Author Topic: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.  (Read 50224 times)

Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3618
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #60 on: August 06, 2012, 04:57:16 PM »
Does it require some kind of prior knowledge of the setting? If not, I might as well look for it since I know basically nothing about Greyhawk.

You don't need prior knowledge of the setting.  It's a very detailed and comprehensive book.

Since it was made in 2001 and considered the "default" setting, it doesn't have much in the way of unique themes.  That, and it's one of the oldest D&D settings.

Notable aspects of Greyhawk include:

(click to show/hide)

Don't mean to thread derail, so I put the meat of my message in a spoiler.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2012, 04:59:14 PM by Libertad »

Offline Squirel_Dude

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #61 on: August 06, 2012, 11:48:31 PM »
Don't mean to thread derail
It's a little too late for that. >.>

Let's see if we can't get back on topic, though.

From the fighter archetype "Dragoon," published in Ultimate Combat
Quote
Leaping Lance (Ex): At 15th level, a dragoon and his mount suffer no armor check penalty on Acrobatics checks while mounted. When charging, a dragoon may jump from his mount toward his target. If he jumps 10 feet, his charge modifiers on attack rolls and to AC are doubled and he is still considered mounted for lance damage, mounted combat feats, and so on. This ability replaces armor training 4.
:twitch I mean it's awesome, but seriously? Jumping off a mount to impale someone with a lance is allowed, but attacking them with it multiple times is banned for "realism?"


From the Ultimate Combat section on vehicles:
Boat Speeds
Understand that I fully accept the lack of realism, but sometimes I simply wish that there was a minimal amount of effort put into making certain things make sense. For example, the speeds of boats as they are listed in the Ultimate Combat.

e.g.
Galley 180 ft./round (current) or 60 ft. (muscle)
Longboat: 120 ft./round (current and muscle) or 30 ft./round (muscle)

1. Both of these types of ships had sails, yes, but especially the first one was primarily powered by muscle and oars, not sails. Especially not with only 1500 sq. ft. of sails for a Galley that uses 140 rowers to move it.
2. Those speeds aren't just fast, they're something that American ship-designers would be proud of in the mid-nineteenth century. CLIPPER ships did not achieve 18 knots (10 ft/round ~ 1 mph ~ 1 knot) on a regular basis, let alone a Trireme!

Also, ship statistics aren't all that useful if you don't provide the height of the ship along with the length and width. It's not like they're 3 dimensional objects or anything.  :banghead

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #62 on: August 07, 2012, 03:05:29 AM »
That Dragoon is clearly an outright ripoff so its exempt!
Honestly though, I think there is only so much you can do with wizards/clerics/druids to make them more in balance with the rest of the other classes, or vice versa before you get to 4th edition. But then again, everyone loves 4th edition, right?
There are actual things you could do... he just doesn't do any of them he actively makes the situation worse...
Its even been done in part. The Inquisitor is basically a reduced power martial cleric, the druid HAS actually significantly lost power(though its still a druid) from the wild shape and animal companion changes, while a subset of the Problem Spells have been weakened.

The bad part is really just his hate on for specific areas of the game.
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 midnight_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
  • It is good and fitting to die for the dice...
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #63 on: August 07, 2012, 08:45:48 AM »
Quote
Honestly though, I think there is only so much you can do with wizards/clerics/druids to make them more in balance with the rest of the other classes, or vice versa before you get to 4th edition. But then again, everyone loves 4th edition, right?

I'm gonna throw my hat in the middle of the ring and say, that its pretty much right out wrong.  There are many, many things that can be done to bring things in line, that occur WAAAAY before 4th edition/Final Destination occur.
"Disentegrate...gust of wind. Can we please get back to saving the world now?"

Offline Squirel_Dude

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #64 on: August 07, 2012, 12:47:21 PM »
Well, so much for getting back on topic.
Quote
Honestly though, I think there is only so much you can do with wizards/clerics/druids to make them more in balance with the rest of the other classes, or vice versa before you get to 4th edition. But then again, everyone loves 4th edition, right?
I'm gonna throw my hat in the middle of the ring and say, that its pretty much right out wrong.  There are many, many things that can be done to bring things in line, that occur WAAAAY before 4th edition/Final Destination occur.
Honestly, I don't see it. The concept of arcane magic as an all powerful force is such a core concept of D&D game-logic, that, when you begin to weaken the wizard or strengthen a Barbarian to unbelievable (read, necessary) degrees, you face massive backlash.

To use the Rage-lance-pounce build as an example. As broken as it was, it was removed for the sake of realism. If realism is the goal of D&D rules, why are wizards allowed to call down meteor storms, and why are clerics allowed to suck away another characters "levels?" People talk about the "supremacy of casters," but really we're talking about the supremacy of magic.

Let's be honest, Spells above 6th level don't really have a place in a setting that's "realistic." Once you've given a cleric the ability to control the weather, you've mentally decided that a class without the ability to cast spells is always going to be the equivalent of a commoner. Why shouldn't martial characters be allowed to run and jump and do physically impossible actions with their sword? Because we've all accepted that marital characters aren't supposed to be able to destroy settings like a wizard, cleric, or druid.

So far, I have only seen 3 attempts. Legendary, which simply removed a wizard. 4E which pigeonholed every class to try and keep a wizard from doing everything. Pathfinder which initially tried a light retooling of the classes and abilities that ultimately doesn't have enough of an effect because casters were still expected to break the setting in the end.

That Dragoon is clearly an outright ripoff so its exempt!
It's not even the only one trying to turn a fighter into a cavalier (Dragoon even has a banner). The other one is the tactician. The archetype where a fighter gains 4 skill points per level and get's teamwork feats instead of combat feats.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 12:52:15 PM by Squirel_Dude »

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #65 on: August 07, 2012, 01:07:54 PM »
I think you're trying to conflate two separate issues here.  The issue that others are addressing is whether it's possible to have a system in between 3.5's caster supremacy and 4th's blandness.  And they are right - there is plenty of conceptual space between those two concepts.  Your arguments are aimed at a different concept entirely - whether the playerbase would accept those changes.  And quite frankly, there's not enough information available to even attempt a guess at that answer. 

If you want non-D&D games that equalize the power level between magic and mundane better, I don't know how big that list would be, but I can think of at least 30 off the top of my head, and could probably push that above 100 if I dug around through my collection a bit. 


Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3618
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #66 on: August 07, 2012, 01:58:20 PM »
There was a Pathfinder feat which could be taken by Trolls.  It allowed them to cut out their entrails and see the future by observing the movements of their still-living organs.

A cool flavor ability, but one of limited use to PCs.  It mimics Augury, which can be prepared/learned by spellcasters without the use of a feat slot.  Additionally, it can't be taken by the iconic races unless your DM allows you to play a Troll (in which case you're better off taking feats to increase your melee fighting capabilities).

Offline midnight_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
  • It is good and fitting to die for the dice...
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #67 on: August 07, 2012, 01:59:19 PM »
I think you're trying to conflate two separate issues here.  The issue that others are addressing is whether it's possible to have a system in between 3.5's caster supremacy and 4th's blandness.  And they are right - there is plenty of conceptual space between those two concepts.  Your arguments are aimed at a different concept entirely - whether the playerbase would accept those changes.  And quite frankly, there's not enough information available to even attempt a guess at that answer. 

If you want non-D&D games that equalize the power level between magic and mundane better, I don't know how big that list would be, but I can think of at least 30 off the top of my head, and could probably push that above 100 if I dug around through my collection a bit.
+1
AND when I find the respect button I'm pushing you up to +7. Thats pretty much exactly the line of thought I had when I read that post.
Thanks Mooncrow.
"Disentegrate...gust of wind. Can we please get back to saving the world now?"

Offline Squirel_Dude

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #68 on: August 07, 2012, 05:00:21 PM »
I think you're trying to conflate two separate issues here.  The issue that others are addressing is whether it's possible to have a system in between 3.5's caster supremacy and 4th's blandness.  And they are right - there is plenty of conceptual space between those two concepts.  Your arguments are aimed at a different concept entirely - whether the playerbase would accept those changes.  And quite frankly, there's not enough information available to even attempt a guess at that answer. 
You're right. I don't know if one could find evidence to support my point without some weirdly specific sociological study into player's conceptual understanding of D&D. It's more or less my perspective reading people's opinions on the issue. I do think that the other part of the problem is the relatively large player base of D&D means there is a larger community of people trying to find ways to break the game than most other tabletop rpgs.

I'm sure there is a solution to the problem, but I'm not widely versed enough in rpgs to know it.

Offline Agita

  • He Who Lurks
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2705
  • *stare*
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #69 on: October 02, 2012, 06:22:53 AM »
Resurrecting this thread for a thing I just came across, a substitution from the Empyreal Knight archetype for Paladins.

Quote
Voices of the Spheres

At 2nd level, an empyreal knight learns to speak and read Celestial, if she could not already.

This ability replaces divine grace.
Please send private messages regarding board matters to Forum Staff instead.

Offline radionausea

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 425
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #70 on: October 02, 2012, 07:03:42 AM »
Divine Grace: worth one skill point. Excruciatingly bad.
Unless that mean's I can spend a skill point to get Divine Grace now... :p
Something inside me dies when I see the word fallacy applied to ideas held about roleplaying. And a small bit of vomit comes up when I see a character called a 'toon'.

Offline Empirate

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 258
  • I'm not as new as my post count suggests!
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #71 on: October 02, 2012, 07:24:57 AM »
Resurrecting this thread for a thing I just came across, a substitution from the Empyreal Knight archetype for Paladins.

Quote
Voices of the Spheres

At 2nd level, an empyreal knight learns to speak and read Celestial, if she could not already.

This ability replaces divine grace.

Omigod. Is this quoted out of context somehow, as in, this is a tax you have to pay so you get the other awesome features of the Empyreal Knight? Or is it just along the lines of "Improved Initiative is not quite on par with the +2/+2 skill feats, since it only comes into play once per combat."?

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #72 on: October 02, 2012, 09:25:10 AM »
No. The Empyreal Knight is just a suckfest. Also trades away Lay on Hands and Channel Positive Energy for a weaker Summon Monster class feature.

Offline Lord Slasher

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #73 on: October 02, 2012, 12:16:34 PM »
No. The Empyreal Knight is just a suckfest. Also trades away Lay on Hands and Channel Positive Energy for a weaker Summon Monster class feature.
It's really saying something about the archetype when the best part is the Mount upgrades.

And seriously Paizo, Get a single skill point in exchange to +3 or more to all saving throws

Offline Prime32

  • Over-Underling
  • Retired Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 2914
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #74 on: October 02, 2012, 05:09:31 PM »
And seriously Paizo, Get a single skill point in exchange to +3 or more to all saving throws
Of course. The paladin's official party role is "superior roleplaying experience" after all.

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #75 on: October 02, 2012, 07:35:33 PM »
And seriously Paizo, Get a single skill point in exchange to +3 or more to all saving throws
Of course. The paladin's official party role is "superior roleplaying experience" after all.
The paladin is actually one of the (few) things I believe that Pathfinder got right.

Offline StreamOfTheSky

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #76 on: October 03, 2012, 01:14:50 AM »
And seriously Paizo, Get a single skill point in exchange to +3 or more to all saving throws
Of course. The paladin's official party role is "superior roleplaying experience" after all.
The paladin is actually one of the (few) things I believe that Pathfinder got right.

Only after being dragged, kicking and screaming, towards the beaming glow of enlightenment.

Of course, people stopped pressuring them after that, and so you get Pal archetypes like this.

Offline Halinn

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2067
  • My personal text is impersonal.
    • View Profile
Re: Pathfinder: Forget the best, let's find the worst.
« Reply #77 on: October 03, 2012, 12:34:49 PM »
I never said that they did it willingly, but the result is a playable paladin class that's a solid tier 4, perhaps low tier 3 with non-PF sources.