Pathfinder Is Still Bad

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:14 am

Maxus wrote:Would someone who isn't banned on Paizo please go point that out about the Monk?

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/pa ... icMonkTypo

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:24 am

And that's why we get feats like their persistent spell.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:27 am

The point is to give ALL monks access to some of these iconic monk-friendly feats. If that means that the monk that wants to get all of those feats needs to pony up with an Int of 13, I'm okay with that. He's already got the baseline feats for free, which puts him ahead of most other classes as far as these feats are concerned. Not everything should be handed out to the monk for free though.

james jacobs enjoys dining upon young puppies while thinking of ways to nerf the monk

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:33 am

Psychic Robot wrote:
The point is to give ALL monks access to some of these iconic monk-friendly feats. If that means that the monk that wants to get all of those feats needs to pony up with an Int of 13, I'm okay with that. He's already got the baseline feats for free, which puts him ahead of most other classes as far as these feats are concerned. Not everything should be handed out to the monk for free though.
james jacobs enjoys dining upon young puppies while thinking of ways to nerf the monk

Wasn't that the same guy who told players to shut up about how bad Vow of Poverty was, not understanding why Monk players expected to be able to take Vow of Poverty and not be incredibly gimped?

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:31 am

SKR was the one who did that because--and I quote--"poverty sucks"

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:02 am

Didn't he talk about how gimped the monk was without natural items before kicking it in the nuts?

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:30 pm

hogarth wrote:
K wrote:I am no longer surprised by designers who don't know how to play their own game, and then get super defensive when someone points it out.
My favourite is Sajan, the monk. He's a level 8 monk with the feat Greater Disarm, despite the fact that (a) it has the prerequisite of +6 BAB so he can't take it before level 8 and he doesn't get a feat at level 8, and (b) he doesn't have the prerequisite of 13 Intelligence. So their own character ignored two prerequisites in order to take a feat that sucks ass in the first place. Sweet!

Real PCs aren't optimized and have quirks. Quirks like being afraid of spiders, or preferring to use suboptimal weapons for flavor reasons, or taking feats that they don't have prerequisites for.

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:38 pm

Uh, as impressively train-wrecky as that exercise in watching people fail to read the actual feat text was, this sort of "go post elsewhere" thing is uncomfortably close to a "threads that make you laugh/cry" sort of deal and probably a very bad idea.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:45 pm

if it ain't closed don't report it

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:15 pm

It's not about reporting anything.

It's about not being assholes the sort of assholes who unwittingly cause those mouthbreathing morons people with whom we fundamentally disagree with but who have difficulty reading the actual text of a feat before telling other posters they are in error to track this back, register here and argue with us.

My ignore list is big enough already, I don't need more illiterates reducing our signal to noise ratio high quality profanity - thank you very much.

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:51 pm

Okay, Pathfinder does get some props for their Appendix 3. Which is an update of Gyagx's Appendix N.

Not just many of the same authors, but the choice of works and the order their works are listed -- "Pellucidar" then "Mars" then "Venus" is neither alphabetical nor chronoligical and omits the likely most famous "Tarzan" series. That and the use of "et al." indicate that this is cribbed pretty heavily. Of course it's not like you can plagiarize a bibliography and they add newer works including the author of the first list - so that's all cool.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:22 pm

Josh_Kablack wrote:Uh, as impressively train-wrecky as that exercise in watching people fail to read the actual feat text was, this sort of "go post elsewhere" thing is uncomfortably close to a "threads that make you laugh/cry" sort of deal and probably a very bad idea.

Yeah, once I got some sleep I realized that.

I was sort of the ADHD Poster Boy last night and managed to play a video game, read a book (Christopher Moore's Fool, since you ask), and post on an online forum, more or less at the same time.

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:59 pm

hogarth wrote:http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/pa ... icMonkTypo

Whoever the hell Enchanter Tom is, you should probably be ashamed of yourself.

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:51 am

Same can be said of 3.5Loyalist. His latest thread about 'spellcasters should get more standard actions per round from having high BAB' is so earnest I can't even call him a troll.

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:52 pm

In actual Pathfinder news, Paizo has announced an open playtest for their rewrite of the Stealth rules. Only time will tell if this turns out like 4E's skill challenges.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:26 pm

TOZ wrote:In actual Pathfinder news, Paizo has announced an open playtest for their rewrite of the Stealth rules. Only time will tell if this turns out like 4E's skill challenges.

Interesting idea, but I suspect it might be drowned by a chorus of "B-b-b-but your opinion doesn't count because it's not playtesting, it's only pointing out the obvious!"

icyshadowlord · Post by **icyshadowlord** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:46 pm

I am not looking forward to ANYTHING Paizo announces anymore. That's how jaded I've become.

K · Post by K » Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:10 pm

TOZ wrote:In actual Pathfinder news, Paizo has announced an open playtest for their rewrite of the Stealth rules. Only time will tell if this turns out like 4E's skill challenges.

Paizo doesn't want feedback. They just want someone to tell them how cool they are.

I mean, actually listing the failings of their Stealth skill isn't even worth it. The designers have already signed off on the convoluted crap that was posted, so the obvious design flaws in their application are apparently beyond them.

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:46 am

K wrote:Paizo doesn't want feedback. They just want someone to tell them how cool they are.

I mean, actually listing the failings of their Stealth skill isn't even worth it. The designers have already signed off on the convoluted crap that was posted, so the obvious design flaws in their application are apparently beyond them.

Well, for what it's worth, it's not even the same guys. The rewrite is by Stephen Radney-MacFarland. Also, I've seen them unfuck at least one thing (the alchemist) through playtesting, so I'm more inclined to attribute failure to fix shit from playtesting to incompetence, not malice or deceit.

This is also the first time I've seen anyone from Paizo just come out and say, "Yeah, this part of our core rules just plain sucks. Let's see about fixing it." It beats the hell out of the typical publisher attitude of "If you're having problems, you're obviously doing it wrong," in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

hogarth wrote:Interesting idea, but I suspect it might be drowned by a chorus of "B-b-b-but your opinion doesn't count because it's not playtesting, it's only pointing out the obvious!"

So far, the "lookjudge" crowd is sitting on their hands. Likely because Buhlmann isn't out encouraging their stupidity. We will see where it ends up.

RelentlessImp · Post by **RelentlessImp** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:26 am

TOZ wrote:In actual Pathfinder news, Paizo has announced an open playtest for their rewrite of the Stealth rules. Only time will tell if this turns out like 4E's skill challenges.

Trying to limit my presence on Paizo forums. How many threads have already popped up about how lolbroken the new rules are? (They aren't.)

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:02 am

RelentlessImp wrote:Trying to limit my presence on Paizo forums. How many threads have already popped up about how lolbroken the new rules are? (They aren't.)

Just the talkback thread so far. They don't have a full playtest forum for this, just the one thread.

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:52 am

TOZ wrote:Same can be said of 3.5Loyalist. His latest thread about 'spellcasters should get more standard actions per round from having high BAB' is so earnest I can't even call him a troll.

Wait, what?

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 4:06 am

CapnTthePirateG wrote:Wait, what?

There is a dude named "3.5Loyalist" on the Paizo forums who came to the forums trying to get people to confirm that iterative attacks allow you to cast multiple spells, because his new GM apparently plays with "house rules" that casters can't do this. He's somehow managed to keep his thread about this running for something like eight pages now.

He's so earnest that he's either a complete fool or the absolute best troll ever.

echoVanguard · Post by **echoVanguard** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:11 pm

A Man In Black wrote:I've seen them unfuck at least one thing (the alchemist) through playtesting, so I'm more inclined to attribute failure to fix shit from playtesting to incompetence, not malice or deceit.

Which changes were made to the alchemist on the basis of playtesting?

echo

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 8:10 pm

echoVanguard wrote:Which changes were made to the alchemist on the basis of playtesting?

Beta bombthrowing was a move and a standard, both of which drew an AOO. It didn't get enough discoveries to accomplish anything. It had no way whatsoever to use its spells on the rest of the party. Mutagens (the Mr. Hyde ability set) were enhancement bonuses and tiny and had goofy durations.

The class was a mess before playtesting.