Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[DMReckless]

First of all, absolutely no one is saying that Magic Weapon or Named Bullet would or could be reused more than once per turn, because it says they only get replicated once per turn. Stop being an asshole.


-Username17

The obvious reading is that all summoned projectiles have any spell cast on the container, like what it says. So you fire ten bullets a round, it summons ten bullets. The summoned ammo all has Named Ammo cast on it. Yay, a spell multiplier!

[Prak]

Ok, all that means is that you need to cast Named Bullet on (number of attacks per round) arrows.

Or, you know, say fuck that, get spell storing on a bunch of arrows and use those, rather than a spell that gives you a couple tiny bonuses and says "you can't use deadly aim, so sorry"

BANDOLIER PRICE 5 SP
You can wear up to two bandoliers at the same time (any more than this and they get in each other’s way and restrict your movement).

I'm pretty sure there are a few characters out there who disagree about how many bandoliers you can wear...

[erik]

BANDOLIER PRICE 5 SP
You can wear up to two bandoliers at the same time (any more than this and they get in each other’s way and restrict your movement).

I'm pretty sure there are a few characters out there who disagree about how many bandoliers you can wear...

I'll see your rob liefeld crap and raise you one rob liefeld crap!

[Prak]

Yeah, but he doesn't have ludicrous numbers of bandoliers and pouches.

...god Liefeld is a terrible artist...

[Korgan0]

BANDOLIER PRICE 5 SP
You can wear up to two bandoliers at the same time (any more than this and they get in each other’s way and restrict your movement).

I'm pretty sure there are a few characters out there who disagree about how many bandoliers you can wear...

I'll see your rob liefeld crap and raise you one rob liefeld crap!

Dear god, Captain America looks like he's pregnant with a baby made of sixpacks.

[erik]

Yeah, but he doesn't have ludicrous numbers of bandoliers and pouches.

I think he's just wearing them internally.

[rasmuswagner]

Yeah, but he doesn't have ludicrous numbers of bandoliers and pouches.

I think he's just wearing them internally.

That would explain SO MUCH!

[codeGlaze]

Yeah, but he doesn't have ludicrous numbers of bandoliers and pouches.

I think he's just wearing them internally.

That would explain SO MUCH!

I spent the last half of June making fun of Liefeld with a friend of mine; all because she found a series of articles picking out especially bad pictures of his, followed by rants by the writer. xD

I also hope everyone realizes that the shoulder in the foreground is bigger than his hips...and the SHIELD eliminates the lower half of his arm. Cap' no longer has a hand holding the shield - he has a motherfucking STUMP permanently attached to that shield. It's all a clever ploy, in reality, because Liefeld just doesn't want to be bothered drawing THE OTHER FUCKING HALF OF THE GODDAMN BODY.

Also this:

[Whatever]

That's not Captain America. It's a clever robot duplicate, with its chest plate halfway open to allow access to the internal wires. We're looking at the side with the hinges.

[codeGlaze]

That's not Captain America. It's a clever robot duplicate, with its chest plate halfway open to allow access to the internal wires. We're looking at the side with the hinges.

That explains the flat crotch.

[Whipstitch]

I loved that article and I doubt anyone will ever write a better description of Rob Liefeld than this one:

The most important thing you need to know before reading about all the terrible things Rob Liefeld has drawn is that he has never seen or talked to a woman in his life and has no idea what they look like or how their bodies operate. If you asked Rob Liefeld to draw a diagram of the uterus he'd put on a pair of gauntlets and punch the shit out of your chalkboard. This is how the man operates, and though I know it sounds like a lot, you have to believe me. I don't want you looking at the stuff he's drawing and think he's a conscious adult male with a creative job who can and has influenced the minds of young artists. The man is a pair of blue jeans with a face. He has on a backwards cap, and when he turns it around, it's still backwards.


Got it?

Okay. The #40 spot is a catch-all for "any time Rob Liefeld has ever drawn a woman." We get more specific from here, but if we didn't lump these together the entire list would be broken spines and colossal hooters.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Because as we all know, if monks were able to have an enhancement bonus to all of their unarmed attacks in a flurry for the cost of a normal magic weapon, the world would asplode.

I don't have Ultimate Equipment, but, it sounds like yet another fucking bullet point on how Pathfinder is unintentionally making unarmed fighting completely fucking boss due to how magic item prices scale.

... for non-monks that is. For example, with the changes to the Amulet of Mighty Fists (can put properties on it, not just cynical enhancement bonuses) and this item, what's really stopping me from ladling on a Spell-Storing body wrap, a +0 guided/agile amulet of mighty fists, and a +1 greyflame gauntlet? And of course it'll only get even more ridiculous as you grab yet more bonuses. I think I'll LOVE having a +5 flaming, shocking, icy, greyflame, agile, spell-storing weapon for under 40,000 gold pieces.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Pathfinder has been getting pretty power-creepy with magical items, however. I mean, a mask that lets your druid wildshape into a giant. Or staves that let you replenish charges. Or hats that grant alter self. I mean, holy shit.

[MisterDee]

what's really stopping me from ladling on a Spell-Storing body wrap, a +0 guided/agile amulet of mighty fists, and a +1 greyflame gauntlet? And of course it'll only get even more ridiculous as you grab yet more bonuses. I think I'll LOVE having a +5 flaming, shocking, icy, greyflame, agile, spell-storing weapon for under 40,000 gold pieces.

As I recall, unarmed strike weapons like the gauntlet were supposed to be errataed to not be unarmed strikes.

But yeah, they only mentionned the brass knuckles and cestus in the official errata, and missed the gauntlet. Then SKR stated in a forum post that there were no such things as weapons that worked as unarmed attacks. And that's been treated as official errata by half the Paizo board and ignored by the other.

(That said, at this point I'm no longer fucking sure which parts of the monk are officially errataed, which parts officially weren't, which parts were but now definitely aren't, and which parts are/aren't on-hold-pending-Paizo-figuring-out-how-to-tell-SKR-he-sucks-cocks-without-hurting-his-feelings.)

[ishy]

IIRC pathfinder errata works like this:
This is legit errata:
anything in an errata file
anything mentioned in a FAQ

This isn't:
Anything they post on forums in threads.

Lago: Don't forget the brawler enhancement,
Costs: +1 on light armour only (so no monks need to apply)
benefits: +2 to attack / damage etc with unarmed attacks

[hogarth]

I don't have Ultimate Equipment, but, it sounds like yet another fucking bullet point on how Pathfinder is unintentionally making unarmed fighting completely fucking boss due to how magic item prices scale.

... for non-monks that is. For example, with the changes to the Amulet of Mighty Fists (can put properties on it, not just cynical enhancement bonuses) and this item, what's really stopping me from ladling on a Spell-Storing body wrap, a +0 guided/agile amulet of mighty fists, and a +1 greyflame gauntlet?

You also missed that there's an armor ability in Ultimate Equipment (that goes on light armor only, so not on Bracers of Armor) that adds to unarmed damage. EDIT: What ishy said.

----

Paizo's prestige class book just came out. The best part I've seen so far? A class that gets a small amount of money each level instead of class features!

Affluent (Ex): At each level, a noble scion gains a stipend worth a number of gold pieces equal to 750 multiplied by his class level. (He gains 750 gp at 1st level, an additional 1,500 gp at 2nd level, and so on.)

The noble scion gains that stipend at each level. So whenever he gains a noble scion level he gets a new stipend. And only once per level gained.

The intended effect is that he has more money than Wealth by Level would normally allow; he gets more stuff at the expense of getting more powers, essentially.

What a great idea!

[Wrathzog]

Fuck Wealth by Level. It is basically the worst thing.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Pathfinder released a new prestige class book? What's it called?

Is Pathfinder still doing the thing where classes can plunder spells from each others' lists? I can't tell you how much I enjoy having my druid being able to cast suggestion and silent image.

[Juton]

Is Pathfinder still doing the thing where classes can plunder spells from each others' lists? I can't tell you how much I enjoy having my druid being able to cast suggestion and silent image.

Yes, yes they are. I remember bringing this up during the Summoner playtest, if they give gate as a sixth level spell to Summoners then someone is going to figure out how to get it at 11th level. The Pathfinder Savant prestige class lets you do this.

Its one thing to leave a hole like this in your system because you didn't know any better. But when you've told them and they still do it, I don't know what to think.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Yes, yes they are. I remember bringing this up during the Summoner playtest, if they give gate as a sixth level spell to Summoners then someone is going to figure out how to get it at 11th level. The Pathfinder Savant prestige class lets you do this.

I don't see gate anywhere on the summoner list. I do see greater planar binding, though, and that's just as good. You can just planar bind a critter who can cast 9th level cleric spells their own damn selves. You know, just in case you get bored of casting Mass Charm Monster as a 6th level spell or summoning 1d3 succubuses with DC 23 Dominate Persons as a 5th level spell.

I'm strongly against losing caster levels for any reason, but crap like that is actually a really strong incentive.

[Lago PARANOIA]

That said, if you're a preparation arcane spellcaster and are willing to soak a caster level in the first dang place, there's no need to go with Pathfinder Savant at all. Just snag your ass a Daivrat PrC.

Due to how preparation spellcasting works, you can snatch any spell off of any list you want. Granted, you will need some down time to fill up your list and you will need pearls of power or Channel the Gift for spells you intend to cast repeatedly without having to soak up the downtime.

[rasmuswagner]

Here are a few popular 3.5 discussions that PF didn't bother to adress:

*Cheap Metamagic Feat + Metamagic Cost Reducers = negative adjustment to effective spell level?
*Fucking Overruns - how do they work?
*Spell Storing ability on ranged weapons, yes or no?
*Stealthy spellcasting, can you do that?

God damnit, people were discussing that shit 10 years ago. Why are these still questions?

[virgil]

Not just spell storing on ranged weapons, but ghost touch is being touted as against the rules because of that stupid chart nonsense. Their very same logic bans Throwing and Returning Warhammers, Keep Rapiers of Speed...

[Duke Flauros]

Not just spell storing on ranged weapons, but ghost touch is being touted as against the rules because of that stupid chart nonsense. Their very same logic bans Throwing and Returning Warhammers, Keep Rapiers of Speed...

What are you talking about specifically here?

[Lago PARANOIA]

Awhile back it was pointed out that the stupid ammunition rules in 3E allowed you to buy 50 +1 spell storing arrows for 8,000 gp, which is the motherfucking tits.

Of course, rather than just admit that it needed errata, people tried to say that it wasn't an allowed property on ranged weapons because it didn't show up on the randomly rolled magical item property chart even though the actual description in no way disallowed it.

So instead of pointing out that descriptions override the chart or that this kind of bullshit RAI divining by omission (sort of like the named bullet fiasco! ) has no place in serious rules discussion, we decided to just point out that by their logic you can't have ghost touch ranged weapons either.

That shut them up real good. But now apparently people are willing to stealth nerf ghost touch arrows rather than just say yes, it's allowed by the rules but spell storing arrows are overpowered so we should issue some errata they're going back to their old simpering strategy. You know, the one where fanbois just pretend that everything is hunky dory and that self-serving tribal knowledge provides an interpretation where the holy designers didn't actually miss a pretty big problem (as opposed to 'problems' like 3.0E power attack) for several years because Pathfinder is SO good at fixing stuff.

Yes, D&D fanbois are seriously that willfully ignorant and dishonest. Not that it's a big deal, but SKR is at the helm of Pathfinder and as you can see from the spirited charge bullshit he laps that shit up. So if I actually cared about Pathfinder other than to mock it I would be rather worried. You know, in the same way when you hang around websites with conservative commentators you can oftentimes see talking points emerge from the primordial soup of the Internet (you didn't build that! Welfare king! etc.) before they get officially promulgated by Fox News. And you just know you're going to see that shit parroted for the next few weeks.