Pathfinder Is Still Bad

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:35 am

arguing custom magical items is fucking stupid, please stop it at once.

Slade · Post by **Slade** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:51 am

Psychic Robot wrote:arguing custom magical items is fucking stupid, please stop it at once.

I don't think anyone has mentioned custom items besides RadiantPhoenix.
And I'm not sure if 4K would be close even if you followed the guidelines in 3.5 or PF.
Because it would be x4 due to rd/level, Continuous: 2000 x 1 x1 = 2000. x4 = 8K.
I don't even know how he/she got 4K; are they referring to crafting cost or market price?

rasmuswagner · Post by **rasmuswagner** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 7:16 am

Slade wrote:
Psychic Robot wrote:arguing custom magical items is fucking stupid, please stop it at once.
I don't think anyone has mentioned custom items besides RadiantPhoenix.
And I'm not sure if 4K would be close even if you followed the guidelines in 3.5 or PF.
Because it would be x4 due to rd/level, Continuous: 2000 x 1 x1 = 2000. x4 = 8K.
I don't even know how he/she got 4K; are they referring to crafting cost or market price?

And the item in question demonstrates again that the custom item creation guidelines are fucking guidelines that require GM input and some common sense.

By RAW, the item costs 50k+. +4 bonus, squared, times 2½ for bonus type "other". Plus a little something for immunity to magic missile. And that's clearly wrong.

Pricing it as a straight enhancement bonus to AC is more reasonable, as a shield bonus would normally come from an enchanted shield. That puts us at 16k. A brooch of shielding is 1500, so call unlimited MM protection 2k, for a total of 18k.

The alternative is a +3 mithril buckler, 10,165 gp. So our custom item is a bit on the expensive side. Say you need Shield on your spell list to use it, call a class restriction, -30%, and your custom item is now at 13,500. Still more expensive than the shield, but lighter, protects against MM, protects against ghost, and is all-round cooler.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 11:12 am

Slade wrote: All these AC boosting defenses last an hour at least (Alter Self).

Polymorph/Alter Self lasts a very long, long time. So you are wasting out side of combat time... you have egg on your face for forgetting durations.
Please, 2nd level spells are cheap (pearls of power anyone).

Pathfinder alter self and polymorph only last 1 min / lvl though

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:28 pm

I know, and his argument sort of hinges on there being a lot of stacking, long-term buffs. Too bad there aren't, which makes it shit.

I feel silly

Doesn't Slade remember the first rule of Pathfinder? Everything you may have known about 3.5 is subtly altered so you have to learn an entirely new, but very similar, system.

In closing: Slade, learn what the fuck you're talking about before spouting off nonsense and then accusing other people of not knowing what they're talking about. You sounded retarded during your entire post because it was based on shit that was wrong and any idiot who bothered reading the rules would know about. Pathfinder is different; you can't argue 3.5 in a pathfinder thread.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:37 pm

That is not true though, here a quote:

phb #199 wrote:Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll."

So grappling is an attack and thus miss chances do apply.

And ToZ is this the story you meant?

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:19 pm

So wait, the flowchart they have on their site to help people adjudicate grapples quickly is WRONG? FUCKKKKK

Who goes to anywhere but the "grapple" section of the rules to figure out how to grapple? They should consider...I don't know, mentioning that every CMB roll ever is treated like an attack roll in their fucking chart or anywhere except in that one section that nobody is likely to read. My group has officially been doing CMB and CMD so wrong it hurts and...

OH MY GOD NO FUCKING WAY.

So, the "quick" way to figure out CMD is CMB + touch AC. However, this is blatantly false now because every attack bonus you have adds to CMB (so weapon focus applies to CMB if you have a tripping weapon, etc) but those attack bonuses don't add to CMD. Every buff means you add something to CMB or CMD, but maybe not both.

You know what? They should just stop using the term "roll CMB" and call it "an attack roll using CMB" because every time they mention CMB they make it sound completely fucking different from an attack roll by calling it a CMB roll. Buffs that make attack rolls better never mention CMB, but everything involving CMB says combat maneuver roll instead of attack roll when a combat maneuver roll is literally the same fucking thing but with a +??? due to size/feats.

Why couldn't they just say "to grapple, make an attack roll but apply size modifiers" instead of making a WHOLE FUCKING SECTION dedicated to this shit to say "CMB is an attack roll but with size mods added in" and "CMD is touch AC with strength and BAB added." Why...why do they do that?

This was very "stream on conciousness," so it's likely tough to read.

tl;dr: CMB should just be referenced as "attack roll + size mods" and CMD should be "touch AC + attack bonus + size mods (because small things are easier to grab/trip?)". Why did they invent these numbers to hide them in various sections and make them get recalculated just as often as attack bonuses and such?

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:51 pm

Can't mirror imaged be solved by throwing a vial of alchemist fire at the Wizard's feet? Every thing within 5 feet should take 1 point of damage, which is enough to disrupt a mirror image. Costs 20 gp.

GâtFromKI · Post by **GâtFromKI** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:55 pm

area effects don't destroy mirror images.

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:12 pm

Pseudo Stupidity wrote: [T]he first rule of Pathfinder? Everything you may have known about 3.5 is subtly altered so you have to learn an entirely new, but very similar, system.

sigged.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:15 pm

Slade wrote:Because it would be x4 due to rd/level

Shield lasts 1min/level according to both my 3.5 SRD and pfsrd.com

Psychic Robot wrote:arguing custom magical items is fucking stupid, please stop it at once.

... I suppose.

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:55 pm

ishy wrote:And ToZ is this the story you meant?

Certainly is. You can see my censored comments in the comments. We try to avoid linking off-forum threads we don't like to avoid encouraging bashing.

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:02 pm

They should have named the witch Harry Potter for how useful she is and how similar her story is (tortured youth who escapes because of MAGIC FRIENDS and DEUS EX MACHINA rather than any talent of her own).

GâtFromKI · Post by **GâtFromKI** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:39 pm

TOZ wrote:Paizo posted the backstory of their Witch iconic.

She was kidnapped and raised by hags, and escaped with help from her familiar and some kind of nature magic that killed off the hags when they chased her.

I found it pretty garbage.

While their initial inspiration for witchs already provide a good backstory...

Shadow Balls · Post by **Shadow Balls** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:54 pm

Slade wrote:
Pseudo Stupidity wrote:Shadow, PF mirror image pops if people miss you by 5 or less. That means every attack because you're a fucking wizard and your AC is somewhere in the teens if you bothered casting mage armor.
Wait, did PF nerf Wizards that badly?
By level 8, I have 24-28 AC as a Wizard in 3.5.

Are you that bad at buffing AC in PF?

They didn't. He just isn't very good at this whole optimization thing. And while in 3.5 the images would just have an AC of 12 or so and be popped 95% of the time by random mooks, in PF it's AC -5, so you could potentially make it into better ablative armor.

The barkskin potion is 1,200 gold.

Now a Dex focus is really stupid, especially in PF. So is casting Haste, as the only characters it makes any real difference to don't matter anyways. But the general idea of your buff routine before entering the dungeon consisting of AC boosting spells is sound, even though your execution is very bad.

Shadow Balls · Post by **Shadow Balls** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:57 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote:
Pseudo Stupidity wrote: [T]he first rule of Pathfinder? Everything you may have known about 3.5 is subtly altered so you have to learn an entirely new, but very similar, system.
sigged.

I would have guessed "Don't talk about Pathfinder." Or alternately that the first rule is that you should play a caster, unless you like sucking barrels of cocks.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:08 pm

Pseudo Stupidity wrote:So wait, the flowchart they have on their site to help people adjudicate grapples quickly is WRONG? FUCKKKKK

Well that flow chart is made by a fan though? And yeah it is incomplete and incorrect at certain points. Which is why I made my own, though since I put everything on one page, it is a bit unclear if you aren't me -

Keep in mind though, that the CMB & CMD rules are unclear at best because the things you add aren't defined clearly. Probably because they still made some changes at the last minute.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:17 pm

Pseudo Stupidity wrote:the first rule of Pathfinder? Everything you may have known about 3.5 is subtly altered so you have to learn an entirely new, but very similar, system.

Wait, I thought that was 3->3.5. It was years before I stopped getting ambushed by stupid rule changes made for the sake of change. Keeping separate memories of two versions each of over a hundred spells with identical names is a real bitch.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 11:25 pm

Yes, that was 3.0 -> 3.5

Guess what? Now you get to do it all over again!

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 2:45 am

The difference is that the changeover to 3.5 was actually fairly limited, and there were actual released checklists. PF changed almost everything, down to every single spell, for IP purposes.

Slade · Post by **Slade** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:52 pm

GâtFromKI wrote:
TOZ wrote:Paizo posted the backstory of their Witch iconic.

She was kidnapped and raised by hags, and escaped with help from her familiar and some kind of nature magic that killed off the hags when they chased her.

I found it pretty garbage.
While their initial inspiration for witchs already provide a good backstory...

I have to say I loved the Cardcaptors series. That was a good series in the beginning. Never saw end so I hope everything went well with Sakura.

What is with Pathfinder and scars that never heal? It seems to be common theme in their characters.

darkmaster · Post by **darkmaster** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:14 pm

They think that characters with tragic backgrounds are compelling, and they can be... you know if you don't over saturate the character base, and actually bring it up later. And, you know, scars are a good manifestation of that. Though, I'm not sure there would be any physical scars that magic actually couldn't heal. I mean, seriously, it's magic, and magic isn't even limited to bringing back the dead, or making entirely new bodies... In 3.5 anyway, I never did look too closely on what cast- I mean magic fighters can do in Pathfinder.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:23 pm

darkmaster wrote:They think that characters with tragic backgrounds are compelling, and they can be... you know if you don't over saturate the character base, and actually bring it up later.

There's a school of thought out there that 'conflict and drama = good story' and while they are essential elements of a good story, having insane amounts of conflict and drama does not make an insanely good story. Quite the reverse, actually.

I swear, the next time I'm playing with someone whose female character's central backstory was that she was abused by her parents (who are now murdered to death by the villain Knifewalker and she was sold to a cruel master who abused her, whose only solace was the family butler. Who was only being nice to her so he could get close to her, to abuse her. And she's adventuring so she can murder Knifewalker) I'm going to slug them. It's just too cheap and easy to pull that card these days.

I'm looking forward to someone whose character backstory/adventuring motivation is "I'd like to be rich, famous, powerful and do some good on the way to there." Or even "I'm in it for the money, and I like the party, get along with them fairly well, so I'm sticking with them as I get money." Even a Druid on walkabout would be a relief to me.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:45 pm

Maxus: a few times now, my character background has effectively been "Got bored, went adventuring for a more interesting (and wealthy) life", "Realised she was not satisfied with a safe merchant life and wanted to go amass disproportionate power" etc.

Makes it easy to find reasons to get along with the other PCs.

Slade wrote: What is with Pathfinder and scars that never heal?

I think you mean THESE WOOOOOOUNDS, THEY WIIIIIIILL NOT HEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLL

And yes, people who listen to that song a lot are basically the reason why they like such backgrounds.

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:57 pm

Im unsure as to "malthiest who wants to kill all the gods for being dicks" fits in with the emoness of backstories.