributes" instead of ability scores. These mistakes tend to appear in homebrew material and 3pp publications.

Okay man, sure. :)

No need to be patronizing.

Headfirst wrote:
Anyway, the point is, the system could easily be simplified way down and rely on a handful of highly situational modifiers instead of clogging up character sheets with four calculations, two of which rarely get used for most characters.

Maybe, but the entire point of it being on your character sheet is so you can do the calculations ahead of time. Replacing it with another number that forces you to do the math at the table doesn't help anyone.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Theliah Strongarm wrote:

Seriously, though, I would rather like to see a book presented in full in the same way the publishers and writers did with the Class Builder. (And anyone else involved in the process, especially editors).

That is what I would personally try to add, even if it's only wishful thinking. *sigh*

Game design is a deceptively challenging subject that Paizo is not in the business of teaching. Even teaching game design is also rather difficult. I read many game design books, and I'd only recommend two or three of them because the authors couldn't adequately teach the craft they excel at. Likewise, I believe a book teaching PF content design would not turn out very good. Especially a book on designing classes, which are the hardest material in the game to design.

On a related subject, I've been wanting to do a Homebrewing 101 series of articles for awhile.


Cyrad wrote:
On a related subject, I've been wanting to do a Homebrewing 101 series of articles for awhile.

Well, you already have a blog all ready for that kind of things. Do it, please !

The Exchange

Cyrad wrote:
Theliah Strongarm wrote:

Seriously, though, I would rather like to see a book presented in full in the same way the publishers and writers did with the Class Builder. (And anyone else involved in the process, especially editors).

That is what I would personally try to add, even if it's only wishful thinking. *sigh*

Game design is a deceptively challenging subject that Paizo is not in the business of teaching. Even teaching game design is also rather difficult. I read many game design books, and I'd only recommend two or three of them because the authors couldn't adequately teach the craft they excel at. Likewise, I believe a book teaching PF content design would not turn out very good. Especially a book on designing classes, which are the hardest material in the game to design.

On a related subject, I've been wanting to do a Homebrewing 101 series of articles for awhile.

Well, I'm not talking about the Race Builder, I'm talking about the way they presented Building Classes in the Advanced Class Guide.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Theliah Strongarm wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
Theliah Strongarm wrote:

Seriously, though, I would rather like to see a book presented in full in the same way the publishers and writers did with the Class Builder. (And anyone else involved in the process, especially editors).

That is what I would personally try to add, even if it's only wishful thinking. *sigh*

Game design is a deceptively challenging subject that Paizo is not in the business of teaching. Even teaching game design is also rather difficult. I read many game design books, and I'd only recommend two or three of them because the authors couldn't adequately teach the craft they excel at. Likewise, I believe a book teaching PF content design would not turn out very good. Especially a book on designing classes, which are the hardest material in the game to design.

On a related subject, I've been wanting to do a Homebrewing 101 series of articles for awhile.

Well, I'm not talking about the Race Builder, I'm talking about the way they presented Building Classes in the Advanced Class Guide.

That was more like a brief essay on class design than anything else.

The Exchange

Yeah, that's what I kinda want/need.


1: Perception checks.
2: What, another thing? I don't have time for that.
3: No really, I'm busy ctrl+f'ing for every 'perception' in all the published modules and scenarios and replacing it with an appropriate alternate skills. Sign... no you don't need a perception to spot the muddy boots. The players successfully spot it without rolling, this is a critical plot point... Ok, survival or handle animal to recognize that is 'dirt' from the pig-sty. No, you cant use perception for that either.

Edit: 3a: Ok, maybe I can make time for 'Instant Full Bonus Dip Bait'/'Underwhelming Until it Comes Online' abilities. (Unchained Rogue dex to damage, Paladin divine grace, Fencing/Slashing Grace) would change it to the min of +stat or class level, or scaling with bab like power attack.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Am... I the only one who really likes the system as it is? Like.. I can't think of anything I'd specifically cut. Unchained fixed like 90% of the major issues I had with the classes, I love the archetype system, I love the magic system, I love that there are now some casters who don't USE that magic system for some variety (looking at you, Kineticist). I mean... why does everyone dislike Pathfinder so much???


cartmanbeck wrote:
I mean... why does everyone dislike Pathfinder so much???

Many if not most of us on these boards DO love Pathfinder... But we see so much more potential than Paizo cares to pursue.


cartmanbeck wrote:
Am... I the only one who really likes the system as it is?

Yes. You are the ONLY one.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Sarcasm Elemental wrote:
cartmanbeck wrote:
Am... I the only one who really likes the system as it is?
Yes. You are the ONLY one.

LOL. Appropriate name is appropriate.


I like it just the way it is.

Grand Lodge

cartmanbeck wrote:
Am... I the only one who really likes the system as it is? Like.. I can't think of anything I'd specifically cut. Unchained fixed like 90% of the major issues I had with the classes, I love the archetype system, I love the magic system, I love that there are now some casters who don't USE that magic system for some variety (looking at you, Kineticist). I mean... why does everyone dislike Pathfinder so much???

Uhm, welcome to the wrong thread, I guess? Why are you posting here if you think Pathfinder is perfect?

A couple things: You can make suggestions on how to improve something without "hating" it (just ask my wife, lol). Also, if someone really hated Pathfinder, they wouldn't be posting on these message boards.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Theliah Strongarm wrote:
Yeah, that's what I kinda want/need.

Try looking up blogs and articles on class design. A few 3pp companies have blogs that do that.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I like it just the way it is.

Let me clarify my statement. I like PF just fine the way it is. We HAVE houseruled a few things to fit out playstyle a little, but even had we not done that we'd play it just like it comes off the presses.


I have a question. I saw more than a handful of both serious and joking mentions from people that they would remove all half-human races. Why? What's the hate on half-elves and tieflings and sylphs specifically? I could understand paring down to core and possibly ARG races, but that specific subset?

(also I too like Pathfinder exactly as is.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like Pathfinder.

I like it even better with my house rules.

And even more better with my house rules and some 3pp thrown in.


Cyrad wrote:
And they're already making a new unique RPG. In a way that doesn't alienate their existing fans.

You used those words....


cartmanbeck wrote:
Sarcasm Elemental wrote:
cartmanbeck wrote:
Am... I the only one who really likes the system as it is?
Yes. You are the ONLY one.
LOL. Appropriate name is appropriate.

Don't let him fool you I'm fairly certain he made that alias just for that purpose >.>.... <.<

201 to 241 of 241 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Paizo hires you and your first task is: All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.