Please no more nerfs


Pathfinder Society

351 to 400 of 708 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Graham wrote:
I doubt the folks at LWD have some inside tract but they are assuming it's a done deed I guess

Considering they get books as soon as they are sent to the printer, and have inside communication channels for rules question/answer, plus have been right on things like how courageous weapon properly only helps saves a year before the FAQ; I would say they have an inside tract.

Shadow Lodge

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I also believe that John Compton was the lead developer on the book, so he's probably got a pretty good idea on what will and won't make it into Additional Resources.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Thomas Graham wrote:

Well I just checked things.. the resonance powers on the Ioun stones have already been 'updated' on hero lab. Even if you didn't have the guide in place

I doubt the folks at LWD have some inside tract but they are assuming it's a done deed I guess

Yep. So am I. I'm just waiting for the notice on when we can sell these back at full price.

Sigh.

Hmm

I assume it is just a database thing, they have added the Adventurer's Guide already, and just like you sometimes see unchained summoner descriptions while working with chained evolutuions.. .. it happens.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Thomas Graham wrote:

Well I just checked things.. the resonance powers on the Ioun stones have already been 'updated' on hero lab. Even if you didn't have the guide in place

I doubt the folks at LWD have some inside tract but they are assuming it's a done deed I guess

Yep. So am I. I'm just waiting for the notice on when we can sell these back at full price.

Sigh.

Hmm

They aren't completely hosed. You still can use them, just not 100% passively.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

I already have a wayfinder for that.

Dark Archive

Please dont allow the sale of these back at full price.
People got their moneys worth out of them.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Please dont allow the sale of these back at full price.

People got their moneys worth out of them.

It's already baked into the rules for PFS. If an item changes you're able to sell it back at full price.

The only thing we're waiting on is the word that it is changed for PFS.

Dark Archive

I dont believe that rule is baked in. Its only if campaign leadership allows the item to be sold back at full price.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Jacksonville aka Kyrie Ebonblade,

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
I dont believe that rule is baked in. Its only if campaign leadership allows the item to be sold back at full price.

I think it should be an option, if only to cut down of the issue when Ithe issue goes live. Just because they 'got their value' is pretty petty

Me? I'm keeping mine but I imagine I'm in the minority.

Sovereign Court 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

What about those persons who didn't get " their moneys worth out of them"? I mean, if someone shows up at a game I'm running next month, and hasn't seen the current changes, and just got the item from the old source... and hasn't played the PC yet... can she sell it back at full?

how about if she only played one game and never used the item?... can she sell it back at full?

Or how about someone who picked up the item, then judged a game or two and assigned the Chronicle to that PC... can she sell it back at full?

Or someone who has it on a PC that actually got one use out of it under the old rules ... can she sell it back at full? Or do they count as "got their moneys worth out of" it?

Where do we draw the line? Never played? Never used? Used once? twice? How much does it take to "got their moneys worth out of them"?

I got no skin in this, as I don't think I have one of the items in question on any of my 30+ PCs... but I don't know for sure, as I haven't seen the entire list of changes, I know I don't have the ones listed in the thread. I only ask because I do judge games and will have to enforce this rule, and I need to know how hard nosed I have to be to the players this is going to pop up with. Going to feel like a real "Gotcha!" moment...

5/5 5/55/55/5

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Please dont allow the sale of these back at full price.

People got their moneys worth out of them.

An item changes you get to sell it back at full price. Thats the rule. Its the rule for a number of reasons. Campaign leadership would need to issue an exception to that rule in order to.. what? Twist the knife? Screw over people already ticked at losing their item? What would the point of that be? to tell people NOT to buy anything new?

Dark Archive

I think people take item adjustments too peraonally.
If it gets changed than it gets changed. Thats the liquid nature of any massive multiplayer rpg. Things get nerfed, they get buffed etc. Asking for refunds because an item you got usage out of for even one session shouldnt be allowed.

If you bought it on your last chronicle and it didnt get usef, thats another story, but if youve had use of it for a session or more than it shouldnt be refundable for full price. Thats all.

5/5 5/55/55/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
I think people take item adjustments too peraonally.

A character is a very personal thing to a lot of people. Gear is a big part of that.

Quote:
If it gets changed than it gets changed. Thats the liquid nature of any massive multiplayer rpg. Things get nerfed, they get buffed etc. Asking for refunds because an item you got usage out of for even one session shouldnt be allowed.

This is not an argument to make the change suck more.

Quote:
If you bought it on your last chronicle and it didnt get usef, thats another story, but if youve had use of it for a session or more than it shouldnt be refundable for full price. Thats all.

Also a statement. Not an argument.

The game is (at least in theory) made better by the changes (because the changes are made with the intention of making the game better)

What possible benefit is there in making the changes harder on the people that it effects, like.. at all? Arguments that there is change do not address that, so you're just repeating yourself, not making a point.

Possible negative effects of this include people leaving pfs, or just not buying books because they feel they won't be able to use anything in it. You're going to do that because... change is change? That's a total non answer.

1/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

I think people take item adjustments too peraonally.

If it gets changed than it gets changed. Thats the liquid nature of any massive multiplayer rpg. Things get nerfed, they get buffed etc. Asking for refunds because an item you got usage out of for even one session shouldnt be allowed.

In other games this happens to, you can farm for gold. With PFS? Gold is quite strongly rationed, and a forced purchase can mess everything up.

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
If you bought it on your last chronicle and it didnt get usef, thats another story, but if youve had use of it for a session or more than it shouldnt be refundable for full price. Thats all.

So many item erratas, for me, dip into the category of "would never buy at the new price." That includes items that have had their functionality massively affected. If the value changes that much, I may NEVER have gotten the full use of the item I paid for - part of what I was paying for might have assumed that I'd have it for several levels.

Dark Archive

Sorry, we just look at things differently. Items get nerfed, get changed. If the only arguement you have is that someones toy got changed, now they wont buy new books or even continue playing, than that sounds like someone that maybe shouldnt be courted for the game.

Change is change, and its for the betterment of the game.

5/5 5/55/55/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
If the only arguement you have is that someones toy got changed, now they wont buy new books or even continue playing, than that sounds like someone that maybe shouldnt be courted for the game.

It's more argument than you're making. If i want a catagory of person not to actively court it's people actively trying to make what's supposed to be a fun game worse for everyone else for no discernible reason.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:
I dont believe that rule is baked in. Its only if campaign leadership allows the item to be sold back at full price.

You are right, my mistake, it's everything else that says if it changes you have the option to "sell" back at full value, but it doesn't say anything about item changes.

Scarab Sages

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

I think people take item adjustments too peraonally.

If it gets changed than it gets changed. Thats the liquid nature of any massive multiplayer rpg. Things get nerfed, they get buffed etc. Asking for refunds because an item you got usage out of for even one session shouldnt be allowed.

If you bought it on your last chronicle and it didnt get usef, thats another story, but if youve had use of it for a session or more than it shouldnt be refundable for full price. Thats all.

Can't really apply that logic here, though, since the type of person that uses the item that NEEDS to be nerfed, is also the type of person to be very upset by having their items nerfed. The sort of player that openly critizes other players for having less than optimal builds....

Don't really think any of my characters have noticed any of the nerfs (nothing I make is optimized). Haven't made a lore warden purely because I can't seem to acquire a copy of the book it's in, at a reasonable price. Sounds like the new version isn't worth it's salt, and comes at an even more inflated cost. Sad.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If they would update the Additional Resources document we could stop speculating about what changes are happening and get on with the process of making changes to characters or making new ones.

Scarab Sages 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Sorry, we just look at things differently. Items get nerfed, get changed. If the only arguement you have is that someones toy got changed, now they wont buy new books or even continue playing, than that sounds like someone that maybe shouldnt be courted for the game.

Change is change, and its for the betterment of the game.

While I certainly think the change is a good thing, and I am not all upset by it, this just seems petty.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
THUNDERLIPS! wrote:

THUNDERLIPS! IS A DANGEROUSLY CURIOUS MAN OF INFLUENCE.

at level 9, he has a diplomacy score of +18

Note, that +18 is usually impacted by GM inclusion of "situational modifiers". The reality is that it's closer to -18.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
Muse. wrote:

What about those persons who didn't get " their moneys worth out of them"? I mean, if someone shows up at a game I'm running next month, and hasn't seen the current changes, and just got the item from the old source... and hasn't played the PC yet... can she sell it back at full?

how about if she only played one game and never used the item?... can she sell it back at full?

This describes me!

The two characters of mine that have them bought them just recently and never used them. I'd love to get my money back to pick up something more protective. Incidentally, I had bought the ioun stones on high will save characters who had Protection from Evil wands. I wanted there to be someone in the party who made their will save and could help others make theirs.

I'm still going to try to be this person, it just means that I have to outlay more cash on this concept.

MisterSlanky wrote:
THUNDERLIPS! wrote:

THUNDERLIPS! IS A DANGEROUSLY CURIOUS MAN OF INFLUENCE.

at level 9, he has a diplomacy score of +18

Note, that +18 is usually impacted by GM inclusion of "situational modifiers". The reality is that it's closer to -18.

As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.

Hmm

1/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

I think people take item adjustments too peraonally.

If it gets changed than it gets changed. Thats the liquid nature of any massive multiplayer rpg. Things get nerfed, they get buffed etc. Asking for refunds because an item you got usage out of for even one session shouldnt be allowed.

If you bought it on your last chronicle and it didnt get usef, thats another story, but if youve had use of it for a session or more than it shouldnt be refundable for full price. Thats all.

Can't really apply that logic here, though, since the type of person that uses the item that NEEDS to be nerfed, is also the type of person to be very upset by having their items nerfed. The sort of player that openly critizes other players for having less than optimal builds....

Or, maybe, someone who just wanted their combat maneuver specialist to have a higher CMB. To me, +2 CMB is worth paying 5k gold. +1 is not, and the AC bonus isn't helpful enough TO MY PC to matter. I have other ways to boost my CMB and other statistics that are more worthwhile uses of my 5k, and locking most of my formerly-liquid assets into an item that I would never have bought at that price is petty at best.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shaventalz wrote:
Or, maybe, someone who just wanted their combat maneuver specialist to have a higher CMB. To me, +2 CMB is worth paying 5k gold. +1 is not, and the AC bonus isn't helpful enough TO MY PC to matter. I have other ways to boost my CMB and other statistics that are more worthwhile uses of my 5k, and locking most of my formerly-liquid assets into an item that I would never have bought at that price is petty at best.

Trying to grapple a colossal centipede is a heroic act, every resource must be optimally allocated to achieve such a reckless goal ;)

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

someones toy got changed, now they wont buy new books or even continue playing, than that sounds like someone that maybe shouldnt be courted for the game.

Do I want players sufficiently invested in PFS that they buy lots of books? Mostly yeah (I have some issues with players who overly optimize their characters).

Does PAIZO want players sufficiently invested in PFS that they buy lots of books?

Hell yes of course they do.

Does Paizo want to piss off these players more than they already have just "because the players should accept all change"?

Hell no, of course they don't.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.

Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually he's at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MisterSlanky wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.
Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.

WHAT ABOUT THE TWO RABBITS? THE RABBITS!

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/55/55/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ward Davis wrote:

Trying to grapple a colossal centipede is a heroic act, every resource must be optimally allocated to achieve such a reckless goal ;)

SQUEEEEEES!

*runs at it full tilt and gives it a hug*

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
MisterSlanky wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.
Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.

THAT IS ALSO WHERE THE BLUE IOUN STONE CIRCLES

Sovereign Court 3/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Kent aka KitsuneWarlock

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow, my post got a lot of replies!

For the record, I don't think Lore Warden being such a commonly used archetype means the archetype is too strong. I think it means the Fighter is too weak. It isn't the fault of the class so much as the one-two punch of feat taxes and said feat taxes requiring odd ability scores. Plus magic scaling so much differently than martial scaling. Compare Burning Hands to Fireball...and compare Dirty Tricks at level 1 to Dirty Tricks at level 6.

My Thrown Weapon Fighter and Dirty Tricks fighter both really needed Lore Warden to be healthy contributors to combat in the 2-5 level range. At least when a Rogue is fighting against an Elemental, they have enough skill points to contribute in some other meaningful way.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Flutter wrote:
Ward Davis wrote:

Trying to grapple a colossal centipede is a heroic act, every resource must be optimally allocated to achieve such a reckless goal ;)

SQUEEEEEES!

*runs at it full tilt and gives it a hug*

...reckless goal...

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Netherlands aka Woran

MisterSlanky wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.
Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually he's at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.

The rooster miniature is a -10 alone.

5/5 5/5

Tineke Bolleman wrote:
MisterSlanky wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.
Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually he's at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.
The rooster miniature is a -10 alone.

SQWACK!?

Dark Archive 5/5 5/5

Tineke Bolleman wrote:
MisterSlanky wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
As someone who has GMed for THUNDERLIPS, one of those situational modifiers is "break the GM." After I am done falling off my chair laughing, I usually give him a +2.
Making me as a GM laugh is not worth +2 situational on diplomacy. Actually being diplomatic will. Thunderlips has yet to ever earn a +2, and usually he's at -2 after he whips out his ... continual flame during a tense negotiation.
The rooster miniature is a -10 alone.

You can blame MisterSlanky for that.

Grand Lodge 5/5

THUNDERLIPS! wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Thomas Graham wrote:
Maybe it's not your style but it worked for other players.

And it works just as fine with rangers and slayers too. Often better.

*says the man with the barbarian trained in diplomacy*

THUNDERLIPS! IS A DANGEROUSLY CURIOUS MAN OF INFLUENCE.

at level 9, he has a diplomacy score of +18

I have been intrigued by your handsome mannerisms and wish to be knowing if you have newsletter or membership in Ambrus Valsin Fan Club.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing that irks me about the lore warden alteration is this: I don't understand what problem is being fixed. I understand that the old LW is front-loaded and very good for dipping combat manoeuvre builds. But what I don't understand is why that's a problem. Combat manoeuvres to me are the interesting part of non-caster combat - the bit where non-casters get to make interesting decisions rather than going "5' here, full attack" (if they want to). I genuinely don't get why that is a thing that needed cutting down on. Is there really a spate of games happening where someone using a lore warden shuts down combat in round one, and everyone else is upset because they wanted the fight to be harder?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Lucy_Valentine wrote:
The thing that irks me about the lore warden alteration is this: I don't understand what problem is being fixed.

I believe a big part was the original swapping Bravery 1, which isn't really a thing. So there were questions about if the Lore Warden just got Bravery later than other Fighters.


Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I believe a big part was the original swapping Bravery 1, which isn't really a thing. So there were questions about if the Lore Warden just got Bravery later than other Fighters.

That hardly seems worth making substantial changes for. Maybe one sentence.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

I'm not making value judgements about that.

3/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The price rebalance reasoning on the resonance stuff really boggles my mind.

Can anyone honestly claim they spent 4k for the sustain without food ever in PFS? The value of that is zero at the level you budget one of these.

4/5 5/5 Venture-Agent, Minnesota—St. Louis Park aka BretI

1 person marked this as a favorite.

On those of my characters who have already bought a Clear Spindle Ioun Stone, it was purchased specifically for the resonance power.

I'm still trying to find something to replace it that gives a good Will save bonus at a reasonable price. Seducer's Bane only gives +2 over what a cloak of about the same price would give and the price point is a little high.

Best I've found so far is the Pale Green Cracked Prism, 4K, +1 Competence bonus to all saves.

Sovereign Court 3/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Kent aka KitsuneWarlock

plaidwandering wrote:

The price rebalance reasoning on the resonance stuff really boggles my mind.

Can anyone honestly claim they spent 4k for the sustain without food ever in PFS? The value of that is zero at the level you budget one of these.

I've honestly only once every had the clear spindle protect me against a mind-affecting effect. It's caused lots of headaches at my tables though, and many DMs have still hit me with charm/compulsion effects cast by evil casters claiming the stone only applies to "other stuff". It's a real hassle, and I can't wait to get it as a 1st level spell I can recharge with Kitsune Star Gems.

3/5

I've never had the one char that owns one "used", that's not at all the point, nor is GM shenanigans.

The effective value of the stone itself is zero, the author seven years ago probably knew that.

The need to mess with something that well established for what seems essentially a bogus reason I find pretty poor.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

2 people marked this as a favorite.
plaidwandering wrote:

The price rebalance reasoning on the resonance stuff really boggles my mind.

Can anyone honestly claim they spent 4k for the sustain without food ever in PFS? The value of that is zero at the level you budget one of these.

It's a slotless version of a Ring of Sustenance, so the price is technically correct. But that doesn't make it worth the money.

Grand Lodge 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I got it for my mammoth to save on the foodbill. The resonance effect was just a nice benefit.

351 to 400 of 708 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Please no more nerfs All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.