|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
A new hardbound book is out (Adventurer's Guide), and it reprints some old material. But some of the old material is greatly changed. The Lore Warden fighter archetype, and the clear spindle ioun stone resonant power are two examples.
Before this book is dealt with in Additional Resources, I want to make this plea to Campaign Leadership: Please, no more nerfs.
About two years ago I made a thread because two hardbound books were heavily errata'd, applying many nerfs to many characters. Campaign Leadership said then that they'd heard players' concerns and would try to communicate better.
If the revisions in Adventurer's Guide become the rule for PFS, then we will again have longstanding player options radically altered by a new publication. I don't have the Adventurer's Guide, but I've followed other threads on the forum and the two examples I've given are certainly much changed for the worse. There may well be other examples.
Changes of this sort - nerfs - are not needed for longstanding options. They are not good for the game or the PFS campaign in particular. Players, like me, design characters with the published options to achieve various objectives. When it comes to options that have been in print for a long time, surely we ought to feel confident that such well-established options are "safe" choices?
So please, please, leave the nerf bat in the locker. It isn't needed, it isn't wanted. Please don't invalidate players' choices (and purchases).
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't agree with any of what you just wrote.
When things get modified (nerfed) its likely because the game designers feel that the current options are too powerful as written. The game designers and the PFS campaign shouldn't make decisions based only on whether it will inconvenience the player base, but rather on whether the new option is a more balanced option for the campaign going forward.
I feel that incorporating these changes into the campaign will ultimately be good for the long term viability of the campaign in helping curtail the power creep and balance of the game.
While I certainly empathize and sympathize with feeling like the rug has been pulled out from under you when changes like these are made, I think incorporating them is for the best.
|
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
As usual, I'm happy to disagree with Tallow.
PFS requires the purchase of certain products to play certain character options, but they also at one point had a Core Assumption which stated that they assumed all PFS players would purchase specific products for use with the PFS Campaign.
Forcing players to purchase new product to replace product which you have required players to purchase in order to participate in the PFS campaign is even shadier than doubling the price of beer in UE.
Since PFS now has it's own campaign clarifications, please grandfather previous products or consider newly published material separate.
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Forcing players to purchase new product to replace product which you have required players to purchase in order to participate in the PFS campaign is even shadier than doubling the price of beer in UE.
I think the most likely alternative is still going to end with the single archetype from that book being nerfed for everyone. Especially since part of the reason for the reprint is so that Paizo can just say go look at the PRD.
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look, i can get the crystal's resonance. It encourages people relying on it and becomes a must have item that drastically alters builds by letting people drop to a 7 wisdom.
But the lore warden? Seriously? THATs the over powered option that needed a nerf bat?
The fighter archetype for PFS, that's good at combat manuvers (which work well in the humanoid centric pfs), thats actually able to know stuff (because we're ostensibly archeologists). It's both thematic and not remotely overpowered.
If lore warden is a boost above the standard fighter, the standard fighter needed the boost. If we want to look at comperable options, just play a ranger.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.Sure, but all change does not need to be a downgrade.
In some cases, this is not true. When power creep starts making every addition to the game more powerful than the original game, downgrading is the only option.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.
I don't think anyone is arguing any of that.
Change happens, sure - generally in that NEW things are made, not old things are reprinted to make worse and force you to purchase new product. [mandatory Games Workshop reference redacted to reduce chance of snark being taken serioiusly]
The primary argument against Paizo offering pdf-only subscriptions for any of the product that they offer in print is that they need to be able to continue to sell hard-copy books. Their recent surge of "reprint and nerf" is damaging to the faith of players who purchase those book in good faith that the product will continue to be usable in the Paizo-sponsored campaign that they (in this case) required the books to be purchased for. As is, Paizo is getting all the worst parts of a 2nd edition without actually having one.
As PFS is insulated and has decided it can use its own rules separate from the decisions made by / for the PDT, I don't think it unreasonable that PFS players ask that our purchases remain viable and that we not be required to bring even more text (ex errata sheets) than we already do between a list of additional resources, campaign clarifications, and the source material itself.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My willingness to spend money on Paizo products has dwindled considerably. For the past 2 years I've been burned by additional resources choices and nerfs to all existing content. It is obvious the only thing saving the other books I own is the time it takes them to implement the changes.
I know a couple people who have canceled subscriptions. I never had one but have probably hundreds to low thousands worth of products. I'm not buying anymore.
I don't like the nerfs. It's obvious my words don't matter so maybe money will. Most people don't actually buy the resources they use in PFS anyway so maybe losing more and more big spenders will have actual impact on their bottom line.
Its hard to stay civil on this topic because I'm actually being robbed of my purchases but I think this gets the point across.
|
|
In some cases, this is not true. When power creep starts making every addition to the game more powerful than the original game, downgrading is the only option.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.Sure, but all change does not need to be a downgrade.
So, you're also advocating for the removal of Unchained Rogues?... that's harsh, man...
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.
If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
Players need to be able to make reasonable assumptions that settled rules will remain stable or have some hint that they won't, and be willing to take the risk anyway (I did this with a Summoner w/ a non combat Eidolon).
Nerfs that catch people by surprise erode trust and goodwill and thus should be avoided. Many of the Nerf of late seem to fall into this category based on the existence of this thread.
Therefore simply saying that "things change" is not an adequate answer.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of my PCs is a classic Summoner. When Unchained came out, that character was grandfathered in. Another character is a Living Monolith. When a revision to that prestige class came out, that character was grandfathered in.
One of my PCs is a Hellknight. Another is a Magus / Lore Warden / Aldori Sword Lord. I'm expecting that both of them will be grandfathered in, in that I won't need to buy a new hardcover in order to play them.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, you're also advocating for the removal of Unchained Rogues?... that's harsh, man...In some cases, this is not true. When power creep starts making every addition to the game more powerful than the original game, downgrading is the only option.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.Sure, but all change does not need to be a downgrade.
You do realize that when you do that it doesn't really help the discussion go anywhere but down, right?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I draw the line at requiring a subscription to use stuff you've bought
^ This has been my argument against errata in the past. I think it's also largely why things do get grandfathered in.
Can anyone quote the new Lore Warden in a spoiler? I'm hoping mine gets grandfathered in as well, but just in case...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
That assumption has been challenged.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
Players need to be able to make reasonable assumptions that settled rules will remain stable or have some hint that they won't, and be willing to take the risk anyway (I did this with a Summoner w/ a non combat Eidolon).
Nerfs that catch people by surprise erode trust and goodwill and thus should be avoided. Many of the Nerf of late seem to fall into this category based on the existence of this thread.
Therefore simply saying that "things change" is not an adequate answer.
Part of the issue I think, isn't that they are nerfing things that were "stable", but rather that things that should have been changed a long time ago were not given the attention they were due because of the specific policies Paizo has about not "changing" anything until a re-printing. And that splat books generally (Adventurer's Armory is the only one I know of that did) did not get reprinted.
What we are seeing with a lot of FAQ's, and the campaign clarification, is that people's cry for updated, FAQ'd, and clarified rules across the product lines has been heard. Paizo is acting on that request. Inevitably, what happens then, is that some things will be nerfed as they continue to comb through their line of products to clarify and bring back into balance.
So to say that the "lore warden" has been a stable option simply because its existed for 6 or 7 years, isn't necessarily a true statement. I've heard designers and developers at Paizo say that the Lore Warden is one archetype that probably needs revamping, should they ever get around to clarifying splat books.
Well, now we have it. Just not with a clarification to the splat book.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you build something that is overpowered expect it to get nerfed. So far I have not heard a story as bad as the player I knew who loved summoners and had 5 different types of summoner archetypes. All of the archetypes got banned during season 3. The ruling was all the banned archetypes can become normal summoners. So suddenly he had 5 almost identical characters of the exact same class. He quit playing PFS.
The Clear Spindle Ioun stone is broke. It should never have been an option in the first place. They should let us sell it back at full price.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
That assumption has been challenged.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
No it hasn't. Having had conversations with friends its really not surprising at all that Lore Warden got changed. Mind you I find it confusing but as pointed out above it is something that has been on the chopping block for a while.
|
|
No it hasn't. Having had conversations with friends its really not surprising at all that Lore Warden got changed. Mind you I find it confusing but as pointed out above it is something that has been on the chopping block for a while.That assumption has been challenged.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
I'm confused by your seeming disagreement with TOZ, as I think you two are saying similar things.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.
The problem is that the change is always back to the way it was, with the status quo of the big six being the most useful items for their price to the point of every other item collecting dust in a catalog.
That is the exact opposite of growth and change
|
|
The problem with the lore warden is that it is far better at maneuvers than anybody else; not just the basic fighter, but anybody else.1) Someone has to be better at combat maneuvers than everyone else, unless everyone is exactly the same.
2) Combat maneuvers need heavy investment in, especially the ones with an intrinsic downside (dropping your weapon, being counter-tripped, etc.)
The Lore Warden from PFS Field Guide had two problems
1) (lesser) It is so much better at maneuvers than anyone else.2) (major) It is a phenomenally dippable class if you want to specialize in maneuvers. For two levels you get three feats, one of which is Combat Expertise. For another level add +2 to every maneuver.
Every Lore Warden I have seen was a 2-3 level dip combined with Monk (old days) or Brawler (since ACG).
All the other Lore Warden abilities have been subsumed into "Sword Secrets" that you choose one of each time a base fighter would have gotten an armor training increment.
Personally I think it's in the "eh" zone. Probably about right power-wise but nothing particularly exciting to me. I probably would have scaled the "BAB bonus to Combat Expertise" a little more to make it better at the high levels.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I'm confused by your seeming disagreement with TOZ, as I think you two are saying similar things.No it hasn't. Having had conversations with friends its really not surprising at all that Lore Warden got changed. Mind you I find it confusing but as pointed out above it is something that has been on the chopping block for a while.That assumption has been challenged.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
TOZ implied that there was no controversy with the Lore Warden. There was controversy and Im not surprised it got nerfed. Mind you the archetype really was under powered by the time even I got back into PFS so Im confused why they changed it but ehhh...
The problem with the lore warden is that it is far better at maneuvers than anybody else; not just the basic fighter, but anybody else.1) Someone has to be better at combat maneuvers than everyone else, unless everyone is exactly the same.
2) Combat maneuvers need heavy investment in, especially the ones with an intrinsic downside (dropping your weapon, being counter-tripped, etc.)The Lore Warden from PFS Field Guide had two problems
1) (lesser) It is so much better at maneuvers than anyone else.
2) (major) It is a phenomenally dippable class if you want to specialize in maneuvers. For two levels you get three feats, one of which is Combat Expertise. For another level add +2 to every maneuver.Every Lore Warden I have seen was a 2-3 level dip combined with Monk (old days) or Brawler (since ACG).
** spoiler omitted **
Number 2 really got nerfed a while ago. Not even nerfed in the sense that the class got changed but Paizo made the decision to bundle all of those abilities into a really good feat.
|
|
The problem with the lore warden is that it is far better at maneuvers than anybody else; not just the basic fighter, but anybody else.
It has the highest bonus but that doesn't make it better. The tetori's or a druids (or a druids snake for that matter) superior action economy on grapples makes a good argument for them being better at the manuever than a strict mathematical comparison.
|
|
TOZ implied that there was no controversy with the Lore Warden. There was controversy and Im not surprised it got nerfed. Mind you the archetype really was under powered by the time even I got back into PFS so Im confused why they changed it but ehhh...I'm confused by your seeming disagreement with TOZ, as I think you two are saying similar things.No it hasn't. Having had conversations with friends its really not surprising at all that Lore Warden got changed. Mind you I find it confusing but as pointed out above it is something that has been on the chopping block for a while.That assumption has been challenged.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
I read it exactly opposite. The post he responded to said there wasn't controversy. He said that assumption is being challenged. Thus implying there is controversy.
|
|
You do realize that when you do that it doesn't really help the discussion go anywhere but down, right?So, you're also advocating for the removal of Unchained Rogues?... that's harsh, man...In some cases, this is not true. When power creep starts making every addition to the game more powerful than the original game, downgrading is the only option.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.Sure, but all change does not need to be a downgrade.
Valid - my apologies. A bit of levity was the intent, but reading back through, it obviously fell short.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I read it exactly opposite. The post he responded to said there wasn't controversy. He said that assumption is being challenged. Thus implying there is controversy.TOZ implied that there was no controversy with the Lore Warden. There was controversy and Im not surprised it got nerfed. Mind you the archetype really was under powered by the time even I got back into PFS so Im confused why they changed it but ehhh...I'm confused by your seeming disagreement with TOZ, as I think you two are saying similar things.No it hasn't. Having had conversations with friends its really not surprising at all that Lore Warden got changed. Mind you I find it confusing but as pointed out above it is something that has been on the chopping block for a while.That assumption has been challenged.Pathfinder is a living game. And life is change. Until it goes the way of 3.5, you WILL see change, for better or for worse.If things don't change for a long time, don't have a continuing controversy about whether they should be legal, unlike say the classic summoner, there is a reasonable assumption that settled rules will remain settled.
Sorry. Very often Im a bit dense.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that nerfs are fine.
I just wish they would be pointed at some of the more obscure, but terrifyingly broken, spells, or even some of the "golden cow" spells, like similacrum or clone.
I really don't get why lore warden needed a nerf.
It was great at what it did, for sure.
But by definition, there will always be a best at something, and nerfing the best at an option that, while nice, doesn't work on a lot of things due to the existance of freedom of movements, monsters without weapons to disarm, and anything thst can fly, the tricks of the lore warden were only so effective.
They could still deal respectable damage, though, making them respectably versatile.
As a melee combatant.
But if the old archtype is banned, it makes that all go away- back to DPS only melee builds for fighters.
|
|
Number 2 really got nerfed a while ago. Not even nerfed in the sense that the class got changed but Paizo made the decision to bundle all of those abilities into a really good feat.The Lore Warden from PFS Field Guide had two problems
1) (lesser) It is so much better at maneuvers than anyone else.
2) (major) It is a phenomenally dippable class if you want to specialize in maneuvers. For two levels you get three feats, one of which is Combat Expertise. For another level add +2 to every maneuver.Every Lore Warden I have seen was a 2-3 level dip combined with Monk (old days) or Brawler (since ACG)
Dirty Fighting is a nice feat, but it's still a feat you have to take. The PFS Field Guide Lore Warden gets Combat Expertise essentially for free. (Replacing Bravery, which isn't a big deal if you are 2-level dipping.) That extra feat over even a base fighter dip is what makes it so attractive. If you are trying to use many maneuvers rather than specializing in one you are very feat-hungry.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Dirty Fighting is a nice feat, but it's still a feat you have to take. The PFS Field Guide Lore Warden gets Combat Expertise essentially for free. (Replacing Bravery, which isn't a big deal if you are 2-level dipping.) That extra feat over even a base fighter dip is what makes it so attractive. If you are trying to use many maneuvers rather than specializing in one you are very feat-hungry.
The problem with your argument is that Dirty Fighting counts as two useless prerequisite feats so it really just washes out.
EDIT:I do see the point but I'm a weird player so my preferences are a bit off kilter.
|
|
I would have to know what it is to try to change it, and the confused dog look here is genuine.
The changes in equipment legality is a matter of weather. It comes and goes, goes up and down, but the cycle is starting to become relevant: if its better than the core 6 or even tempts away from those option, banhammer.
A character is built and exists for long enough period of time to have to worry about climate. Changes in weather are almost irrelevant.
|
|
Skills:
Old Lore Warden: +2 Skills, All Int skills become class skills.
New Lore Warden: +2 Skills, Craft, Knowledge, Linguistics, Spellcraft.
(Both lose medium/heavy armor/shields)
Minor sadface regarding the loss appraise.
Expertise:
Old Lore Warden: Level 2 loses bravery, gets Combat Expertise
New Lore Warden: Level 2 loses bravery and level 2 feat. Counts as combat expertise as a prereq but can't actually use the feat. Gets Combat Expertise for real at level 6 (or a feat with CE as a pre-req if it is already possessed). Gets an ability nobody cares about at 10.
So, Lore Wardens basically lose a feat (instead of CE + feat at 2) they get psuedo CE at 2 and then the real CE at 6.
This means they no longer get 1 more feat than everybody else.
Probably a good change, but a big sad face.
Other Abilities:
Old Lore Warden got +2 CMB/CMD at 3/7/11/15
A knowledge power standard action at 7th that improves to a swift at 14
A defensive Acrobatics power at 11 (Fighter's don't get acrobatics as a class skill and the archetype doesn't fix this)
And a critical related capstone at 19.
The New Lore Warden gets a power of their choice at 3/7/11/15/19
- Brawler Maneuver Training
- +1/3 level to confirm crits. At lvl 11 ignore 5 DR/hardness when critting/19th level old critical capstone power.
- Old Acrobatics defensive power. Must be 11 to chose, gets a bonus use at lvl 15
- Old Knowledge Power, level/2 in rounds rather than until end of encounter. Adds an AC bonus at 11 and improves to +3 at 19
- Brawler Maneuver Training class Feature.
- Knowledge Power becomes move action. Improves to Swift at level 15
(Yes there are exactly as many choices as there are opportunities to gain power)
tl;dr;
Lore Warden gets some choice in what order they get their power.
Half as much CMB/CMD bonus and on only a some maneuvers of their choice. (Does catch up 1 missing point at level 19)
Loss of 1.5 feats at level 2, in exchange for 0.5 feats at level 6 (There might be a tiny bit that's gained if you particularly want 2 feats with BAB 6 requirements, of which at least 1 requires CE and you'd rather have 1 less feat but get it at 6 instead of earlier)
Improvements to bonuses on knowledge power and a second use of the defensive acrobatics power at high levels).
A bonus on critical hits.
tl;dr;tl;dr;
They lose a feat and half their CMB bonus for some minor flexibility, better crits and minor improvements to secondary powers at high levels.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is this a complaint about equality then? Things can absolutely be nerfed or banned, as long as it is perceived to be equally applied across the board?
As long as there's some sense to the banning.
Is the option clearly better than all of the others in its food group?
Is the option sucking all the fun out of the game
Is the option so good that everyone has to take it?
Does the option completely alter the way the game is played for everyone?
By any sane measure of "should we be breaking out the nerf/banhammer for this option" the lorewarden is so far down the list that Santa's not going to be able to check him until the year 2073