You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 09, 2016, 09:45:10 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Pathfinder RPG  (Read 13639 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #75 on: January 23, 2010, 05:48:45 AM »
Actually, they specified that they were doing 2 alternate builds for Paladins in the Advanced Players Guide that I saw.  The Anti-Paladin, which is Chaotic Evil, and the Templar, which is everything else.

As for your comments, I feel they're mostly correct.  The summoner is a bit overpowered, but hopefully the new version will be out soon.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #76 on: January 23, 2010, 08:03:51 AM »
For those who are interested, we have verification of variant paladins being in the Advanced Players guide - but not evil ones. 

That slot will be taken up by the 20-level Blackguard class instead.  A preliminary view of one is to be had HERE.

NASTY.... but if you got detect evil you can sense the big bads.. heck.. they are REALLY nasty.

Offline Mnemaxa

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #77 on: January 23, 2010, 08:09:03 AM »
Well, the designer did make a few errors in it (good in place of evil and vice versa mostly). 

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #78 on: January 23, 2010, 08:15:12 AM »
Well, the designer did make a few errors in it (good in place of evil and vice versa mostly).

Yeah spotted that.. I see Teiflings having fun with this.. perhaps getting their racial enhanced to cover this too. (ie.. treating their Charisma as 2 points higher for it.. hmm.. might want to reread it.. itmight already be covered. :D )

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #79 on: January 23, 2010, 12:03:10 PM »
I added a new player to my table top game two weeks ago and of course the first thing he wanted to play was a summoner, which I was fine with. I like the flavor of the summoner. My number one complaint about the class was and is still that you can do multiple attacks without penalty through tentacle or claw monsters. So after I saw the power potential of that route, I ruled that you can have 1 pair of primary claw attacks or tentacle attacks but afterwards everything is a secondary attack (thus -5 to hit without multiattack). If you have another primary attack like a bite, tail slap, sting, etc then all other attacks are secondary as well. So far I haven't seen any more abuses of Eidolon builds. Hes using a serpentine Eidolon right now that focuses on swallow whole, constricting, and a poisonous bite which works pretty well as a potential crowd controlling monster, especially teamed with our fighter who uses stand still like its going out of style. The one complaint I do have about those abilities is that is there doesn't seem to be a way to change what kind of ability damage that poison does except Constitution damage. I would personally like to see an Eidolon power similar to the cockatrice's bite (Doing dexterity damage) or a poison that effects cognitive reasoning and reaction (Intelligence and wisdom damage) which is an easy house rule fix

Anyway, the theme of the blackguard and I are sort of at odds. Having gotten my start in D&D as an anti-paladin character in my first mature game I have a special place in my heart for the Honorable yet evil as hell anti-paladin's and I have a hard time accepting the idea of a chaotic evil servant of dark gods and demon masters. Then again, I have to remember that if devils can do it, then so can demons its just fair (although Paizo continues to play demons in a far to organized and sinister manner IMO). The blackguard, to me, is an abberation of that key honorable point. Why would a chaotic creature give a crap about honor, tradition, codes of conduct, etc? It just doesn't make much sense to me because it seems completely against their nature. Now I'm not saying there isn't room for an unholy warrior of Chaotic or neutral nature (in fact Paizo did a great writeup for both classes in a Dragon magazine at one time) but I think as an opposite to the paladin it just doesn't work in theme. The class looks good at first glance though


Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #80 on: January 23, 2010, 12:18:09 PM »
I'm not going to get into the conspiracy theories and all that but here is my take on the evolution of D&D from my point of view and why I support Pathfinder. It started, not with 3.5 and 4th edition but way back in 2nd and 3.0 edition. Like many others, I didn't touch the 3.0 rules for 2 or 3 years after their release because I felt comfortable with 2nd edition. Back then I wanted fixes to the current rules I was using, not an entirely new system that I had to learn and master. Eventually one of my players, who would always go on about 3.0, finally said "Just try it and if you hate it I'll never mention it again" so I tried it and I found that liked it.

Luckily I learned about the coming 3.5 before I bought any books so I waited, got the 3.5 books and began a new library like my 2nd edition books (which I still use to this day for inspiration). When I first heard about the canceling of Dungeon and Dragon magazine I felt pretty disappointed because I had looked forward to Paizo's publishings for around 7 years by that time. Paizo's response was perfect to the situation with the reveal of Pathfinder adventure paths. However at the time 4th edition had not yet been announced either. WotC's response was very bad. A lot of us wanted, and others demanded information on its new "digital initiative". All we got was Gleemax.com (I think that was the name) and silence. It was bad business decisions (made by WotC) vs good business decisions (made by Paizo) those decisions being to inform your fan base on what was going on.

Then 4th edition was revealed and I felt the same when 3.0 had come out. With such a familiar feeling I was ready to hang up my D&D books for good because I felt that WotC didn't realize they were alienating their own fan base yet again. Then I heard of pathfinder coming out, not as a bunch of adventure paths but as a fix to our old game. For me it was a messiah, exactly what I wanted with 2ed when 3.0 came out. Someone did what I wanted them to do, which was fix the problems with old system instead of a complete redesign. I supported pathfinder from the first minute because of that premise

Things got even more complicated when I gave 4th edition a chance and actually played it. The first problem that I had was it felt like I was playing an MMORPG rather then a table top RPG. At that point I had already played Everquest for 4 years and quit World of Warcraft about a year earlier. I did not want the feeling of another MMORPG in my D&D game. That feeling made me hate 4th edition and all that came with it. I despised it with all my heart and soul and still do. The edition, IMO, is beyond redemption and will forever be worthless to me. That said, if YOU enjoy 4th edition then by all means play it and have fun with it, I'm not going to burst into a 4th edition party and demand to be accommodated.

Pathfinders alpha and beta testing were things that I was heavily involved in and I have to say that a lot of things were listened to, not all of them (especially when it came to the sorcerer class) but a lot were listened to and implemented as it grew into a gaming system. During that testing I remember seeing many vocal minorities proposing unbalanced or overly complicated changes to certain classes, spells, and mechanics but those minorities died down and seemed to disappear overtime.

Overall Paizo's response to everything that happened in this time frame was wonderful. They made a lot of great business decisions by listening to the majority of their players. On the flip side WotC made a lot of bad decisions by alienating their fan base just like they had done 8 years prior and then staying silent when we asked for information.

Is pathfinder perfect? Hell no but IMO its much better then any fantasy based table top RPG out today. If YOU enjoy other editions of D&D, Palladium Fantasy, Swords and sorcery, or whatever else for your fantasy table top gaming then please play that and have fun with it but don't come to Pathfinder players and demand to be accommodated either

That all said, can we give the Old/New D&D vs pathfinder arguments a rest? Were starting to sound like a large group of fan boys and that disturbs me...

It's things like this that drives me insane.  "Plays like an MMO"?  Please, that tells me you haven't played it at all or have never played an MMO.  Which just as likely.  Because if you did, you'd know that if anything it plays like a TRPG, like Disgaea, Fire Emblem or Ogre Tactics.

I've played both 4e and Pathfinder, and sadly, I dislike both.  Pathfinder still has the Magic Rules All problem of 3.x and in some cases magnifies it.  But then again, seeing as Monte Cook is involved I'm not surprised, he loves the Vancian magic system.  For every spell they nerf, they seem to over power another to make up for it.  And the fighter still sucks, especially with certain feats no longer stacking.

As for 4e, it's too focused, and each class is an island.  It's fun mind you, but it's not something I want in my Fantasy.  It's too much a game, not enough Fantasy, as the best I can describe it.

And so I'm looking for another Fantasy game.  Which is sad because around here, it's either 3.x, PFRPG or 4e for Fantasy, and White Wolf for everything else.

Maybe, I will pick up Fantasy Craft, it's kinda D20, so people won't get as upset for getting out of their comfort zone.

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #81 on: January 23, 2010, 01:02:14 PM »
Really Chris, can you give it a rest? You've been harping on the pathfinder threads since I posted about the Alpha. I dont want to call anyone a troll but it is starting to feel like you're trolling or have an irrational hate for the game. I can respect that you dont care for it and if you do not want to play it then Im all for that. We have different opinions about the game and neither one is necessarily wrong since an opinion is subjective. Play whatever game you want to play and have fun with it but please, dont come here trying to ruin our fun or detract from our discussions.

Now to try and help you find your game of choice. Rifts is an interesting mish mash of genre's (although class balance is at best laughable and it does have a sci-fi theme in a lot of it) and theres always Call of Cthulu if you like a good horror story and dont care for world of darkness (which is my choice for horror gaming). With some adaptation CoC could be put into a fantasy genre. Savage worlds isnt a bad setting either. There is palladium fantasy which I have not played but heard good things from Rifts fans. Exalted has an eastern fantasy feel with other stuff thrown in, creating another interesting mish mash. There's also Scion which could be adapted for fantasy or historical gameplay very easily with Scion: Companion. Those might be some games to look into, I dont know what you are looking for so its hard to recommend anything

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #82 on: January 23, 2010, 02:59:00 PM »
Irrational hate?  Why would I spend my time hating an inanimate object?  What a waste of time.  No, I'm just disappointed with Paizo.  All they did is reprint the SRD and changed JUST enough to destroy any real backward compatibility with 3.x.  Instead of improving, they stagnated, but then again, seeing as they are selling the book and new addons, I suppose there's enough of a market of people afraid of change.

Sadly, as long as they put out their own books, they are invalidating my shelf of 3.x stuff.

I WANTED to like this.  I WANTED to feel that all classes were playable, instead we got another go around with the same problems, disguised with a half-assed layer of attempted cool.

However, there ARE good things about PFRPG.  I LIKE their Paladin, the encounter long Smite?  Just what the Doctor ordered!  But the game is heavily focused towards magic caster (Again, no surprise, Monte Cook loves magic, he's made that abundantly clear in a few of his products, like Ptolus.)  Which is not what I want.

Thing is, the big issue Brandon is that you and other detractors keep bringing up the same point, which is incorrect and an internet meme, about what's 'wrong' about 4e.  If you've played 4e, or an MMO, you'd stop parroting the internet and REALLY figure out WHY you don't like it.  I don't begrudge ANYONE who doesn't feel comfortable with 4e, hell, I don't.  But at the same time calling it a 'WoW clone' or whatever the wacky 4chan haters are calling it this week is incorrect.  In MMO's you can farm the same bosses over and over and over again to get all the set amount of loot.  In a Table Top RPG (Including 4e) you don't need to.  Also, in an RPG you get to be central focus of the game, where as an MMO, you're competing with hundreds of thousands (Minimum) of other players.  In an RPG you can 'advance' a story, in an MMO, it's canned and vague at the same time.  Nothing in an MMO is even remotely LIKE 4e.

Take apart the mechanics, see what you don't like, analyze it and explain, don't copy the internet, because it makes you look stupid, and frankly, I don't think you are.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #83 on: January 23, 2010, 03:21:04 PM »
My biggest hate (for 4e) Chris, is easily summed out:

Broken Multi-class out the box, a MMO feel (you DE magic items for materials to make more? the character roles are pretty much what my guild uses for raid roles and the TOTAL incompatibility with EVERYTHING that comes before.)

Multiclassing is my big thing (I'm usually the type that likes 'Off-X' roles in a group in any game. Off-Tank, Off-Healer, Off-CC). Can't do it.

But it does seem that you have said the same thing several times. That is what Brandon was saying (I think)

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #84 on: January 23, 2010, 03:22:04 PM »
Irrational hate?  Why would I spend my time hating an inanimate object?  What a waste of time.  No, I'm just disappointed with Paizo.  All they did is reprint the SRD and changed JUST enough to destroy any real backward compatibility with 3.x.  Instead of improving, they stagnated, but then again, seeing as they are selling the book and new addons, I suppose there's enough of a market of people afraid of change.

Sadly, as long as they put out their own books, they are invalidating my shelf of 3.x stuff.

I WANTED to like this.  I WANTED to feel that all classes were playable, instead we got another go around with the same problems, disguised with a half-assed layer of attempted cool.

However, there ARE good things about PFRPG.  I LIKE their Paladin, the encounter long Smite?  Just what the Doctor ordered!  But the game is heavily focused towards magic caster (Again, no surprise, Monte Cook loves magic, he's made that abundantly clear in a few of his products, like Ptolus.)  Which is not what I want.

Thing is, the big issue Brandon is that you and other detractors keep bringing up the same point, which is incorrect and an internet meme, about what's 'wrong' about 4e.  If you've played 4e, or an MMO, you'd stop parroting the internet and REALLY figure out WHY you don't like it.  I don't begrudge ANYONE who doesn't feel comfortable with 4e, hell, I don't.  But at the same time calling it a 'WoW clone' or whatever the wacky 4chan haters are calling it this week is incorrect.  In MMO's you can farm the same bosses over and over and over again to get all the set amount of loot.  In a Table Top RPG (Including 4e) you don't need to.  Also, in an RPG you get to be central focus of the game, where as an MMO, you're competing with hundreds of thousands (Minimum) of other players.  In an RPG you can 'advance' a story, in an MMO, it's canned and vague at the same time.  Nothing in an MMO is even remotely LIKE 4e.

Take apart the mechanics, see what you don't like, analyze it and explain, don't copy the internet, because it makes you look stupid, and frankly, I don't think you are.

Alright, I think Ive had enough. I have played 4th edition and I have played the following MMORPGs between now and 2000: Everquest, Everquest 2, World of warcraft, Warhammer: Age of reckoning, Aion: The tower of eternity (which Im still playing), City of Hero's/villains, Dark age of Camelot, Tabula Rasa, Eve online, champions online, D&D online, and Im sure theres a few Im forgetting. I say that 4th edition feels like an MMORPG because it does to me, the system pigeon holes you into a single class role with no variation outside its very tightly made options just like an MMORPG class. At least in pathfinder and World of darkness I have the option of expanding my character beyond face value. My fighter can be a survival expert or my Uratha can be a scholar and a nearly unstoppable killing machine. I dont have the option t be something more or just something unorthodox in 4th edition

I take GREAT offense at the accusation that my opinion is not my own and this is the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. So now, rather then keep an argument or bother a staff member going Im just going to let you join my esteemed ignore list along with MadPanda because, just like him, you continue to enter threads and take on a harassing tone with me and others. I have had more then enough
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 03:34:19 PM by Brandon »

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #85 on: January 23, 2010, 05:59:40 PM »
Alright folks, time to chill. There's no need for disparaging remarks, and everyone is equally entitled to their opinion, whether it be love or hate here.

Offline Mnemaxa

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #86 on: January 23, 2010, 07:13:44 PM »
The blackguard, to me, is an abberation of that key honorable point. Why would a chaotic creature give a crap about honor, tradition, codes of conduct, etc? It just doesn't make much sense to me because it seems completely against their nature. Now I'm not saying there isn't room for an unholy warrior of Chaotic or neutral nature (in fact Paizo did a great writeup for both classes in a Dragon magazine at one time) but I think as an opposite to the paladin it just doesn't work in theme. The class looks good at first glance though

Well, there is the 15 level Hell Knight prestige class, which covers the lawful aspects of an antipaladin fairly nicely from what I understand.  I haven't had a chance to study that class in detail, and the gamemaster I'm workign with will be using them on us shortly and I'd rather keep that bit a surprise for myself.

Irrational hate?  Why would I spend my time hating an inanimate object?  What a waste of time.  No, I'm just disappointed with Paizo.  All they did is reprint the SRD and changed JUST enough to destroy any real backward compatibility with 3.x.  Instead of improving, they stagnated, but then again, seeing as they are selling the book and new addons, I suppose there's enough of a market of people afraid of change.

Sadly, as long as they put out their own books, they are invalidating my shelf of 3.x stuff.

I WANTED to like this.  I WANTED to feel that all classes were playable, instead we got another go around with the same problems, disguised with a half-assed layer of attempted cool.

However, there ARE good things about PFRPG.  I LIKE their Paladin, the encounter long Smite?  Just what the Doctor ordered!  But the game is heavily focused towards magic caster (Again, no surprise, Monte Cook loves magic, he's made that abundantly clear in a few of his products, like Ptolus.)  Which is not what I want.

No matter what class you play, you cannot do something that another class is geared towards better than that class itself.  It is this which made 3.5 broken.  The so called 'attempted cool' serves a purpose, and it does not break any of the classes.  The purpose it serves is to make it possible for a character built out of a single core class flavorful and useful but not necessarily exactly the same as all other members of its class. 

Despite your apparent detractions, I have found no 'broken' spells in Pathfinder - those spells which are considered 'instant win' can now be duplicated by every other class after 10th level just as consistently and just as or even more effectively.  It is backwards compatible - if you are willing to take the time and effort to unbreak much of what had been broken in 3.5 to begin with, which was namely the spells and the prestige classes abilities.  Casters are useful, but you can actually not have one in the group, and by 7th level you will no longer need one.  They would still be useful, but you can duplicate or work around the spells and abilities of a cleric, wizard, or druid at that point.  This is accomplished through judicious skill and feat selection, but it is entirely possible to build non-casters who can Use Magic Device or craft Wondrous Items and Magic Arms and Armor without casting a single spell - which means anyone can gain the ability to craft the renamed version of Keoghtom's Ointment, or use wands which can duplicate 4th level spells or lower, and even create Gate type effects at higher level, or teleportation effects, or whatever is necessary, without a wizard or cleric.  The final thing is that most 'breaking' examples in 3.5 require absolute gamemaster consent for everything (the infamous Pun Pun build, Wings of Flurry Kobolds, Infinite Quarterstaves, or Locate City Nuke which never worked in the first place) and only an idiot or a very naive gamemaster would have allowed the backgrounds and efforts which allows those things to work in game.

I am not saying your opinion is invalid.  I am saying your reasoning doesn't match the evidence I have seen. 

As for MMORPG, any RPG can play like one, depending strictly on the players and gamemasters. 

Offline MasterMischief

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #87 on: January 23, 2010, 08:48:08 PM »
In my opinion and personal experience, magic using characters are unbalanced in any system.  I see two contributors to this.  One, magic, by its very definition, allows a character to do something most others can not.  Two, power gamers are drawn to the magic using characters, likely for reason number one.  This means magic using characters are often optimized to their full potential.  Is it any wonder any poor n00b playing a fighter feels outclassed?

I am not going to say magic using characters are broken or make all the other options unfun.  I use to feel that way, but I believe now, that it is a bigger issue.  I have seen a lot of discussion about balance.  I am not sure balance is actually the issue.  I think it is spot light time.  If a game focuses on combat and one character is always stealing the glory, the others are going to feel something is unbalanced.

Looking at cinema and literature, they are filled with unbalanced characters, but somehow, the important characters always get their fair share of time in the spot light.  Buffy and Xander from Buffy the Vampire Slayer jump out as an example to me.

I believe the solution lies somewhere in the social contract.  Something, in my experience, is sorely lacking at the table.  GM and players need to discuss expectations and what they want out of the game.  The players need to be careful not to hog the stage.  Of course, all of this is easier said than done.

I have to admit, the 4e is an MMO argument grates on my nerves...and I am not even a fan of 4e.  For me, MMO's have felt like D&D since...well...since the first fledgling computer RPGs were modeled on it back in...what...2e days?  It just feels like the pot calling the kettle and all that.

I believe there are a lot of issues behind the 4e hate.  And all those issues are different for different people.  Hell, there are people that think 3.5 is an abomination to D&D.  The scars are not going to heal any time soon.

As for other fantasy games, Chris...I would suggest Mutants & Masterminds' Warlocks and Warriors or True20 if you want to keep near the d20 crowd.  Savage Worlds and All Flesh Must Be Eaten's Dungeons and Zombies if you want to branch out with some rules lighter fair.  And if you are ready for some serious tinkering, Fantasy Hero.

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #88 on: January 23, 2010, 10:04:14 PM »
Well, there is the 15 level Hell Knight prestige class, which covers the lawful aspects of an antipaladin fairly nicely from what I understand.  I haven't had a chance to study that class in detail, and the gamemaster I'm workign with will be using them on us shortly and I'd rather keep that bit a surprise for myself.

Im not familiar with the hellknight either, Im not even sure what book its in at the moment but if I can find it I'll have a look. Thinking about it Hellknight makes sense to me as a name. It sounds like a great start for an honorable evil guy because of the lawful nature of Devils and of medival knights.

Going back to the blackguard though I have my doubts as to why a class requiring a free spirited person would also require the person to follow a code of conduct too. It just seems like a big paradox to me I guess

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #89 on: January 24, 2010, 10:05:52 PM »
Despite your apparent detractions, I have found no 'broken' spells in Pathfinder - those spells which are considered 'instant win' can now be duplicated by every other class after 10th level just as consistently and just as or even more effectively.

From the Pathfinder SRD, I present to you:  Hideous Laughter.

This spell afflicts the subject with uncontrollable laughter. It collapses into gales of manic laughter, falling prone. The subject can take no actions while laughing, but is not considered helpless. After the spell ends, it can act normally. On the creature's next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this save is successful, the effect ends. If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration.

Now, then.  First off, I have bold two important parts.  First off, if you ignore the second bolded part, it's broken in that you can lock down any target, ANY target, for as many rounds starting at level 3 for a Wiz/Sor or level 1 if a Bard.  That's incredibly powerful and in MY opinion broken.  If you allow the second bold part, it invalidates the first, making it a prime example of lousy oversight.

Next, are the save or Die series of spells, most of which were very powerful in 3.x.  The Hold series of spells.  (Which has the same silly wording.  Take no actions at all, for the assumed duration, except on your next turn you can spend a full action to free yourself.  Which is it??)

Flesh to Stone:  Almost a direct port from the 3.x SRD, and...  Still a fight ender, you save or you are effectively dead.

Phantasmal Killer:  Not only will it kill your target dead instantly, if your target actually saves, and has telepathy, he might turn it against you!

Those spells were, among others, considered 'broken' by virtue of being very powerful, so powerful that they are still considered must haves for any arcane caster.

Now, you state that all classes have the ability at 10th level to match these encounter ending abilities?  Sadly, I don't see it.  The fighter doesn't get anything other than 'Armor Training' and a paltry +1 with weapon groups that don't stack.

Bard?  Nothing in Class, must be his spells (No surprise there.)

Barbarian?  Nope, nothing that instantly kills or otherwise removes the target from the fight.

I could go down the list, but suffice it to say, no class has the fight stopping power of the pure casters.  Which...  Was the problem with 3.x.

This is my disappointment.  My complaints all stem from this.  And personally, I dislike multi-classing, always have.  And in 3.x it still was a bad choice for spell casters because you were cutting into your spell casting level.  I don't see anything replacing that.  And if it did, by allowing full spell progression, it would make Multi-classing way too powerful.

If they had only listened during the Playtesting, maybe I could have liked it.  Instead, I have to make do with the same old, same old.

Still, if you like it, go nuts.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #90 on: January 24, 2010, 10:20:11 PM »
Thanks for sharing Chris. I know a few of those examples already.

Offline Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #91 on: January 24, 2010, 10:24:01 PM »
Hmm...Chris, that looks like, I don't know, the exact same limitations that Hold Person has on it?  It's not oversight, it's consistency.  But I'll go back to ignoring you.

Brandon, the Hellknight, from what I understand, is in the Council of Thieves Adventure Path, in the 3rd part of the adventure.

Offline Mnemaxa

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #92 on: January 25, 2010, 01:27:13 AM »
Hideous Laughter:  This spell afflicts the subject with uncontrollable laughter. It collapses into gales of manic laughter, falling prone. The subject can take no actions while laughing, but is not considered helpless. After the spell ends, it can act normally. On the creature's next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this save is successful, the effect ends. If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration.
This spell gives a +4 bonus against creatures not of the casters type and doesn't work on anything with intelligence less than 2, which means against anything but humanoids, it's pretty worthless.  Furthermore, you get two saves and it does not allow you to coup de grace the target, nor does it allow sneak attack damage as you do not lose your Dex bonus to AC.  You get a +2 to attack a prone target, but otherwise it just keeps the opponent from doing anything for a few rounds.  You still must try to kill the oppenent the hard way.

Next, are the Save or Die series of spells, most of which were very powerful in 3.x.  The Hold series of spells.  (Which has the same silly wording.  Take no actions at all, for the assumed duration, except on your next turn you can spend a full action to free yourself.  Which is it??)
Save every single round.  This time the opponent is helpless, and a coup de grace may kill it.  This spell is absolutely worthless against anything that isn't a humanoid - such as giants, fae, dragons, oozes, monsters, animals, plants, constructs, undead, etc.   This is a 2nd level spell at earliest casting, which means a 3rd level character can cast it.  A CR 3 monster can be killed by a 3rd level fighter in one round on a good day or three rounds on a bad day without needing to concern oneself with saving throws - and it doesn't have to be human.

Flesh to Stone:  Almost a direct port from the 3.x SRD, and...  Still a fight ender, you save or you are effectively dead.
This spell targets fortitude, generally the strongest save for fully 3/4 of all monsters you will be fighting.  It is also useless against any shapechanger, undead, or against anything not made out of flesh, such as elementals, constructs of the non-flesh golem variety, etc.  Since it is a 6th level spell, the soonest it can be used is 11th level, which will be a later point.

Phantasmal Killer:  Not only will it kill your target dead instantly, if your target actually saves, and has telepathy, he might turn it against you!
This spell is a 3rd level spell, and targets the two strongest saves of all - will and fortitude.  Either save means the spell doesn't work.  Instant death spell at 5th level with the possibility of the two best saves to negate?  Not particularly overpowered.

Now, you state that all classes have the ability at 10th level to match these encounter ending abilities?  Sadly, I don't see it.  The fighter doesn't get anything other than 'Armor Training' and a paltry +1 with weapon groups that don't stack.
The +1 on weapon groups is an escalating bonus that nets the fighter a +4 with his main weapon group at 20th level.  This seems paltry to you, but it is not.  Why not?  Feats.  Lots of them.  Explanation to come.

Bard?  Nothing in Class, must be his spells.  (No surprise there.)
Spells yes.  Not a big deal, we knew this.]

Barbarian?  Nope, nothing that instantly kills or otherwise removes the target from the fight.
And here we come to the crux of the matter, with fighters and barbarians and monks.  The instant win spells you point out are useful, but they all have some glaring limitations as I described.  If you looked through the feats you can see that they are not the same as they once were.  Let us take a 11th level fighter, vrs. your 11th level wizard in comparison threat towards enemies of their CR rating.

At this level as an example, the fighter who has specialized in Power Attack, with Critical focus as well as Bleeding Critical and uses an elven court blade or falchion as his main weapon does damage of weapon damage average of 6+2+9+ 1 1/2 str + magic damage.  At 11th level, this averages around a +6 bonus for strength (which goes up to 9 with the added two handed weapon bonus of +3) and +3 for magic (ignoring weapon enhancements other than simple magical for the moment).  So, average damage of 29, multiplied times 2 for iterative attacks, which will hit two out of three times, so 58 damage on average per round.  But every 4th hit is a critical, for which that average damage is doubled and will inflict 2d6 bleed damage for which there is no save.  Note that this does NOT include Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization.

Your average CR 11 monster with a full BAB will have around 160 hit points and good Fort saves, and most likely good Fort and Will saves.  In three rounds, a fighter will have killed it inflicting average damage on 2 out of 3 attacks with no saving throws, no crits, and using a basic magic weapon.  By himself.  A single crit reduces that to two rounds.  He'll survive, because his armor class will reduce the chances of his opponents hitting him by a great deal.  He can reduce his damage output by an entire 4 points if he uses a ranged weapon from his second tier Weapon Training and Deadly Aim, which he will also be able to have via sheer volume of feats - this means he can cause an average of 25 points of damage at range each attack on average, meaning he's forced to spend 4 rounds killing his opponent instead of three without any help.  To those who say, "but that's not an instant win!" I have one thing to say:  If the opponent is dead, you win.

In the meantime, Hold Monster, Stone to Flesh, and Phantasmal Killer may also end the fight in a single round if the opponent fails saving throws.   Three critical hits on the same monster by the fighter in one round will also end the fight in a single round.  And Hideous Laughter doesn't kill anything, as there is no coup de grace or sneak attack damage available.

A barbarian is perfectly capable of emulating this to a large extent using rage abilities in place of weapon training, and will most likely be even harder for opponents to hit.  A monk...well, considering he has the attacks of a fighter wielding two weapons, along with this stunning/exhausting/sickening fist abilities and potential trip attacks during these attacks to gain extra attacks as well as possibly using Ki to gain more attacks, all without spending a single character level feat to improve or gain these abilities, the damage values are not the same but pretty damn close.  Rangers and paladins are just as effective against their specialized enemies as a fighter, and can certainly hold their own against their unspecialized enemies.

A lot of people respond to this argument by saying 'but damage was never the problem', to which my reply is 'damage solves the problem by ending the fight in the case of the instant win spells, and the revamped skill system and magical item creation ended the problem of nothing to do outside the fight'.

With the removal of the caster's abilities to emulate a rogue or fighter in any way and the remaking of monks into and bards into effective classes , no one class is obsolete, and thus there is no 'caster imbalance' issue that you are so intent on harping on in Pathfinder.  With the changes in the skill system, a fighter will be able to be useful out of combat if he desires, and anyone can make Magic Arms and Armor if they desire.  Pathfinder fixes 3.5 by opening up options that allow the player to build their desired character however they wish, including the ability to manage without true casters and still create a functional party - something impossible in 3.5. 

This is just a restatement of something I've already pointed out in this thread done in great detail.  And mind you, these details aren't even hyperspecific - this is an AVERAGE fighter, not a truly specialized fighter.  A truly specialized fighter will be even more destructive.  Feel free to check the math.  The fighter's starting strength was 18, with his bonus points added to strength for 20, and a +4 strength enhancement bonus from a magic item.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 01:37:45 AM by Mnemaxa »

Offline hgb

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #93 on: February 02, 2010, 12:52:15 AM »
I have played, and run pathfinder games, and I see no overpowering magic issues... Magic is just that Magic, but I don't see any of the other classes wishing they were casters instead. Not to mention survivability of the other classes is a major. The monk in my current gaming group is as good as immune to most anything with a save, the barbarian has soaked critical hits which would have outright killed the wizard, even though she was still at full life, and the wizard was using her magic to play teleporter for the party.

I have yet to be in a group, where the other players felt they were outclassed because their classes were defunct. I have seen characters feel underpowered because they tried building story based characters, or had unique concept ideas that just didn't work out well in game. That, however, is hardly the fault of the system, or the other players. I always try to understand one thing going in to a game with a new group, and that is the balance between story and power. If the rest of the group is powergaming, I must as well to have any fun. I don't enjoy being in a battle and everyone else being efficient, while I'm just dead. On the other hand, I do love a good story driven game, especially if all the players are on board with more story less power. It all depends on how things are run.

I personally enjoy the pathfinder system, and intend to continue to play it despite the adjustment to some of the more glaring differences.

Offline Mnemaxa

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #94 on: February 02, 2010, 02:58:20 AM »
For those who are interested, they just posted the 6 playtestign classes revised for a final playtest run. 

They changed the Eidolon's stats and gave it some limitations, while giving the summoner some potency all on his own as well. 

The witch needed almost no changes whatsoever, but the few changes they did make are better hexes. 

The alchemist got a serious retooling, and more discoveries, as well as a way to manage his bombs better - they're considered a weapon, which means he can quickdraw a catalyst vial, then activate and throw it and apply weapon focus and greater weapon focus on it.   His spell selection is a little better, and he gains Brew Potion as a bonus feat, giving him the ability to turn his few formulas into potions, making him an excellent backup buffer and potential healer now.

Inquisitors and Cavaliers have been altered the msot drastically so I'll have to entirely playtest them from scratch.

Oracles have a few new Focuses (called Mysteries now), and they'll need a little playtesting, but they're overall improved in style at least.

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #95 on: February 02, 2010, 09:11:04 PM »
For those who are interested, they just posted the 6 playtestign classes revised for a final playtest run. 

I just went form having a bad day to having a flipping awesome day *goes to look*

Online National Acrobat

  • Elliquiy's Resident Heavy Metallurgist
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2005
  • Location: Virginia, USA
  • Gender: Male
  • Black candles burn, all minds aligned
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #96 on: February 03, 2010, 02:22:51 PM »
I know people running Original DnD at the local game shop, 1st Edition is still popular as is 2nd Edition. 3.X oddly went out of favor after they pulled the 3.5 version on us and we felt ripped off.

2nd Edition is a great example several players were in the playtest groups for that, they playtested it for two years with gaming groups trying it and making recommendations. In fact they saved the Bard when people wanted it. Now do they playtest the new rules with gaming groups for two years asking US what WE WANT to see in the DnD game? No.

Pathfinder RPG is in my view what 4th Edition should have been fixing the earlier rules and having a well tested final edition of the game.

I've got to agree here. My group still plays 1E ADnD and 1E Gamma World. Mind you, it's because it's what we like and what we've already played. When we do play a 3x variant, however, we play Pathfinder. We love the way the classes were done, the channeling for clerics, and the skill system changes.

We gave 4E a try, and when one of us said 'this reminds me somewhat of the old days' we just decided to go back to the old days, our 1E ADnD games.

What really put us off with 4E was that it wasn't backwards compatible at all with 3x. At least 2E is with 1E, and there was a conversion guide for 3x for 2E stuff.

We routinely use our 3x books with Pathfinder, with just a few minimal tweaks.

Overall though, we're still happy with 1E ADnD.

Offline Mnemaxa

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #97 on: February 04, 2010, 12:45:31 AM »
New Witch Hex: Flight
As the Witch gains in levels, she becomes lighter, gaining the ability to fly. At 1st level, the witch can use feather fall at will and gains a +4 racial bonus on Swim checks. At 3rd level she can cast levitate 1/day. At 5th level she gain the ability to fly as per the spell for a number of minutes per day equal to her caster level.

So if she floats and weighs the same as a duck, we can burn her, right?

Aside from that, the rewrites of the classes give the Witch and the Alchemist the ability to resurrect people (above and beyond the spellcasting ability of the Witch), making it possible to no longer have a cleric and still get the benefit of having people brought back to life.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 01:12:17 AM by Mnemaxa »

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #98 on: February 04, 2010, 02:16:14 PM »
That kind of annoys me as I have always believed that divine magic, arcane magic, and Psychics should be able to do something iconic that the other 2 cant. In this case bring back the dead for divine spellcasters.

I understand the need for it, it just detracts from one of my core beliefs about the caster classes

Also the flight hex is flipping awesome!
« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 02:17:40 PM by Brandon »

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #99 on: February 28, 2010, 08:28:13 PM »
I finally got my copy of Council of thieves 3 yesterday and got the chance to look over the hellknight today. Its not what I expected in the least. As a general rule they arent honorable yet evil warriors of a cause. Theyre just simply lawful and their morale code lets them be as good or evil as they need to be to keep order (obviously they tend toward evil). Morale obscurity and dark reputation does not equal a good counter to the paladin and that leaves me supremely disappointed in the entire class

That said, theyre still interesting antagonists to be used in Chelaxian or similar devil influenced settings. The different orders also give a lot of flavor to them. Just not what I see as an honorable warrior of utter evil

Another thought comes to mind too. When is Paizo going to do a writup on Pharasma and Erastil? For me theyre the most interesting gods in the entire pantheon and we havnt seen anything for either.