Author Topic: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?  (Read 77698 times)

Offline oslecamo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10080
  • Creating monsters for my Realm of Darkness
    • View Profile
    • Oslecamo's Custom Library (my homebrew)
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #60 on: March 22, 2012, 04:40:09 PM »
Save DCs are generally low-ish(because PF monsters tend to have lower HD/CR), you can probably expect to fail about 40% of the saves in your weak save. The exceptions, like the big cats, are relatively squishy, so if they do pounce, and you're alive, they're dead.


Straight from the bestiary.
Fascinating. First you're claiming players are only expected to fail 40% of their weak saves, then you show a table where enemy DCs are expected to increase by 1 at every level.

Considering that  weak saves progress at 1/3 level in PF, and more often than not they're tied to dump stats that don't progress either, I would love to hear how needing a 12+ on a 1d20 to suceed (first level +0 at bad save against DC 12, and it will only get worst) turns out to be just a 40% fail chance.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2012, 04:43:41 PM by oslecamo »

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #61 on: March 22, 2012, 04:44:02 PM »
Answer: His posts do not accurately describe those numbers which in turn do not accurately describe the numbers contained within the very same book.

Though really, save DCs are so crazy in PF if you're passing 40% of the time with a high save that's atypical.

7 + Cha + likely negative Wis + resistance vs DC 25 twice. And that's a character with so called good saves.

Offline lans

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 252
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #62 on: March 22, 2012, 04:51:43 PM »
I vehemently protest BB's
Quote
every melee enemy is now stronger
,  but it looks like a chunk of them are.

All of them are. Since they all use natural weapons and all natural weapons are buffed, not to mention the PA nerf for everyone else is a buff for them.
Huge earth elementals did not, unless 2d8+9 is a higher number than 2d10+9 some how.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #63 on: March 22, 2012, 04:53:51 PM »
Fascinating. First you're claiming players are only expected to fail 40% of their weak saves, then you show a table where enemy DCs are expected to increase by 1 at every level.

Considering that  weak saves progress at 1/3 level in PF, and more often than not they're tied to dump stats that don't progress either, I would love to hear how needing a 12+ on a 1d20 to suceed (first level +0 at bad save against DC 12, and it will only get worst) turns out to be just a 40% fail chance.
In practice(the table is as the book says to be a 'central guideline' i.e. your stats should start on the table and then modify for specific cases),  you see a lot more Secondary Ability DC types than Primary Ability.

Chance of failure tips the other way when you make use of caster-type monsters more frequently, as they tend to have enough attack forms to actually choose the save they'd be hitting, and have a high DC. They tend to be even squishier than usual though.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #64 on: March 22, 2012, 05:01:59 PM »
Huge earth elementals did not, unless 2d8+9 is a higher number than 2d10+9 some how.

Seems like someone really needs a hug from the floormaster elemental...

]In practice(the table is as the book says to be a 'central guideline' i.e. your stats should start on the table and then modify for specific cases),  you see a lot more Secondary Ability DC types than Primary Ability.

Chance of failure tips the other way when you make use of caster-type monsters more frequently, as they tend to have enough attack forms to actually choose the save they'd be hitting, and have a high DC. They tend to be even squishier than usual though.

We're still talking about PF right?

Offline oslecamo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10080
  • Creating monsters for my Realm of Darkness
    • View Profile
    • Oslecamo's Custom Library (my homebrew)
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #65 on: March 22, 2012, 05:30:38 PM »
In practice(the table is as the book says to be a 'central guideline' i.e. your stats should start on the table and then modify for specific cases),  you see a lot more Secondary Ability DC types than Primary Ability.
"Make up stuff in your own" isn't exactly a sign of good design.

Chance of failure tips the other way when you make use of caster-type monsters more frequently, as they tend to have enough attack forms to actually choose the save they'd be hitting, and have a high DC. They tend to be even squishier than usual though.
Prove it.

The Aeon Pleroma, for example, has 24 HD at CR 20 with SLAs, cleric 20 casting, no stat under 24, SLAs, and custom save-or-dies with DC 30, which is actually higher than on the table (and can be made even higher if the Pleroma bothers to buff itself with its cleric casting). Oh, and it has Implosion and Gate as sugested spells prepared. It could give a 3.5 Solar a run for its money, but it's three CRs lower!

EDIT: Scratch that, it's actualy tougher than the 3.5 Solar with higher overal DCs. Doesn't really suport the theory that PF monsters are weaker in any way.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2012, 05:35:58 PM by oslecamo »

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #66 on: March 22, 2012, 05:39:55 PM »
"Make up stuff in your own" isn't exactly a sign of good design.

Especially when it gives you stuff much weaker than anything in the book.

Quote
Prove it.

The Aeon Pleroma, for example, has 24 HD at CR 20 with SLAs, cleric 20 casting, no stat under 24, SLAs, and custom save-or-dies with DC 30, which is actually higher than on the table (and can be made even higher if the Pleroma bothers to buff itself with its cleric casting). Oh, and it has Implosion and Gate as sugested spells prepared. It could give a 3.5 Solar a run for its money, but it's three CRs lower!

EDIT: Scratch that, it's actualy tougher than the 3.5 Solar with higher overal DCs. Doesn't really suport the theory that PF monsters are weaker in any way.

Wow. I mean I know PF monsters were altered in such a way so as to heavily favor spellcasting as the only valid tactic by and against them but going ahead and making a Planetar+? And those most likely being the numbers before items as well as buffs?

Offline Thurbane

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • **
  • Posts: 133
  • 3.5 fanboy
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #67 on: March 22, 2012, 09:11:25 PM »
And wizard is much stronger now.  They can still cast spells from prohibited schools and can prohibit divination.  And they get powerful school powers for class features, whether they prestige out or not.
In other words, wizards have 500 ways to win the game instead of 400.  You really consider that notable?
I don't know about notable, but I personally consider it idiotic, if any part of their claimed goal with system changes was in any way to try and address balance issues. Brings me back to some of my original issues with PF - they fell far short of their intended (lofty) goals, did some reshuffling of deck chairs on the sinking ship, and called it an improvement...

Offline Hallack

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • With Jetpacks
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #68 on: March 23, 2012, 09:55:49 AM »
Sometimes a different chair on a sinking ship improves the experience :D

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #69 on: March 23, 2012, 03:51:47 PM »
"Make up stuff in your own" isn't exactly a sign of good design.
Never said it was, but making up stuff with goalposts is a bit better than making up stuff without.
Quote
Prove it.
Ok, firstly, passing over 'boss' type creatures for the reason that they inherited the 'lets under CR this so its more like a boss fight'.

CR 5:
(click to show/hide)
Ok, I guess I overstated the point, they're mostly only slightly squishier, and DCs aren't that low. Optimized players helps skew perceptions(I forget my crew is running around basically all the time with a Mass Conviction), the PCs kill everything more or less trivially prior to mods, and back up their defenses with spells.
Beyond that, you can see the damage values tend to be counted as consolidated offense totals, anything with a decent AC could trivially quarter most of them, except for the Megaraptor, who needs a decent AC just to survive being charged at all.

CR 10:
(click to show/hide)

At this point, it seems hp is consistently below the bestiary recommendations, but many cases have DR or some other damage mitigation. The damage recommendations seem to be based off the assumption that all attacks hit and that they get full attacks, which depending on their secondary attack bonus, may not be a given. Power Attack does not appear that frequently, however appropriate it might be, likely because it'd drive the damage values up significantly. Critical hits are not accounted for.

Numbers in general adhere closely to the given statistics on published creatures, generally deviating by +1-5(gap gets larger at higher CR) on the d20 numbers, and larger variances on hp and damage. A number of creatures however, have more extreme outliers, and deviations are generally higher than the baseline, except for hp, and iterative based to-hit. Damage is surprisingly consistent between the goalposts, except for particularly hard hitting creatures with weak secondary attacks, those get to almost exactly double the cap, personally I suspect the designer for those creatures counted damage after accuracy is accounted for, rather than before. For a given creature, 2-3 stats would be above the standard, and 1-2(depending on how you count saves below. Additionally, damage estimations seems to only consider the first round of damage over time, as the cumulative Con loss from an effective poison may be disproportionate over time. Relatively few things have save spamming, they tend to have the bulk of saving throw effects behind a standard action, or else tied to only one natural weapon.

Those numbers also make monsters defensively rather weak, a Fighter with the weapon training bonus can power attack all the time and hit pretty much all the time. Output wise, barring crits and extreme damage whores, the majority of monsters take two rounds to kill pretty much any PC(minimum of HDd6+3*HD(Con 14+Favored Class) makes it 65 hp on a squishy wizard at level 10, while the monsters hit for just above half that) given even favorable situations like all full attacks connecting and fulfilling all their extra damage conditions. Having decent armor alone would shave off a third of this value, and good fort saves to resist poison takes off another quarter.
At level 5, minimal Dex(+1), full plate(+9) and a shield(+2) would get you an AC of 22, which is about 50% miss for their best attack(inclusive of high to-hit of +13), and significantly better for voiding secondary attacks. At level 10, adding another point of Dex, +1 to armor, shield and 3 magical AC sources at +1 gets you AC 28, which performs similarly.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #70 on: March 23, 2012, 03:56:16 PM »

... Seems like someone really needs a hug from the floormaster elemental ...


 :o ... I survived an encounter with a Thighmaster Elemental , once.

I'm still scarred by it  :twitch
Your codpiece is a mimic.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #71 on: March 23, 2012, 04:07:19 PM »

... Seems like someone really needs a hug from the floormaster elemental ...


 :o ... I survived an encounter with a Thighmaster Elemental , once.

I'm still scarred by it  :twitch

I have no idea what you just said, but it made me laugh. Hard.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #72 on: March 23, 2012, 04:12:43 PM »

You don't want a "hug" ...  :eh ... from a Thighmaster Elemental.
Your codpiece is a mimic.

Offline SorO_Lost

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7197
  • Banned
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #73 on: March 23, 2012, 05:40:49 PM »
You don't want a "hug" ...  :eh ... from a Thighmaster Elemental.
Depends if it writes M or F on a certain line in applications.

Offline Fragglerox

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #74 on: March 28, 2012, 08:42:57 PM »
I can't really understand where a lot of this animosity towards Pathfinder is coming from.  After everything posted so far it's easy to see how some of the rule changes could be upsetting if you really hinge your experience on mimicking 3.5 games.  If a typical game consists of nothing more than everyone taking turns rolling dice dnd is king. Simply put, the mechanics of the game are amazing.  Speaking from my own experiences dice rolling is only a small part of a good rpg which is why my group has been able to have a lot of fun playing "inferior" games.

My primary argument in favor of pathfinder is that the flavor of your character seems important and meaningful.  I'll admit, in the past I have bastardized many of my own characters with level dips and strange class combinations in search of the perfect character.  With pathfinder I was able to find fun and exciting character options within a single class that allowed me to role play the way I wanted to.  To date I have played and enjoyed a barbarian, an alchemist (which I would consider my favorite gaming experience from any source), a summoner, and a cleric. Now I want to stress this, I am not attacking the quality of the lore and options available in 3.5,  I am making an observation about the available options and their influence on the gaming experience.  Did my pathfinder barbarians Mike Tyson-esque bite attack alter the course of the game? No, but I had a lot of fun using it.  Meaningful changes do not have to be earth shattering or have far reaching implications, they just need to be fun and enrich the experience.

I understand that most of what I enjoy from pathfinder could be incorporated into a 3.5 campaign but that kind of defeats the point.   Here we have a game that is familiar but different enough give us a very different gaming experience.  Politics aside (which have no place at the gaming table anyway), what is it exactly that pathfinder has done to make you dislike the gaming experience provided?  I'm not trying to be a jerk or make anyone mad, I sincerely would like to know because I am worried about the future of my groups experience. 

Offline Solo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1778
  • Sorcelator Supreme
    • View Profile
    • Solo's Compiled Works
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #75 on: March 28, 2012, 08:45:49 PM »
Falseness in advertising. Poorly balanced classes.
"I am the Black Mage! I cast the spells that makes the peoples fall down."

Offline TenaciousJ

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 600
  • AVENGE WAGON
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #76 on: March 28, 2012, 09:05:55 PM »
My primary argument in favor of pathfinder is that the flavor of your character seems important and meaningful.  I'll admit, in the past I have bastardized many of my own characters with level dips and strange class combinations in search of the perfect character.  With pathfinder I was able to find fun and exciting character options within a single class that allowed me to role play the way I wanted to.  To date I have played and enjoyed a barbarian, an alchemist (which I would consider my favorite gaming experience from any source), a summoner, and a cleric. Now I want to stress this, I am not attacking the quality of the lore and options available in 3.5,  I am making an observation about the available options and their influence on the gaming experience.  Did my pathfinder barbarians Mike Tyson-esque bite attack alter the course of the game? No, but I had a lot of fun using it.  Meaningful changes do not have to be earth shattering or have far reaching implications, they just need to be fun and enrich the experience.

Why does flavor written in books matter more than flavor you create for yourself?  I could be a druid focused on summoning and never refer to myself as a druid and opt for Pokemon trainer instead.  I could be a ranger/swordsage dual wielding cleavers while specializing in Desert Wind maneuvers and call myself a chef.  I could be a dwarven barbarian/fighter/warblade and roleplay as a drunken brawler.

When people bring up this sort of argument, I describe the classes as building blocks with labels that do not have to translate to flavor.  You can't bastardize a build with a level dip anymore than you can bastardize it for choosing something besides the feats on the sample characters or choosing a different weapon than the pictures.  If you think something is mechanically stronger and your character would think having the options from a level dip are stronger, your character would be stupid to say, "No, I am a <class> and I cannot deviate from my training."  Real people identify themselves in more than one way and a character should be allowed to do the same.
Make Eberron Great Again! #MEGA

Offline Fragglerox

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #77 on: March 28, 2012, 09:28:12 PM »
Falseness in advertising. Poorly balanced classes.
Thanks! Could you elaborate as to what class balance issues you found most disrupting to the game?

Why does flavor written in books matter more than flavor you create for yourself?  I could be a druid focused on summoning and never refer to myself as a druid and opt for Pokemon trainer instead.  I could be a ranger/swordsage dual wielding cleavers while specializing in Desert Wind maneuvers and call myself a chef.  I could be a dwarven barbarian/fighter/warblade and roleplay as a drunken brawler.

When people bring up this sort of argument, I describe the classes as building blocks with labels that do not have to translate to flavor.  You can't bastardize a build with a level dip anymore than you can bastardize it for choosing something besides the feats on the sample characters or choosing a different weapon than the pictures.  If you think something is mechanically stronger and your character would think having the options from a level dip are stronger, your character would be stupid to say, "No, I am a <class> and I cannot deviate from my training."  Real people identify themselves in more than one way and a character should be allowed to do the same.

Very true, flavor does not need to be written into the game since you can bring flavor to the game yourself.  I would site the paladin as an example where built in flavor helps improve the gaming experience since the restrictions and conditions help them shine and struggle in different situations.  I understand that it is very often enriching to do whatever it take to maximize your characters effectiveness but restricting your character can be equally rewarding.  My barbarian might benefit from a fighter dip but I would be completely opposed to doing so because it goes against his character.  Many of the great characters from movies and plays are not remembered because they were all encompassing renaissance badasses but because they were imperfect and felt real.  Similarly the actors behind those characters chose to play to those weaknesses to relate with the fictional characters they portrayed.  Real people do have many facets, but they do not choose all sides of their personality to optimize their total living effectiveness.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 09:30:00 PM by Fragglerox »

Offline Prime32

  • Over-Underling
  • Retired Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 2914
    • View Profile
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #78 on: March 28, 2012, 09:52:00 PM »
My barbarian might benefit from a fighter dip but I would be completely opposed to doing so because it goes against his character.  Many of the great characters from movies and plays are not remembered because they were all encompassing renaissance badasses but because they were imperfect and felt real.  Similarly the actors behind those characters chose to play to those weaknesses to relate with the fictional characters they portrayed.  Real people do have many facets, but they do not choose all sides of their personality to optimize their total living effectiveness.
...huh? :??? What exactly would an "all encompassing renaissance badass" look like? How could you even tell that a barbarian you meet has a fighter level?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 09:58:44 PM by Prime32 »

Offline Solo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1778
  • Sorcelator Supreme
    • View Profile
    • Solo's Compiled Works
Re: Why are the exact problems people have with Pathfinder?
« Reply #79 on: March 28, 2012, 10:23:51 PM »
Falseness in advertising. Poorly balanced classes.
Thanks! Could you elaborate as to what class balance issues you found most disrupting to the game?

The example that most readily comes to mind is how they have nerfed the rogue's combat ability. It is more difficult to make sneak attacks, qualify for sneak attacks, and tumble into position due to the changes the tumble DC.
"I am the Black Mage! I cast the spells that makes the peoples fall down."