The Gaming Den

OK, many people have noted that the ranger's main schtick, the whole "tracker/wilderness guide" thing, is obsolete by level 5. We can certainly extend its shelf life, but that would require cutting into the spells lists in the name of niche protection. For example, if the ranger got anchor...

Ah, right. I forgot because that makes NO DAMNED SENSE. So the class was even more shittily designed. Yeah, the designer thought that mage armor was an abjuration; but instead of changing the wording to reflect this, WotC issued an erratum that runs the complete opposite direction: Under the abjura...

Because otherwise Sorcerers lose their casting stat and clerics will no longer have additional channels per day. Duh. Nice! Sarcasm aside, though, one could just as easily say that Wis represents the bard totally being in touch with his music, and the sorcerer being in touch with his inner dragon o...

Before that, I have to inform you about the thrush familiar from the APG. It gives +3 Diplomacy (and +2/+4 Sense motive, as any familiar). It's not as good as the scorpion familiar (+2 init), but if your group already has a wizard and need a face, it's still better than using some lame Cha-class. W...

Seerow wrote:Now I need to see a Tome Feat "Hill Fighter" all about beating the shit out of mountains.

If it was good enough for Cu Chulainn, it's good enough for me!

Granted, most classes hand out martial weapon proficiencies like candy, but let's still pretend the difference in performance between a longbow and a sling is accounted for by the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat. I'm even willing to go out on a limb and say the composite longbow should arguably be E...

So asking for crossbows to be as good as bows is like asking for water balloons to be just as good... I had the sad misfortune of asking "If martial weapons are better, and cost a feat to prove it, then why can't I spend a feat -- or even two -- and have a sling perform as well as a longbow?&q...

Ice, I hadn't seen a few of those traits before -- there's a limit to how deep into dumpsters I'm willing to dive. So, is it just me, or did someone actually say "We already took away 1/2 ranks for x-class skills, and I know the wizard already gets bonzo skill points from Int, but I want to mak...

Picking traits is easy. "Reactionary" is better than all the other ones, so everyone takes that. Whatever else you pick is likely so situational it will never come up, and so minor it won't matter if it does. So waive the second one, or just pick it at random. Done!

GâtFromKI wrote:Actually Hill fighter is a trait, not a feat. So NPC can't have it. It's PC-only-stuff.

Then what's it for? This kind of thing is what makes me anxious to not look at PF anymore. If it were a monster ability, I could at least use it to build encounters.

Edit: Adam, if you could take a look at the stuff I'm planning on publishing for Pathfinder, I'd appreciate the eye of someone who knows the system. I know jack-all about comic books, so I can't be of much help in that regard except to caution you to be very, very careful about publishing anything ...

Yeah, most PF feats are so situational they're basically intended for NPCs/monsters who don't move from a specific location and will only have one "set piece" before they're killed. Why stuff like Hill Fighter wasn't simply rolled into skills (e.g., "at 6 ranks, you don't even have to...

Wiseman wrote:Welcome to the Den!

Thanks! I've lurked here before, but never posted until now. Something just clicked -- the stuff I read here can get aggressive, but it generally makes sense. The stuff I read there now just makes me want to drown myself.

New user here -- a refugee from the Paizo boards. The level of stupid of some of the "discourse" is brain-shattering... I just couldn't take it anymore. And when the actual game designers hold high-level martials to what sedentary real-life geeks can easily do without practice, you know it...