Pathfinder: the Lowdown

[Roy]

Really? For a place where the mayority of people chortle into their tea about "Pathfailure" and "Paizils", I think the term is not any less imaginative.

What majority?

Well, the "felt" mayority, in my case. In my ( perhaps flawed ) perception the mayor part of people who post have an exceptionally negative view on Pathfinder and habitually refer to it and the people on the PF forums with the terms referenced above.

Of course I could be equating the most outspoken part of the population with the mayority, but as I said, it's personal perception.

I coined the word Paizil. It gets used around here a lot, and not just by me. But no one on the other board uses it. Even those who have no faith in Pathfailure. That term was coined by someone else and given that it did fail at everything it is supposed to do it is accurate.

But the Den did not fail at everything it is supposed to do. People come here and tear apart games, and people get butthurt and complain about it. And no one gets banned.

Successful Den is Successful.

As for our resident troll, he has a habit of failing even by fail boards standards. So this is about par for the course for him.

[virgil]

Does anyone know, why exactly Paizo tries to make their game so fucking grimdark, that Warhammer Fantasy's world perspectives are looking bright by comparison?

It's not just those things you've mentioned, but the PC's inability to fight anything worth a damn. It's an explicit design goal that the major nations are led by CR 20 entities (especially the devil-worshiping one), which makes the mortal political structure remarkably resistant to change. This makes it unfeasible to change anything beyond Golarian, as the planes are higher level than the Prime.

So the biggest thing the players can proactively change is a city unless they go out of their way to find an area that's practically a blank canvas so it'd essentially be homebrew (see Kingmaker). Though filling a blank spot isn't really changing the setting, so much as it is adding to it.

While I can appreciate/understand a setting with aspects too large for the PCs to meaningfully change, placing your glass ceiling at city level is a bit too 'mundane' for something like D&D.

Eh, I think a good number of things I've read here about the technical problems of Pathfinder are correct. But then the on the last pages we got extended "They suck!" posts over the beta playtest of the Magus, which I think is premature. If the Magus doesn't get better in its final incarnation, go ahead and lambast them, but wait until it is the final product.

Screw that. I've seen many attempts to stifle criticisms with that "wait and see" B.S., and the final product has been consistently just as bad as before (or worse!); a noticeable amount of their errata (beyond typo) is nerfs. Fool me once, and all that, so I'm not going to withhold judgement at a playtest anymore.

Another thing which is often mentioned is that a number of persons here are confused why people would pay for what they call "a set of house rules".

I don't think they appreciate how important it is for many players to have a rule set published by a mayor company, which is done professionally, with good artwork and product support.

Yeah, that whole "published with good art" really really helps. I can't disagree there. I throw the house rule moniker as an indictment of what I think of their rules quality. Hell, even that RL rabid PF fan-boy I've mentioned on this board has admitted that Paizo has real trouble with numbers and rules (but awesome flavour, in his words).

[magnuskn]

Does anyone know, why exactly Paizo tries to make their game so fucking grimdark, that Warhammer Fantasy's world perspectives are looking bright by comparison?

It's not just those things you've mentioned, but the PC's inability to fight anything worth a damn. It's an explicit design goal that the major nations are led by CR 20 entities (especially the devil-worshiping one), which makes the mortal political structure remarkably resistant to change. This makes it unfeasible to change anything beyond Golarian, as the planes are higher level than the Prime.

So the biggest thing the players can proactively change is a city unless they go out of their way to find an area that's practically a blank canvas so it'd essentially be homebrew (see Kingmaker). Though filling a blank spot isn't really changing the setting, so much as it is adding to it.

While I can appreciate/understand a setting with aspects too large for the PCs to meaningfully change, placing your glass ceiling at city level is a bit too 'mundane' for something like D&D.

Well, most Paizo campaigns end at level 16-17. At least in some of them there are briefs for the GM how s/he could continue the campaign, and many of those descriptions go right into the territory of "fuck that nations shit up!". Since Golarion doesn't have a metaplot like the Realms had, I can understand the reticence of the developers to really rip up their own setting too much.

Of course the problem seems to me, personally, that again a good number of people here want to apply the power of their characters to take over/out the setting they are playing in, which is why there are so many complaints that Golarion/The Realms/etc. are too static.

[virgil]

Well, most Paizo campaigns end at level 16-17. At least in some of them there are briefs for the GM how s/he could continue the campaign, and many of those descriptions go right into the territory of "fuck that nations shit up!". Since Golarion doesn't have a metaplot like the Realms had, I can understand the reticence of the developers to really rip up their own setting too much.

Most APs end at level ~16 because it's even Paizo has lots of trouble selling their high level adventures, which gives the impression that as far as official support goes, PF campaigns in general don't progress past that. I've got at least anecdotal evidence, in that the PF-lovin' group I hang out with have played three entire APs so far, and will drop their characters and their campaign the moment the AP's over.

It's already well known that the developers hold the design stance of "what happens in a particular AP, stays in a particular AP." When you've already committed yourself that an adventure holds no continuity in the setting, why would its effect on the setting matter? Why go out of your way to make it so that if you're not going to change your setting, nobody else will either (by making it too high level for anyone to even bother touching)?

Of course the problem seems to me, personally, that again a good number of people here want to apply the power of their characters to take over/out the setting they are playing in, which is why there are so many complaints that Golarion/The Realms/etc. are too static.

And there are people on this very same forum who do not want to do that. For instance, me. I'm fine with never being able to punch Elminster, but I'd like named city-state leaders to not all be big enough to punch Elminster.

[magnuskn]

Most APs end at level ~16 because it's even Paizo has lots of trouble selling their high level adventures, which gives the impression that as far as official support goes, PF campaigns in general don't progress past that. I've got at least anecdotal evidence, in that the PF-lovin' group I hang out with have played three entire APs so far, and will drop their characters and their campaign the moment the AP's over.

It's already well known that the developers hold the design stance of "what happens in a particular AP, stays in a particular AP." When you've already committed yourself that an adventure holds no continuity in the setting, why would its effect on the setting matter? Why go out of your way to make it so that if you're not going to change your setting, nobody else will either (by making it too high level for anyone to even bother touching)?

As I said, there are guidelines to progress after reaching the end of the AP, and they do touch on quite mayor possibilities.

That being said, if those guidelines would go the route of "blow that region up", my guess is that there would be complaints that the world never reflects those mayor changes the PC's are making.

And there are people on this very same forum who do not want to do that. For instance, me. I'm fine with never being able to punch Elminster, but I'd like named city-state leaders to not all be big enough to punch Elminster.

Well, I can't speak for most other cities, but Korvosa only got

her ruler being at CR20 through some spoilerish things happening to her

. Most mayor NPC's in the city with which you interact during the AP are CR10 or thereabouts. Only in the last adventure there suddenly appear the high level characters and those are quite few. I can't say it with certainty, but I dimply remember James Jacobs talking about the breakdown of characters in Korvosa and how that was according to the DMG. But I might be misremembering something on that point.

[FatR]

I think James Jacobs is responsible for most of the "this ain't your momma's D&D!!!" creative direction. He's always blathering on about "shades of grey" and how awesome it is to have "deals with the devil". Feh.

I thought that "shades of grey" were supposed about giving antagonists stuff like understandable motivations, genuinely positive traits, maybe enough sense and reason for PCs to talk them down. But apparenly here these are just code words for "evil is cool, let's screw over the good guys".

Well, most Paizo campaigns end at level 16-17. At least in some of them there are briefs for the GM how s/he could continue the campaign, and many of those descriptions go right into the territory of "fuck that nations shit up!".

And this is bad. Because even if the campaign hadn't disintegrated for mechanical reasons, RL reasons or simple player burnout by then (most do), this means that PCs only get to interact with the top normal tier of the material plane power pyramid for the last three levels of their default career or so. Not even with the planar power structure, just with people who actually control countries on Golarion. If PCs are supposed to be important people within the world as presented - and as DnD is kind of supposed to be heroic fantasy, they should be - they should be able to topple toughest countries on Prime just by walking in and whipping out their powers by about level 13-15. So that the rest of the game can be spent dealing with powers above and beyond that, primarily planar ones, which DnD universe is full of. At level 20 you seriously should be able to have at least 50/50 chance against most gods (with a good plan and decent allies, but without plot devices of winning this particular conflict). At least. If Gygax allowed his players to stab Lolth right in her spider-ass before that level, then why the version of the most overpowered DnD edition ever doesn't allow anything of the sort? Destroying (or converting) a single god (save for two or three key entities) isn't even a big deal, in the grand scheme of things! It will seriously change the setting far less, than actions of the LotR main cast changed their own world.
While we're on that note, changing the world in really grand, sweeping ways by the end of the campaign is the proud tradition of heroic fantasy (and even, to a lesser extent, sword and sorcery). So I think we have every right to demand the possibility of this (within playable level range) from any setting, which is supposed to reflect this genre.

Since Golarion doesn't have a metaplot like the Realms had, I can understand the reticence of the developers to really rip up their own setting too much.

The entire setting can be blown up in one AP (in fact, this can happen if PCs fail in Second Darkness), and this will not matter precisely because there is no metaplot, and therefore developers can use negative continuity as much as they want.

Of course the problem seems to me, personally, that again a good number of people here want to apply the power of their characters to take over/out the setting they are playing in, which is why there are so many complaints that Golarion/The Realms/etc. are too static.

My players have yet to exhibit any such intent. Maybe I'm just lucky with them, or maybe that's because I'm trying hard to prevent thoughts like "Dude, where's my respect?" or "Why we're still running errands, like we did 10 levels ago?" from appearing in your help. Golarion's power structure and Golarion adventure paths construction does not exactly help with that.

[magnuskn]

Uh, FatR, how exactly does going on a rant about how "My PC is Superman and I want to rip up cities, dammit!" disprove my point about people here wanting to rip up cities? Not that I am accusing you of wanting to disprove it, but your first part of your message kinda contradicts the last part. ^^

[FatR]

Uh, FatR, how exactly does going on a rant about how "My PC is Superman and I want to rip up cities, dammit!" disprove my point about people here wanting to rip up cities? Not that I am accusing you of wanting to disprove it, but your first part of your message kinda contradicts the last part. ^^

Superman does not want to rip up cities, even though the power to do so is the core part of his identity. So are PCs in my games. Of course I try to reinforce such behavior by giving them various perks for free from grateful townspeople and simply playing out respect and adoration they get for superheroic behavior (without having to gring to two-digit levels and above first).

[magnuskn]

Fair enough.

[Kaelik]

magnuskin. The word is Major or Majority. With a fucking J. Please type with a J. Do not use a Y. Is your keyboard fucked up?

[Dr_Noface]

Relax, Kaelik. He probably hails from the bestial coldlands. There is no room for j on the tundra.

[For Valor]

AHAHAHAHAHA!!! "mayority".

I didn't even notice that. It's hilarious.

[Maj]

I didn't notice, either. But then, that happens to me with foreign words sometimes. "Mayor" is - at the very least - Spanish.

[houstonderek]

Screw this, it's Paizils Invade The Failden Week ! Hi guys

Go suck a barrel of cocks.

Cool. So in addition to the Paizils jumping at shadows that I might be lurking among them, I got two fucktards here doing the same. It amuses me greatly to know I elict such fear in the hearts of failtards. Though at the same time it's sad that anyone would be scared of someone on the internet.

You know, some of us do miss you and speak fondly of you over the gaming table. TOZ can attest to that, having shared said table with me from time to time.

O rly?

O rly. Hey, you had be belly laughing every time someone brought up rule zero or some other DM fiat as a proper way to address problems with 3.x and you tore them a new one.

Good times.

[Gorbacz]

Re: Failden.

For a forum that kicks off a "Stay classy, Paizo" thread and degenrates it into feminist flamewar, well, that's an appropriate name.

Also, Hi Roy.

[houstonderek]

Eh, who cares what Paizo people think of this place, or what this place thinks of Paizo. I hardly post in the rules sections of Paizo as I've lost interest in the inanities there, and I lurk here because, well, it's an entertaining read.

Paizo had a chance to really fix things, and they didn't. Oh, well. They put out some stuff I can use for 3x (with some fixing) and I can't stand 4e. Also, they allowed some 3pps to continue to publish 3x type stuff and have a current rules set to hang it on. So that wasn't such a bad thing.

I've borrowed some stuff from here for games, and I love that "tone" is irrelevant to the discussions here.

[ubernoob]

Re: Failden.

For a forum that kicks off a "Stay classy, Paizo" thread and degenrates it into feminist flamewar, well, that's an appropriate name.

Also, Hi Roy.

The short answer to that is that Crissa is and always will be a crazy bitch. Don't lump her in with the rest of us.

[Koumei]

I just assumed that, like with the tjeck thing, we were above tearing into someone over a typing habit (that is probably influenced by native language).

That said, if we want to be sticklers, I shall do everything in my power to viciously attack people who split their infinitives.

[Maxus]

I just assumed that, like with the tjeck thing, we were above tearing into someone over a typing habit (that is probably influenced by native language).

That said, if we want to be sticklers, I shall do everything in my power to viciously attack people who split their infinitives.

Actually, the split-infinitive thing was made up out of whole cloth who want to primly control the English language with their idea of what is the 'correct' English.

The justification for not splitting infinitives is "They didn't dare to crudely split infinitives in Latin!"

And the answer is: Of course they didn't split infinitives in Latin. Latin infinitives are a single word! Amare is one of the first words taught in basic Latin. It means to love Furthermore, the split-infinitive debate actually started with some pompous asses who didn't have much else to do going "You are splitting too many infinitives! Cease and desist at once, you scoundrels!" and made everyone else go "Wha...?"

So, when split infinitives are mentioned, I make sure to viciously stick it to the Man on this issue.

Also, bolded so everyone will see what you did thar.

[Kaelik]

I just assumed that, like with the tjeck thing, we were above tearing into someone over a typing habit (that is probably influenced by native language).

Koumei. Read what I wrote again.

Did I, Kaelik, notorious B I G- I mean, asshole, tear into someone? Or not?

I mean, I waited through all those "Mayority"s because I thought he was actually trying to say "The people who are in charge and run things" instead of majority.

I merely politely asked him to please use a fucking y, and inquired into the reason for his strange typing, after I was absolutely sure that he meant to be using a j.

Because I am a kind and generous Mayor of the TGD.

[Koumei]

Fair enough, then.

And Maxus, I am aware of the origins of that argument.

[magnuskn]

I didn't notice, either. But then, that happens to me with foreign words sometimes. "Mayor" is - at the very least - Spanish.

Yeah, trilingual here, sometimes the spelling is a bit screwed up. German, English and Spanish got some major ( ahem ^^ ) cross-over potential. That's also why I am somewhat liberal in putting commas.

[Roy]

Screw this, it's Paizils Invade The Failden Week ! Hi guys

Go suck a barrel of cocks.

You know, some of us do miss you and speak fondly of you over the gaming table. TOZ can attest to that, having shared said table with me from time to time.

O rly?

O rly. Hey, you had be belly laughing every time someone brought up rule zero or some other DM fiat as a proper way to address problems with 3.x and you tore them a new one.

Good times.

Laughing, facepalming, and growing more concerned for the ongoing survival of humanity.

[hogarth]

I think James Jacobs is responsible for most of the "this ain't your momma's D&D!!!" creative direction. He's always blathering on about "shades of grey" and how awesome it is to have "deals with the devil". Feh.

I thought that "shades of grey" were supposed about giving antagonists stuff like understandable motivations, genuinely positive traits, maybe enough sense and reason for PCs to talk them down.

Of course not. "Shades of grey" means that the baby-raping baby-eating bad guy has a plot MacGuffin that you need, so you have to suck up to him. Duh.

Actually, it sounds like you're complaining about two (or three) different (but equally valid) problems under the heading of "grimdark":

• Sigil-style power-level-wanking: "Having a city full of superpowerful NPCs that never seem to do anything interesting is totally bad-ass and makes perfect sense!" {(a) There's no accounting for taste and (b) no, it doesn't.}
• Thomas Covenant-style ick-factor-wanking: "A plain ogre is boring, but a baby-raping baby-eating ogre is awesome, and forcing the PCs to cooperate with a BRBEO is super-awesome!" {Uh, no.}

And possibly:

• Elric-style world-is-doomed-wanking: "Having tons of bad guys and very few good guys is cool!" {(a) Again, it's a matter of taste and (b) it's not clear to me that that's the case with Paizo's campaign setting.}

Am I missing anything?

[FatR]

Actually, it sounds like you're complaining about two (or three) different (but equally valid) problems under the heading of "grimdark":

• Sigil-style power-level-wanking: "Having a city full of superpowerful NPCs that never seem to do anything interesting is totally bad-ass and makes perfect sense!" {(a) There's no accounting for taste and (b) no, it doesn't.}
• Thomas Covenant-style ick-factor-wanking: "A plain ogre is boring, but a baby-raping baby-eating ogre is awesome, and forcing the PCs to cooperate with a BRBEO is super-awesome!" {Uh, no.}

First can be (and is, for Golarion) a separate problem from the second, but second is practucally always accompanies by the first. Otherwise PCs can just stab BRBEO and call it a day.

And possibly:

• Elric-style world-is-doomed-wanking: "Having tons of bad guys and very few good guys is cool!" {(a) Again, it's a matter of taste and (b) it's not clear to me that that's the case with Paizo's campaign setting.}

I don't know, is there at least one White Hat country in the setting to counterbalance all the devil worshippers and cenobite wannabes (who conveniently benefit from what you described as the problem #1) and various pure evil races? I'm mostly familiar with the setting through APs, and I don't remember any. Local elves were stupid dicks, and most cities that got spotlight past RotR were pretty crappy places.
Also, there definitely is wank on how awesome and unbeatable the authors' pet evil races are. Aboleths, as I mentioned, got alot of this, and so are devils, and now the serpentfolk received the same treatment.