Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[GâtFromKI]

I think it important to note that SKR basically did something very similar and equally stupid with his Feat Point System. We discussed it before on this board.

No, the feat point system is far less stupid.

The race builder isn't intended for players:

The following rules allow a GM, or even a player with GM oversight, to create new races that are balanced and mesh with the existing core races.

Therefore, I don't think it's intended to be balanced. I think this subsystem is intended to be used like this:

1. The MC needs a new race for his campaign. eg he plays in Eberron and needs the warforged race.
2. The MC create the race. He also do some additions for no reason.
3. In the end, he tries to see if the race is balanced. Since he's the MC, he can add or remove a trait, depending on what he thinks is balanced. He also have a number which is the result of the additions.

That's why the system allow some powerful abilities like SR: only the MC decides who get those abilities. That's also why the system allow the creation of an "über-race" with +12 Int: the MC won't create such a race.

And that's why balance isn't a concern in this system: the MC is supposed to adjust the races at the end of the process to provide balance.


In the other hand, the feat point system is intended to be used by the player, and balance was a concern. SKR failed to provide a balanced feat point system because he's SKR, but at least the design goal was sensible.


The feat point system uses numbers to try to provide something new and useful. And it fails. It's a failure, but the base idea isn't silly. The race builder uses numbers for the sake of using numbers.

[ishy]

If you are a gm and you use a system to create new races you do want balanced and interesting results. If players can't use it because it is way to easy to break, what good will it do for a gm? You're probably better off to just assign some random shit and see if that looks any good.


Though assigning points to random lists can be very useful in seeing if you fucked up. This way you can get a better idea if for example feats need to be better or worse.

[Seerow]

I think it important to note that SKR basically did something very similar and equally stupid with his Feat Point System. We discussed it before on this board.

SKR seems to really like breaking down lists of choices into longer lists of incomprehensibly assigned point totals in order to eat up word count and look like he is working. He does this kind of shit a lot. He produces long lists of apparently randomly assigned point totals to write next to selections to try to prove... something. I don't know. I think he's like one of those people who sees little numbers everywhere that point to a giant conspiracy to spy on him through his teeth.

-Username17

Wow somehow I had missed this before. Apparently Two Weapon Fighting is such a good feat it costs more than just one feat slot

I mean the feat point system is actually a half-decent concept. You SHOULD be able to pick up like 10 bull shit shitty feats like Run, Endurance, skill focus, etc, in place of power attack. But his costs were wtf. Rapid Shot and TWFing are more beneficial than power attack. Toughness is the same value as power attack. As are Weapon Focus and Weapon Spec. I mean I have to wonder if this guy has even played the damn game.

[hogarth]

Wow somehow I had missed this before. Apparently Two Weapon Fighting is such a good feat it costs more than just one feat slot

I like his impassioned defense of why Toughness is an awesome feat.

huh. I can't even see what this subsystem is for. It doesn't generate balanced races since costs are totally random (eg: for 1 RP you have +3 to a skill, or for 2 RP you have +2 to a skill).

I don't think the costs are intended to be random. There's still plenty of time to fix some of the more egregious costs before they put out the final version.

Having said that, I suspect this will join the Words of Power system (from Ultimate Magic) and the piecemeal armor system (from Ultimate Combat) as another clunky variant that nobody uses.

[Juton]

Having said that, I suspect this will join the Words of Power system (from Ultimate Magic) and the piecemeal armor system (from Ultimate Combat) as another clunky variant that nobody uses.

Speaking of words of power, has any one ever tried it? Compared to regular casting it seems nerfed to high heaven. Some could argue that 3.5 spellcasting needs a bit of a nerf, the question though is whether words of power are a good nerf. OK, well I can guess it fails (it is Pathfinder) but does any one have reasons why it fails?

[hogarth]

Speaking of words of power, has any one ever tried it? Compared to regular casting it seems nerfed to high heaven. Some could argue that 3.5 spellcasting needs a bit of a nerf, the question though is whether words of power are a good nerf. OK, well I can guess it fails (it is Pathfinder) but does any one have reasons why it fails?

I'm playing a level 1 Words of Power oracle in one game. It's pretty dull so far, but I think that's more because I don't like the oracle class.

The biggest problem is that the Words of Power spell lists are a zillion times shorter than the regular spell lists (in most cases).

[GâtFromKI]

I don't think the costs are intended to be random. There's still plenty of time to fix some of the more egregious costs before they put out the final version.

And I don't think costs are intended to provide balance.

They are intended to make some race cost 10 RP. To make a goblin cost 10 RP, stealth rider has to cost 8 RP (more than flight or invisibility 3/day). Stealth rider cost 8 RP to make the goblin cost 10 RP, not because it worth this cost.

That's the same with hardy, and many other abilities. And I don't think it will change with the playtest : they want some races to cost 10 RP, and they can change costs but not the abilities.

[PhoneLobster]

... they want some races to cost 10 RP, and they can change costs but not the abilities.

Or you know. They could just not do that.

They could reasonably price abilities and just admit that some races aren't worth 10 points.

But oh my god that would mean some PCs might need some extra abilities or fall behind the standard! If only there were a bunch of extra properly valued point's based abilities they could immediately take... like from the points based race ability system...

Of course even then it would fall down in all the ways any point's based advantage/disadvantage system tends to. But really the whole thing where they set out with the direct intention of getting the numbers wrong to try seriously try and say with a straight face that they never made any mistakes with race balance in the past? That's just pure stupid and defending it is stupid.

[K]

Of course even then it would fall down in all the ways any point's based advantage/disadvantage system tends to. But really the whole thing where they set out with the direct intention of getting the numbers wrong to try seriously try and say with a straight face that they never made any mistakes with race balance in the past? That's just pure stupid and defending it is stupid.

It's stupid, but also completely consistent with Paizo design philosophy.

At this point, we really can't expect them to admit fundamental design mistakes and create working subsystems. I mean, as long as a +2 bonus to skill checks you don't care about is equal to scaling Spell Resistance, we can't even pretend they know what they are talking about.

[A Man In Black]

Save for the people who immediately started work on their weeaboo catgirl races, the playtest forums have unianimously rejected this shit, for basically the same reasons posted here.

It's kind of refreshing.

[fectin]

Well, seeing as how Paizo itself said right out the gate that it wasn't for their organized play events, you'll have to forgive me if I'm less than shocked that the Paizo community also feels it's worthless.

[CapnTthePirateG]

Showed it to the biggest PF fanboy I knew. He was mad as hell and thought it was shit.

They even trying over there?

[GâtFromKI]

the playtest forums have unianimously rejected this shit, for basically the same reasons posted here.

On Pathfinder-fr, the forum of French fanboys, peoples are almost fighting with each other to decide who will have the honour of translating this piece of shit. And they think that this system is good (or at least salvageable), even if they didn't actually read it.

It makes me sad.

[A Man In Black]

On Pathfinder-fr, the forum of French fanboys, peoples are almost fighting with each other to decide who will have the honour of translating this piece of shit. And they think that this system is good (or at least salvageable), even if they didn't actually read it.

It makes me sad.

Well, go and tell them that this system's bad and they should feel bad.

[GâtFromKI]

They are intended to make some race cost 10 RP. To make a goblin cost 10 RP, stealth rider has to cost 8 RP (more than flight or invisibility 3/day). Stealth rider cost 8 RP to make the goblin cost 10 RP, not because it worth this cost.

Oh.

They already admitted this 2 hours before I have written it.

Oh.

And they also explain with a straight face that the intend of the system is to help the MC to create balanced races. Do they really think that a guide saying "3 skill points is the same as 1 skill point in term of balance, and the core races are balanced" is somehow more useful than "3 skill point is more powerful than 1, and the core classes aren't exactly balanced" ?


Anyway, they admit they didn't even try to balance anything, because "perfect balance is impossible" ("level infinity is unreachable, therefore level up is useless"). What remains is, again, an overly complex subsystem which bring nothing to the game.

Well, go and tell them that this system's bad and they should feel bad.

That's what I do, but since they don't even read the playtest...

They are fanboys:

1. The playtest comes from Paizo, therefore it's good.
2. If you find it bad, it proves that you're a rollplayer. That's generally enough to discard your opinion.
3. Balance isn't important. Which doesn't raise the question : "why would someone use this complex subsystem instead of his intuition, if it's not for balance purpose?", because 1°) the playtest comes from Paizo, therefore it's good.
4. Like hogarth explained, it's a subsystem that nobody will use. Therefore, they don't need to read it. They defend it nonetheless, and they will buy the book, because 1°) the playtest comes from Paizo, therefore it's good.

(and non-fanboys don't even talk about the playtest, because they know it will attract fanboys.)

What makes me sad is that French fanboys are even more stupid than English fanboys...

[ishy]

I really like what he said here:

"It's a mistake to treat all RP as being equal, and the system does not. RP interact with a number of buckets. There are difference in RP between traits and abilities. There are differences and balances in the ability categories and the ability power levels. "

So I read this as him basically saying, we created a point system, but even if something costs the same amount of points it doesn't mean it is equal.

wait..... how is this even supposed to make sense?

[fectin]

That is actually a coherent arguement. Restate it this way:
- Options have a value-able effect on character power.
- Options have a value-able effect on character role-play.
- Those values are not covariant.
- The points cost is based on the effect on role-play.
Therefor, it is perfectly correct to say both "the points provide balance" (to role-play) and "the point cost of power is all over the place", because there is no contradiction there.

Now, you might think that's crazy and stupid, and you might be right, but you do have to admit, that is some impressive mental contortionism.

[ishy]

Keep in mind that here 'RP' doesn't mean roleplaying but something like racial points.

If he was talking about it being balanced roleplaying wise and didn't care for the power level, then I just misunderstood.

[fectin]

Oh.
In that case, I think he's just producing word salad.

[koz]

I really like what he said here:

"It's a mistake to treat all RP as being equal, and the system does not. RP interact with a number of buckets. There are difference in RP between traits and abilities. There are differences and balances in the ability categories and the ability power levels. "

So I read this as him basically saying, we created a point system, but even if something costs the same amount of points it doesn't mean it is equal.

wait..... how is this even supposed to make sense?

This is identical to Gav Thorpe's logic, who claimed the exact same thing regarding 40K and Fantasy points values being compared across lists. Something to the tune of '7 points in one list is not the same as 7 points in another list'.

Of course, just like in this case, that's patent bullshit, because points have to be equal value - otherwise, they don't mean anything.

[angelfromanotherpin]

This is identical to Gav Thorpe's logic, who claimed the exact same thing regarding 40K and Fantasy points values being compared across lists. Something to the tune of '7 points in one list is not the same as 7 points in another list'.

Of course, just like in this case, that's patent bullshit, because points have to be equal value - otherwise, they don't mean anything.

Gav's line is not inherently bullshit (though I suspect it was in that case), values can be divergent across armies. The same gun is worth less on a BS2 Ork than on a BS4 Space Marine. The same Power Fist is worth less on a Strength 3 IG commander than on a Strength 4 Space Marine. The same psychic power is worth more on a well-protected Ld10 Librarian than on a fragile Ld7 Penal Psyker.

Similarly, it might not be out of line for the same Space Marine to cost a different amount in a Space Marine army (where good stats and protection are common) than in an IG army (where having even one resilient unit gives you a lot more options).

But I don't trust GW to be able to judge value on that level, nor should anyone.

[TheFlatline]

So bit of a tangential shift here, but I'm something like 6 months into this pathfinder game and I want out. We're up to level 9 now, and I've seen the path that my alchemist is taking, and it's boring as shit now and will just get frustrating as time goes on.

I haven't actually missed a single attack since level 3. Some players may get a boner off of the idea of hitting everything, but I find it to be kind of depressing. My damage output at this point is around 75-100 points a round, and I'm not even trying to maximize my damage. The DM has basically given up on trying to challenge me, since putting me into a real fight apparently means really, really screwing over the rest of the party. Instead he's doing Monty Haul for all but one of the incredibly inefficient characters/annoying players. So I'm tooling around at level 9 with a headband of intellect +2 and not much else because the fighter needs 80% of the party funds to stay state of the art and "found" magical items are incredibly rare for me but unbelievably common for others in the party. How common you ask? The mage has a rod of maximize spell (and a ring of spell storing, and a pearl of power +4), the thief has a permanent cloak of invisibility and a weapon that's a +6 enhancement bonus, and the bard has a permanent +40 giving... something... to his diplomacy and a bunch of other stuff. The only person who has it worse is my friend playing the summoner. Talk about completely forgotten.

I don't optimize at all, I just try to stay consistent with my character's strong points. I was asked why I never use mutagen, and I explained that dropping my mentals wasn't worth the nominal boost to my physical stat. "But there's feats & discoveries that make mutagens badass!" they reply. "True" I say, "but focusing on that, at level 12 I'd have a +6 in one stat. Or I can do what I'm doing now, and have cloudkill bombs. +6 stat... or 20+ casts of cloudkill, force bombs, acid bombs, cold bombs, electricity bombs, or whatever I need at the time. Per day. Plus all the bonus spell/potions that come with that, the bonus damage from your intelligence, and that whole ranged-touch-attack-with-absurd-bonuses thing that has me hitting on 2 or better on almost anything."

We've talked about dead-end options in the game, and I've always seen the real dangerous ones as the ones that *seem* really useful until you apply them and then they suck. Shit like the Mutagen doesn't even appear to be really useful on paper. I mean, I'll take cloudkill over a +3 or +4 bonus to hit or AC or a handful of hitpoints. I thought that was so obvious that it was painful. But the entire group I'm in thinks I'm missing out by taking my INT 25 STR 8 character and going into melee.

I used to not think dead-end character paths were a big deal. Now I understand. I'd be even more miserable in this game now if I listened to the group. I already made that mistake allowing myself to be bum-rushed into the alchemist class.

[A Man In Black]

Well, you can make mutagen work, but you have to build to do it. You don't just put the mutagen on any old alchemist and then go tooling around in melee. It's not really a trap option as long as you go all-out to do it.

That said, having a million bajillion stupid little changes you can make means it's very easy to accidentally take half the choices from one schtick, half the choices from another schtick, and end up sucking at everything.

[icyshadowlord]

I wonder what Paizo will throw at those fanboys next. The race guide (even as a playtest version) is pretty terrible (hell, I fooled around with it a bit myself) but seeing all the fanboys of the earlier works and of that one, I can only imagine what kind of crappy books they'll puke out next. More stupid options to take, more annoyances and frustrating situations...

[Username17]

SKR hasn't made them a point system to create classes yet. That could easily use up 40-50k of wordcount in completely useless ways. I can't wait to be told how mathematically balanced the Barbarian is to the Wizard.

-Username17